 All right, 602. My name is Jacques Livingston and I will call to order the March Transportation Advisory Board meeting, and first up on our agenda is a roll call. David Drosz, Jacques Livingston. Here. Courtney Michelle. Here. Sandra Stewart. Present. Liz Osborn. Here. Joe Long. Here. Council Member Peck. Here. All right. Welcome all. So it looks like, it looks like I got off kind of easy tonight stepping in for Neil, who is unavailable tonight. So I am sharing. It looks like we have one thing that we have to vote on and it looks like the approval of last month's minutes. So take a look and then, if I can get a motion, we can proceed. I make a motion that we approve last month's minutes. Thank you, David. Okay, Joe is the second. Any discussion? Thank you guys did good. I'm not hearing any notes or discussions. So, all right, all in favor to approve the minutes, say, I or raise your hand. Yep. All right, that's unanimous and approved. All right, next up is communications from staff. Thank you, Tyler Stamie, LogVot Transportation Engineering Administrator. A couple of things for you tonight, one last week, or last month, we heard from certain citizens on 17th Avenue. We just want to follow up on that with a little bit of additional discussion ideas. One of the things we're looking at doing, Westbound 17th, approaching Atwood, the curve, there's definitely a change in the curve alignment. And so we'll be adding some striping changes Westbound to our striping work this year. I'll be one small, relatively quick thing that we can do at that location. So I wanted to provide that update. You mentioned it, Jack, a little bit earlier on, but we have some, some members whose terms are coming up here in a couple of months. So the applications for those positions, we really enjoyed working with all you and would be happy to, if you're all interested in continuing to apply or reapplying, the applications will open up April 1st. So keep an eye out for those. And then I think Phil has a quick update on 287 BRT. Yeah, good evening, everyone. Just really quickly, Phil Greenwald, Transportation Planning Manager with the city. The project is moving forward for US 287 Bus Rapid Transit Feasibility Study. And so it looks like they're going to be heading into some public meetings coming up pretty soon. So we'll just keep you apprised of when those meetings are as they come forward. We don't have exact dates or times yet, but once they come up, we will make sure that you get them. So you can be involved in that discussion. We've done some work kind of at the more technical level so far. And so that's been going well. I think we've just had some technical comments for the group. And so they're getting those things positioned and ready for more of the outreach efforts to come. So stay tuned. We'll have more information to you as it comes available. Thank you very much. Alright, thank you Phil and Tyler. Appreciate that. And Tyler, thanks for following up on that part of 17th. It's actually in my neighborhood. Never tried to drive past it now. It reminds me. So thanks for saying on top of that. Next up is any public invited to be heard. So I haven't seen any names yet. So did we have anybody sign up for public comment? I didn't have any outreach at a time. I think we have some call-in users that maybe that I don't recognize. I, if you want to speak up or able to, please do so. This is a quiet group tonight. I'm really not that the imposing in my hair. Maybe we can ask the call in, maybe we can ask the call in users to identify themselves for the sake of the meeting. That would be great. A good idea, Phil. Do we need to unmute them in some way? Great question. They will have to unmute themselves. I'm unable to do so as host. Is that, is that star six? I believe so. If the call-in users are able to, that would be wonderful if they could identify themselves and just let us know who's out there. Hi, this is am loads and I'm director of energy strategies and solutions. I'm here with, with Tim, who apparently is a host. For the discussion on our charging station. Thanks. Thank you. And thank you for coming and listening in. Yeah. Anyone else. Okay. All right. So, next up, no action items. So, we'll move on to the informational items, which is our presentation. So, I will hand that over. I don't know if someone's got to introduce them. Tyler, would that be you or Phil? Good evening again. Members of the TAB. Wonderful to have you guys all here. And we're very excited to have folks from RTD here as well, too. Basically, give us their annual kind of annual presentation of the update to RTD and all the different things that are happening currently. Obviously, a lot of impacts from COVID-19 that you'll hear about tonight, but we'll just want to go through and we have two members from the board of commissioners. All of the staff introduced themselves as they, as they get going with their different pieces of presentation. But I would like to introduce Lynn Geisinger to kind of start off with the kind of the state of the district, I guess, as it were currently in 2021. And then Eric Davidson is our new board member for the bulk of the city of Longmont and then all the way down into Broomfield. So, Lynn is more of Boulder County and just touches kind of the edge up to Hover on the west side of Longmont. So, I'll let her go first and give her about five minutes just to tell us kind of what's going on and all the new things that are happening, exciting things that are happening at RTD. Thank you. Thank you, Phil. I was going to let Eric go first since he represents Longmont, but I guess I'll go ahead. I actually do represent a very small corner of southwest Longmont. And as Phil said, I represent Western Boulder County, Boulder, Lewisville, Superior, Lyons, and the unincorporated areas up to Maryland and all the way to the Continental Divide, although there's not a lot of bus service up there. But thanks for having us. We've kind of been on the circuit. We've been with the Longmont City Council and Boulder, Lewisville, Superior, a number of different places. And it's really great. Eric and I both learn a lot talking and listening to all of you, and we hope to learn more tonight. And I see a great group of our staff with Natalie and Sage and Chris and others. So I'll be listening once we're done. But again, thanks for having us. Things are busy at RTD. We have, I guess, over the last two years, I went on the board two years again, two months ago. And over the last two years, we've had a lot of change, a lot of change that needed to happen. As many people know, as most of you know, and a lot of what I've worked on has been around some of that good governance. I chair the Communications and Government Relations Committee. And in that role, you know, I've been working with our chair and others in the board to really try to bring back our RTD's brand. We kind of became known as the Agency of No. And I really believe we're on a good path at this point. We are being led now by two women, Angie Rivera-Malpiedi as our chair. And then we brought in the first external GM CEO in many years in General Manager and CEO, Deborah Johnson. And she's really doing a very good job of creating change. I've heard from several people up in Boulder, in this area of Boulder County, that they're seeing a change in RTD's willingness to work together with them and flexibility in some of those things. So just to mention a couple of specific matters that I'm sure will be touched on otherwise tonight. A huge issue is ridership. We lost 75% of our riders when the pandemic started. And we're back up to, I think we're still down about 60%. I haven't heard the most recent. But we're starting to focus a lot on how we rebuild that ridership now that people are getting vaccinated. Things are hopefully going to be opened up and people will start to go back to work and hopefully trust public transit again. I think some of us on the board have been pushing for pilot to try lower fares to help bring riders back. Start to look at how we change the eco pass and some of the other passes the student passes to try to bring riders back. And a significant change is that we're hearing those things from the CEO as well. That she also agrees we need to look at our fares and our passes. She worked out after a number of months of not being able to work anything out with the Raria. She came in and worked something out to start a pilot with much lower fares there to keep them on board. And so we're hoping that we can start to use that as a way of looking at other options and other programs. A big piece of that is returning service. We're down 40 percent on our service and get into the issue of do you wait for ridership to come back for bringing back service or do you bring back service to try to entice ridership? And you may learn more about that from some of the staff. But I think it's probably a combination of both that we'll need to be doing in the next few months. Northwest Rail is front and center right now. Eric may talk a little bit more about this and others may as well. But the board had a study session just a few weeks ago. And we're looking at updating the design study that BNSF completed several years ago. With three articles in the Boulder and Longmont papers this weekend. You may be fairly up to date on what that is. The CEO Miss Johnson is bringing the board back a proposal. It was supposed to be in 60 days. So it'll be sometime in April. And the proposal will be to update and the design study that BNSF completed several years ago. And look at peak period rail. We really, really need to get cost numbers ridership numbers that we need to get them in a very transparent way. And we need to get them numbers that everybody agrees on. And we need to look also at the impacts to the cities, good and bad and how we deal with those. Will it be electric trains? Will it be diesel? Those will have different impacts as well. So we need to get the information. We owe it to the voters up here. And then we have a new place to start the discussion to move forward with that. 119 is a big issue. I think you'll be hearing that from staff as well. It is the only capital project that's currently in the funding plans for RTD with about 33 million in 2023. And recently, just one other thing I would mention the board passed a new equitable TOD policy, transitorial development. With the goal of working with developers to build at least 35% affordable housing, try to take away some of the requirements to replace all of the parking that was there before and some of those things. So I'll stop there. And I look forward to hearing the conversation later. If you have questions, concerns, we appreciate your feedback. And thanks so much for having us. Thanks, Lynn. And good to see you again. Yeah, it's nice to see you. Thanks, Lynn, Eric. Five more. Yeah, it's good to meet you all. Yeah, thanks. Thanks, Phil. Thank you, Lynn, for for teeing it up. And I know, I know many of you, but, but not all of you. So thank you for having me here. I think I'll just provide a little bit more context on a few things going on in RTD. Obviously, I'm the newbie here sworn in on January 5th, although it seems like it was quite some time ago at this point. But as Lynn mentioned, we have a lot going on recovering from a pandemic. Not not the least of those. I would just echo, you know, something that Lynn highlighted. I give a lot of credit to our board before me in making a difficult change, but an important one in our CEO and general manager. I have had a wonderful experience getting to know Deborah Johnson as our CEO and GM. She's a tough leader. She's a demanding one, but she is detail oriented. She's an operator. She's experienced. She knows her way around and she's a collaborator. And from being outside, you know, that was one thing I felt needed to change at RTD and now being inside. I'm delighted to be a part of that change. Miss Johnson has actually spent some time getting into the weeds on issues. I received calls from constituents that she's personally gotten involved in. We've received information from cities and problems with IGAs that she's gotten involved in. So I think we're in a new time of collaboration. There's a lot to do, but I feel good about some of the adjustments that we've made. Obviously, as Lynn mentioned, Northwest Rail is a biggie for those of us that are up here in District Dive, particularly in Longmont. And we did have a good study session last month on the 9th. It was thorough. We got caught up on some of the numbers and some of the history. And as Lynn mentioned, what comes next now is a proposal for how we proceed. In 2019, because it was looking like we couldn't do our full service for Northwest Rail, we finally came up with this idea and my predecessor was a major part of that, Director Lubao, looking at a peak service plan. And presumably we'll come back from COVID and we'll be looking at commuter patterns returning. The number that was thrown out was a conservative estimate between $710 and $800 million. And it's conservative because there's a lot of things we don't know. Half of that cost is BNSF cost, which is we have to go through some of the design study work to have a really better understanding of that. There's also things like, you know, do we do electric, do we do diesel, as Lynn mentioned? And we don't have the same economies of scale buying rail cars if we are doing a peak service. So there's a lot of big questions of big things we don't know the answers to. So I'm hopeful that we can at least tackle those big ones to get a better understanding of what the cost would look like. And I think there's a lot to talk about. And as Lynn mentioned, I think we need to do everything in a transparent way. The ridership numbers have been a question that come up to me all the time. So we need to tackle those and get those updated. I would just say, you know, I think, as Lynn said, we have some good things going on. ETOD was a really exciting one. I'll also just highlight we have an app to peer review happening right now. That is the folks that are looking at RTD and giving us a good review. It's a good cast of characters. We have a lot of experience. So I'm looking forward to seeing the results of that and a lot of good things going on. The other thing I would just state, you know, since north of Australia, we had three articles, I think, over the weekend. One thing I would ask for and encourage everybody, we need to channel a lot of our energy into any partnership opportunities. Right now we've got a new White House. We have Amtrak looking at the corridor. Talk is cheap. There's a lot of long shots in this, but I know there are a lot of us and there's a lot of energy. I can tell you that from the emails and the phone calls just over the last couple of weeks. So I'd love to see us all work together and go after our federal delegates and see if we can work together and pull something off like bring Amtrak into the corridor. So anyway, great to be here. I look forward to listening in on the rest of the conversation. I'm going to take this slide off to our staff members and have some good updates as I understand for this evening. Thanks. Great. What we'll try to do is we'll try to hold questions to the end, but I've got the RTD presentation. So I can certainly share that if RTD would like that. Does that work for you, Natalie and Linas? Yeah, that works. Thank you. Okay. Great. Can you see that? Yes. Wonderful. Thank you. Go ahead, Natalie. Good evening. Thank you. Do you want staff to introduce themselves quickly? Yes, please. If you could just introduce yourself as you have your different topic, that would be wonderful. Okay. Wait, then we will do that as we go through the presentation. And Manas can go ahead and go through the slide. Thank you. Okay. Good evening, everybody. My name is Manas Baraman. I'm the service planner, scheduler one at RTD service development north team. And today I'm here with my colleagues, Natalie, Sage, Chris and Aaron to present an update on the local regional flex ride and long range planning services in the city of Longmont. Next step, please. I'm sorry to interrupt and feel somehow I do not see your screen. All I see is viewing the green wall screen, but nothing else. I have a blank. Is that ascending on my end? Is everybody else able to see the screen? I'm able to. I'm able to see your screen, Phil. Oh, Natalie. Sorry. Okay. Yeah. I'll go on to my Citrix and we'll move along. Sorry about that. This is the RTD services slide. Yeah. So here the table here presents the data on fixed route, fixed local and regional route services in Longmont in both the pre COVID scenario and the current COVID scenario. In the current scenario, the routes J and LX were suspended and the frequency and service hours were reduced. Most of these are out there operating at a one hour frequency with the exception of the LD, which is operating at a two hour frequency. And we also calculated the operating costs for these routes. These costs were calculated using the in service hours for these routes as well as a cost per hour that was determined by RTD. The latest on that is $100 per hour for local routes operating in Longmont and $120 per hour for regional routes operating in Longmont. If you look down below, you'll see that you'll see the total operating costs for in both the current scenario and the pre COVID scenario. You'll notice that we are currently operating at 30% of pre pandemic service costs. So essentially we're operating at 30% of the cost while providing 60% of pre pandemic service levels. Next slide, please. Here we have the ridership data for all these routes between the years 2014 and 2020. We use the August run board data for all these years except for 2020 where we use the September run board data. The reason we picked the August run board is because this is a run board that typically sees steady ridership as well as less holidays compared to the other run boards. So we thought it'd be a pretty accurate representation of the ridership that these routes are getting. And in 2020, the August run board was moved to September, which is why we're using that data for 2020. And I also want to note that the route L was split into the routes LD and LX in August 2017, which is why you're not seeing any ridership data for the L past 2017 there. Could you go back to the previous slide, please? Thank you. The quick summary on the ridership, essentially all these routes were seeing steadily growing ridership ridership from 2014 to 2019. And then in 2020 when the pandemic hit, we had drastic decrease in ridership. And I will explain the trends in ridership in the next couple of slides. Next slide, please. So here we have the ridership data for the local routes or the 300s. So I just want to note that in 2015, the long line implemented the free fare program or the fare buyer program, which essentially provided free fare on all the local routes. So we saw a increase in ridership around 2015 and 2016, which was steadily rising. And then we did notice a decrease in ridership in 2018, which was recouped in 2019. But we haven't identified a cost for this dip in ridership yet. And then in 2020, because of the pandemic, we had a drastic decrease to be specific around 60%. And this number matches what we were seeing across the entire system. The RTD system, most of the routes experienced a 60% decrease in ridership. Next slide, please. Yeah, thank you. And here we have the ridership data for all the regional routes. We noticed a dip in ridership in 2018, which was recouped in 2019. This has been attributed to the route L being split into the routes LD and LX. And after about a year of adjustment period, we recouped that ridership and it was steadily growing. And then in 2020, because of the pandemic, we again saw the 30% decrease in ridership, which once again matches what we were seeing across the entire system. Next slide, please. So here we have the data on the flex ride services in Longmont. The table here presents the operating hours as well as the number of operating vehicles for flex ride services. Unlike the fixed route services, flex ride is currently operating at 25% of its pre-pandemic service levels. And so you can see this kind of reflected in the decrease in service levels during the pandemic as well as the decrease in operating vehicles. Next slide, please. And here we have the average weekday boardings data for flex ride. In 2015, we saw a decrease in boardings and this is attributed to the implementation of the fare buyup program. We saw a lot of the ridership move to the 300s, specifically route 324. That's a lot of boardings. And which is why we were seeing a decrease in ridership in flex ride in 2015 and 2016. And then in 2020, because of the pandemic, we saw that stark decrease in ridership again. If you look at the PAN 2020 run board, we saw that the 60% decrease, which matches what we were seeing across the entire system. But I do want to note that in the subsequent run boards, we were seeing a slow but steady increase in ridership. And we're hoping that this trend continues on into the future run boards. And from here, I will hand over the presentation to my colleague, Natalie. Yes, good evening, everyone. And again, thanks for having us. Since I can't see Phil's screen, I will have to kind of go back and forth onto my laptop to go through there. I think I have three slides. So please bear with me for a minute. I guess if you have the first slide up, Phil, then. Yeah, just making adjustments to the local network. Okay. All righty. That's it. All right. So, and again, just real quick, my name is Natalie Hamples. I'm the lead or senior service planner for North team. My colleagues are Manas Subaraman. She just joined us in September. And we're very happy to have her. And he's also been with us on next stage Sembroke on with us as well. He's been service planning with us for a little over two years. Now his IV Vous neuvert. So it was a March 4th. Um, we also have Chris Quinn from planning. And then we have Aaron. I host who took over basically for Bryan Matthews, which he I think you will probably remember. Um, for our special services. And she pretty much took over, um, Involved by fire. right as well, if you'd like. So for update on the local network, those who were here last year, you saw this presentation as well. We went ahead and completed the State Highway 119 BRT study in 2019. And again, Chris will also give a little bit more information as to where we're at with 119 at this point. The study included a local bus network planned for long specifically has a wonderful long name, as you can see on the slide. We made sure that we did a very extensive approach. So we hired an external consultant, TMD. We coordinated pretty heavily with city along one staff as Phil can probably attest to. We included it in the final State Highway 119 BRT project document so that it becomes part of the overall 119 BRT plan. And we set it up so that it would be phased as route changes become warrant. And those potential adjustments we could, which could become warranted depending on how things change due to development, et cetera, et cetera, could be routing service level service fans or stop locations. Next slide, please. And I hope just tell me when it's there. So you've got there. Okay, got the maps on the left. On the left, you have the current network on the right. You have the proposed feeder network plan that is in conjunction with State Highway 119 BRT. So you can see there are a few changes, mainly to the east and to the southwest. On the east, a fixed route out to the Walmart and the hospital, which I know is something that people have been looking for, as well as the adjustments on the southwest part with the redevelopment of them all. And then also still considering the service out to the high school, specifically for school troopers. Again, this study was done and the adjustment was done with a lot of input from staff and from stakeholders. And it also took into consideration, obviously, where the stations for the 119 BRT network are to be. So we really did an extensive plan and took our time to get this right. Next slide. Making adjustments to the local network. That's right. It's always flexible. That's what it is. So you can just see, real quick, the change in weekday platform hours, from what it is current and what is proposed and what the difference in service hours is. So for weekday, it is basically an increase of about 20%. And the same for Saturday, it's an increase of about 20%. And for Sunday, it's even as much as an increase of 40% of in-service hours. So almost a doubling of service of Sunday and a significant increase, a notable increase for the weekday and Saturday. And that is by taking some of the hours from current routings and shifting them around. As you can see, there are more routes in the proposed and in the current. That means that we're looking to basically split routes because some routes like the 323 are almost two separate routes as they are. They have that southern western portion and then the northeastern portion and the ridership is quite different. And a lot of these folks, a lot of these customers transfer at currently 8th and Kaufman. And so by splitting them out and allowing the tail, so to say, to be more flexible, it allows us to adjust the network, have more frequency or different frequency on one section than on the other. And so again, coming back to phasing, the flexibility to move along as things become warranted, because we all know things can change. And as we noted in the last year, can change in a heartbeat. So that's all I have for now. We can most certainly go into more detail if you have questions afterwards. And I'm going to hand it off to Chris. Hi, everyone. This is Chris Quinn with RTD, with RTD planning. A couple of things that I'm going to be talking about are the Northwest Rail and status of State Highway 119. Can you go to the next slide, Phil? So as Director Geisinger and Director Davidson did note, on February 9th, we staff went to the board to provide an update on where we stand with Northwest Rail, giving the history, the status of where we are now, all of just kind of how we got to where we are. And one of the things, and as I was going through the report, trying to come up with what to present tonight, it came almost a little bit overwhelming. But a few things that I do want to emphasize in the next couple of slides to show where we are are as follows. Just I think most of you have been plugged into the process long enough to know that one of the biggest challenges that we have related to this corridor is the fact that actually, can you go to the next slide, Phil? The Northwest Rail is the only one of the fast tracks corridors where RTD was not able to either all out purchase or come up with a full full on lease agreement for the right of way. So of all the rail corridors, this one, we will have to have a unique arrangement with the BNSF. Currently, it's a single track corridor, meaning there's just one set of tracks out there. And if we were to establish the full service in the corridor, we would have to construct a full set of tracks parallel to the existing tracks. If we were to go with the starter service, which Director Geisinger referenced earlier on, the intent of that is that we might be able to use the existing infrastructure with fewer improvements. And I'll talk a little bit more about that in just a moment. But in order to have passenger service on the corridor, we would be sharing the corridor with freight service. BNSF intends to keep their freight operations going right now. They have about eight to 10 trains a day. And they expect that number to either continue to be constant or go up in the future. Given the fact that we would be sharing operations with the freight services, we would have to have what is known as a federal railway administration crash worthy vehicle, meaning that it has to have extra protections more than the light rail that you see in parts of Denver. So that if a freight train were to derail and collide with one of our trains, the passenger trains, that there would be adequate protection for the passengers. Another unique thing about the corridor is even though the BNSF is currently running freight through there, there is no signalization in railroad parlance. That is, it's dark territory, meaning that the trains are dispatched in and out. If we were to add passenger service in, we would have to install signalization. And we would also have to install what is known as positive train control. That's a new federal requirement that actually, for lack of a better way to describe it, it's almost, if as an example, if an operator were to go through a signal that they shouldn't be going through, the positive train control would actually stop the train from going any further to prevent a collision. And then we would add, obviously, and I think this was addressed in the Northwest Environmental Evaluation that was completed in 2010, we would in fact have to establish quiet zones throughout the corridor. And that's, I think Boulder County has already started implementing some of those on their own, but we pretty much have to implement those on all of the crossings throughout the corridor. And I think there's approximately 40 between Westminster and Lawn Mound. Next slide, Phil. Chris, we have a Chrissy grant for that, so $4 million from the federal government, $4 million from the city, so we're working on that. So we'll just ask for our money back, I guess, at some point. You're ahead of us. I had forgotten that. Yeah, thanks for reminding me on that. Sure. And just a few things on the full Northwest service. Initially, the intent of the Northwest Rail as part of the fast tracks plan was that it would run from Union Station to Lawn Mound. And currently, the only piece of that that has been constructed is the segment to Westminster Station. So there still is about 38 miles to construct to complete the corridor all the way to Lawn Mound. The initial service and vision 55 trains per day, and with bi-directional service running at 30 minute peak or 30 minute rush hour frequencies and one hour and non rush hour. As I said earlier, that would assume a double track. So a new set of tracks being laid out throughout the corridor as well as FRA compliant vehicles and a new maintenance facility for those vehicles. Next slide, Phil. Whereas the peak period service or the starter service, which was considered just a few years ago, we started the analysis of that. So in working with the stakeholders, we came up with a possible plan there and the intent was to significantly reduce the capital costs by using the existing infrastructure that's out there right now. So in this case, could we get by with a just the single track configuration that's out there right now? And if that's the case, we would we realize all we would need would be passing tracks or the railroads referred to as sidings so that if there were a freight train in the corridor, the freight train could park on the siding or the passing track while the passenger service went through the cost for that. We had estimated to be about 708 million. But as director Davidson emphasized, we wanted to keep the cost as conservative as possible, especially as it related to the acquisition of right away. So it's certainly a number that needs more refinement. Next slide, Phil. Then also as director Geitzinger mentioned at the beginning, there are some parallel efforts that are going on at the same time that this is going on. Specifically, the state formed in 2017, the Southwest Chief passenger rail commission. And with that was the establishment of the Front Range passenger rail study, which identified potential corridors along the Front Range. One of those corridors would run from Fort Collins to Pueblo, and one of the alignments in that would would in fact use the Northwest Rail. So that's one of the considerations, one of the alternatives that's under consideration. And next slide, Phil. And then along with that also Amtrak has as part of their modernization effort. They're looking at corridors of approximately 400 miles or less in between major population centers. What they're really trying to focus on is areas that were flights, air service doesn't really work, but would be right for passenger rail. And one of the corridors under consideration would be the Fort Collins to Pueblo, Fort Collins to Colorado Spring. The way the federal reauthorization of transportation funds works, the corridors that are chosen, they could have up to 100% of the capital costs covered. And then the initial first five years of operating costs could be covered as well. So it's certainly something, you know, we're trying to position our working in a way so that we can position ourselves so that if something comes up with either the state or with Amtrak, we are ready to go. And as both directors Geisinger and Davidson did say, after the February 9th meeting, we did commit to coming back to the board with a with a path forward or actually a couple of alternatives to present to the board on paths forward for their consideration on how we might to have reconsider the service on the Northwest. So I will leave it at that. And then I think the next slides are related to a State Highway. Oh, excuse me, before that the first and main station update. Next slide, Phil. So I'm not sure how much the advisory board has been prized of this. It previously as part of fast tracks, $17 million was set aside for the Longmont downtown Longmont station. So we have been working closely with the city on coming up with what is called an infrastructure master plan or an IMP, trying to determine given some of the unique challenges to that particular site, how could we foster a plan that would accommodate both new mixed uses that the city would like to see on the site, as well as satisfy the needs of our TD for a future rail station and a multimodal facility where we could also focus bus operations for the State Highway 119 future bus rapid transit service. So we've been working with the city on that analysis that has been mostly completed. And included the slide shows boundary survey drainage analysis and that sort of stuff, as well as a phasing concept. So now that that's been mostly completed, my understanding is and I haven't worked on this, my understanding is that it's substantially complete. And at this point just addressing comments in the from the final plan. Right, Chris, I can chime in real quick with the staff met today. So we the city staff did review the document and did give comments and feedback. And now RTD staff engineering is and service planning and systems planning is reviewing it. And we will once we have all our comments combined, send it back to the city. There will be a few items we will have to talk over and clarify. But the IMP is moving forward steadily. Good. Okay. And I don't know, Phil, if there's anything else you would like to add on to that as well, since I know you've been fairly you and Tony have been pretty deep involved with that. Yeah, I mean, I can add a couple of things is just that the city did go through and review that piece. And now we do need to get to the kind of the nitty gritty and what's you know, who does what when those kind of things and that's going to get into an intergovernmental agreement between RTD and the city of Longmont. So that'll be kind of that next step. And then at that point, we're hoping hoping that we can go forward with property acquisitions and start drawing against the $17 million that set aside, well, $17 million that was set aside by RTD for this project. And that's kind of that next step. Okay, thanks. Okay, then the next slide is related to State Highway 119. So I know we were we addressed the advisory board about a year ago. And at that time, we had completed the State Highway 119 PEL or the Planning and Environmental Linkage Study. And at that time, the recommendation coming out of the PEL was for a bus rapid transit similar to what's going, what was similar to what's out there in US 36, so that there would be a managed lane in the center, that lane would be for buses, tolls, and high occupancy vehicle users. So with that, the next steps that have happened since the completion of that study is CDOT is now moving forward with an operational study to an operational analysis, I should say, to determine exactly how the managed lanes would function on State Highway 119. Unlike US 36, 119, at least the Longmont diagonal piece of it has signalized intersections. And there isn't anywhere in the US or North America that we know of where there have been managed, managed toll lanes with grade separate or with a signalized intersections. So they're currently conducting an operational analysis to determine how it would work. They have a consultant apex on board. And I think that effort supposed to be completed in the next couple of months. When they finish that, they're going to begin what is known as a traffic and revenue study, then to determine what kind of tolling rates they could establish on the corridor. And that'll determine then how much money the corridor can raise from tolls, which can determine then how much money they can leverage on future tolls as far as determining financing mechanisms for construction of the corridor. The other thing then, and this is really the big piece is they have also engaged Mueller engineering to come up to begin the engineering design on the corridor. So when the design begins, then we'll start to know exactly what the configuration of the lanes will be. They will also be working on the design of the BRT stations as well. So that will really get a better sense of how the corridor is going to function. Right now, RTD as part of our midterm financial plan, we have $30 million designated for 2023 that will go to the corridor. And we've also put in a request as part of the consideration for this next year's midterm financial plan to accelerate $5 million of those dollars so that we can kind of move forward a little bit faster on some of the design issues. So that if with the new administration, there are, if there are some federal funding that becomes available, we're more ready to go and can, you know, jump into this a little bit faster. So, and I think, I can't remember if I have any more slides on that show. Oh, and just as a, through this in there, just to show, if any of you were around when US 36 was being put together, the total cost for the corridor was way more than anyone, and any was more than any one of the agencies or entities had. And in this case, the total cost we're thinking for the corridor is, I want to say 200 and forgetting the number now 200 and maybe 70 million. And so far, we've really only been able to identify 93 million. But using the model of us 36. At the beginning, we didn't have enough money. But RTD was able to come to the table with 300 million from fast tracks. Then we were able to get a, we were able to get a loan. I think we even got an earmark. CDOT was then able to come to the table with more money and point being money kind of brings in money. So the more money you have, the more money you can leverage from future grants. So our hope is at least having money that has been identified, we can use that too as part of our local match for future grants as we move forward. And I think that's it for a 119. Great. Thank you. I think that's the presentation from RTD. Really appreciate your time. Good job, Chris, on handling kind of a interesting situation that I look like. So way to be mobile and flexible. Are there any questions from RTB members to any of the different slides on this or to any of the directors that, to Director Davidson or Director Geisinger? And I'll let Jock kind of take care of that. All right. Thanks. Yeah. Unfortunately, I can't see folks. So if you're raising your hand, I can't see you. So just jump right in there. Thank you, Phil. Any questions for our guests? David? For one thing, I hadn't realized, I guess, during the previous presentations about the diagonal bus rabbit transit that we were looking at making that a toll way. So that, I guess maybe I just missed that before. So is that a new development? That's one question. And the other one is, is that you'd mentioned that you kind of anticipated possible passenger rail at 55 trains a day and freight at eight trains a day, which might go up. And then you've mentioned that the freight is likely to move over when the passenger trains go by. And I thought, I couldn't see that happening. With 55 trains, they never make it, they never make it. And I'm kind of curious as to what you really think is going to happen. Yeah. Let me answer the second question first. So related to the trains, so in the scenario with the 55 trains per day, that would in fact require a full double tracking of the system. So we would have to add a complete new set of tracks parallel to the existing tracks throughout the entire corridor. Or as you point out, there's just no way that that can possibly work unless all of the freight trains were to go through the corridor between like two and four AM, which, you know, BNSF is not going to let happen. With the starter service with the proposal of the three trains in in the morning that would originate in Longmont and then head down the corridor south to Denver. So just one way in the morning into Denver, and then the reverse in the afternoon, that's where we would employ the passing tracks to allow for the mixing of the operations on the single track operation. But even that, I'm trying to remember, BNSF did come up with some plans for us on what that could look like in terms of where the passing tracks would have to be. And I'm trying to remember the number where there was at least three or five. And each one of those passing tracks has to be more than a mile long given the length of the freight trains that go through there. So while it's significantly less investment than double tracking the entire corridor, there is still some work that would go into it. So we're not just plopping down trains into what's out there right now with no upgrades. So and your first question I believe was on the tolling for State Highway 119. That's right. Yeah. So the final recommendation that came out of the study was for a managed lane. And that is in fact what we had taken out to the public with the intent of it functioning similar to the way US 36 operates. So free to buses, free to car pools, but anyone else in a single-occupant car or two-occupant car would have to pay the toll to use the facility. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from the board? I was going to ask a quick question, Chris, since we're on the topic of rail. I was reading an article in the New York Times this weekend and it said something interesting. And I was just curious if you knew. This has to do with M-track. So you may or may not know the answer. But they cited that M-track actually had priority on a rail line. Is that true? I read that article and I'm not going to try to venture into the legal aspects of that. But my understanding is, and so we'll get back to you to make sure that whatever I say tonight is actually correct, but my understanding of that is theoretically they have priority, but they have to be able to keep the freight operations whole. And so what often happens is the freight still, in reality, the freight still has priority often over the passenger services. So now in the case of, say, the Northeast Corridor, all of that between Boston and Washington, D.C., all of that operates on its own track. And there's segments and other segments of the Northeast where that's also the case and some of the busier corridors. On other corridors, and I remember experiencing this in Western Massachusetts several years ago, you know, all of a sudden the M-track train comes to a halt. The conductor gets on, announces, they're waiting for a freight train to get through. So my understanding is that, yeah, they have priority, but it doesn't work that way. But we can come up, we'll get back to you with a more refined answer than my anecdotal Western Massachusetts experience. Oh, and yeah, just so you know, that's my anecdotal as well as Worcester to Boston. Yeah, yeah. Back and forth all the time. So I remember giving way to the freight trains as we were venturing into the city. Okay, thanks, Chris. The other questions I had, well, first one's a comment. I just wanted to give some kudos to the FlexRide. I know it's kind of a relatively new service. I've, you know, personally experienced the FlexRide. I think it's a great service for Longmont. It's good to see the data that was presented tonight. So thank you for that. And then on the local rides, I was curious, I just keep coming back to the same question every time I see the local data, which is, do we know who's riding? Do we have demographic data? Have we done a survey? I just, I feel like I need to know who's using the service so that I can better understand how it's being used in the expansion and all this. Sure. Thanks for asking the question. The last survey we did specifically for the North area, pre COVID, we were on a three year cycle between the various teams. So the last one we did was in 2017. So we were due last year. I know that RTD internally is working on a customer service survey, on board survey. So we will gather more recent data in that regard. We do have data, I know, from another customer service that was done region wide in 2015. So is 2015 still the same as today? Maybe, maybe not. But we've been more than happy to share that data with you when this next survey is done. I'll make sure that Jeff Tengrish is aware of that. And as soon as we have that available, we'll be happy to share it. That would be great. I look forward to it once we can get back to some things I appreciate the concern. I understand ridership, the demographics in Laumont are different specifically than many other areas within the metro region, concentration wise. So we're well aware of that. And we're keeping a close eye on that as well. And that's part of the reason why we did with the local network plan, what we did to allow first much flexibility as possible to address changes in demographics and socioeconomic changes, et cetera, as best as possible. Thank you. Thank you, Natalie. I appreciate that. And yeah, given the growth up here, I would be highly surprised if we're not a lot different from 2019. Just it seems like every three months, things are changing up here in Laumont. We're growing by leaps and bounds. Any other questions from the group? Councilmember John Peck. Thank you. I want to thank the directors as well as the RTD staff. This was a great presentation and all your hard work. It's really showing. Chris, I was wondering if this presentation we're going to give incremental updates to the public. I know we had the transportation conversation, but keeping the public informed as to our progress, what we're doing, and where we're going. Do you have any of those planned for the general public? I don't have a good answer for you right now. But as we did note earlier, we will be going to the board sometime probably in April to determine what path we want to take forward. So with that, and I'm kind of speaking a little bit prematurely, but I think what we're going to go is presenting probably like three options to the board based on effort, cost, etc. So within those varying tiers, there's probably going to be different levels of public engagement that would be associated with it. So I can't answer that now, but we'll probably have a better sense of what that will be in a little more than a month or so. Okay, great. Thanks. I look forward to it. All right. Yeah, I want to echo that. Thank you so much for coming and presenting. This is one of my annual days that I always look forward to. I love seeing the new data and seeing where we are and where we're going. So oh, look at that. Joan Peck has even got the applause going there. We appreciate it as well. We appreciate that we can come and share this information with you. That's it. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you for having us. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. So moving on to the next item here, I see EV Station 2020 summary and rate analysis. And Jock, thank you. Tim Ellis is going to join us. It looks like he's joining us again as host. So we're going to go with it and Tim has some good information to share with this group. So he's our renewable energy strategy manager. So thanks for joining us tonight, Tim. And we're yours. Great. Thanks everyone. Thank you, board members, for allowing me to present tonight. I am the renewable energy strategy manager at Longmont Power Communications. And tonight, I'm going to be presenting. I guess I'll share my screen. I'll be doing the presenting. So I will do that right now. Delay. Can everyone see that screen? The presentation? I can see it. I think you're good. Excellent. Thanks. So yeah, my name is Tim Ellis. Tonight, I'm going to be presenting on the 2020 summary of our publicly owned, our city owned EV charging stations. And also talking about our upcoming rate determinations. So as you know, electric vehicles and the electric vehicle station plans are an important piece of the city's overall transportation plan. The sustainability plan includes it to reduce harmful air emissions. The climate action plan has EV discussions and strategies to reduce greenhouse gases. And our public and fleet electric vehicle education and support as well as increasing electric charging infrastructure also embedded in our new plans, the carbon free equitable transportation roadmap. All of these include discussions and strategies around EVs. And as you can see from this map, we do now have five electric vehicle stations available to the public. They're located north to south in the city at the memorial at DSC between Main and Kimbark in the garage at the library. That one was installed just last year. And we also have one down at the museum and one at the service center. So summary of some of the data that we collect, all of our stations are now charge point. We switched them over in 2019 to four original ones and the one we installed at the library last year is also a charge point. Charge point allows us to get a lot of different kinds of data. So we monitor and track different pieces of data that we use to see how the stations are being used and what rates and things like that as I'll present tonight. The first piece of data for 2020, we had over 40,000 kilowatt hours of use at our all five stations. And this is associated with some greenhouse gas savings when charge point actually put these numbers together to compare if someone had driven a certain amount of miles with a car and chart and ran on gas versus running on electricity. The calculated savings was over 17 metric tons of carbon dioxide for 2020. And this graphic kind of shows just a basic comparison between a standard vehicle in this case it's a Subaru Outback and a standard electric vehicle like the Nissan Leaf. And the two important circled points here are buying and driving on one gallon of gas. If you do the equivalent amount for the equivalent cost in electric, you get over 90 miles of extra driving mileage. You also save a significant amount of money over the year. This is if you drive over 12,000 miles per year, a typical electric driver will see over $1,000 in savings versus the same amount of driving in a gas car. And this graphic just lays out month to month, the number of sessions. And a session is each time a vehicle plugs into a station. So we had almost 4,000 sessions in 2020. And here are the number of unique drivers. And this is a breakdown by each station of how many unique and individual people actually access to the driver. So the same driver can go to the station multiple times, but this is not that number. This is actually each unique person that has plugged into our stations throughout the city. And the total comes to about 342 that have used it in 2020. You can see here that the library only had 13, but that was because we just got the library station online in September of 2020. So it only had a few months to get up and running and get people accessing it. And this table shows kind of a breakdown of different types of data that we're tracking for each station. The first column is the available hours. That is, each station has two ports and obviously there are 80,760 hours per year. So with this number, we're just adding up all the available hours that each port and station are available. So for instance, service center was available all year round last year and both parts ports were available. So the total was 17,520 hours. Whereas the museum was down for repairs at the end of the year last year. So it had a little less. And as I said in the previous slide, the library just got online in September, so it only had a little over 4,000 available hours. This number is important when we look at the next two, which are a charging time and a time at station. The charging time is how many hours during the year that a car was actually charging off the station. And the time at the station was how long they were plugged in. So we expect there to be more time plugged in than actual charging. But as we can see in the last column, which is charged in while plugged in, I know it gets a little, we're all over the place. But the last column really shows that, you know, customers who came in to charge, generally charged, they might have been there a little longer than they were charging, but they generally got off soon after they finished charging their car. So you can see the numbers in the high 70s and 80% where that's how long the car was actually charging while it was plugged into the station. That's an important number for us to keep an eye on, because we don't want people plugging in and leaving for the day, and then taking up that spot and not allowing other electric vehicles potentially to come in and charge at that same port. At the time, charging versus available hours is an important one, so we can see how much each day that cars were actually plugged in and charging at our stations to see how they were utilized. And there's numbers vary quite a bit, but you can see at the Memorial and DSC stations that 16 and 20%, it's a pretty high number because we're considering the available hours as 24 hours a day. So if someone, a vehicle is there 20% of the time, that's actually very high for an electric vehicle charging amount versus available hours. And next, so the stations were changed out to charge point in 2019, and like I said last year, we put the library station in. So customers and people who come into the city and live in the city have had free charging for those stations for the past almost two years now. Prior to that, we had another vendor had the stations at those four initial locations and we charged a dollar an hour during that time period. But after we changed them out, we wanted folks to get re-associated with the new stations and find where they are. We put some information up on the web where our stations were. So we wanted to get people re-engaged with the stations and we feel that it's been enough time so folks know where they are and how to use the new charge point stations. So at this time, we felt it was appropriate to start charging folks who are coming to use those stations because they do cost money, they do use electricity. So some of the things we used to calculate the rate that we anticipate having are the cost of electricity, average hours of charging so that we can recoup the costs depending on how long the vehicle is charging, purchase and installation of the stations, station maintenance and repair. We have five year maintenance and repair contracts for all the stations and there are certain wiring metering costs as well as administration but we also deducted from that total amount of funds that we used to operate and purchase the stations. We had a rebate from the state of Colorado which was very substantial so we actually took that rebate out of the total cost and we ended up coming up with about a dollar an hour as an appropriate charge which is what we charged previously and what our nearby cities Boulder, Loveland and Fort Collins are all charging a dollar an hour. It's a pretty standard rate for EV charging stations and are all the costs added up and appropriated. We came out just about that so we would be able to recoup our costs for that rate. And just a bigger picture slide here. The graph on the right is from the Colorado EV plan for 2020 and it charts three different scenarios for EV purchases over the next 10 years or so. That first one, the orange one, the lowest one is business as usual. The second, the middle one is the actual plan that Colorado has come up with and then there's a high scenario to that plan but in either case really looking at a tremendous expectation for vehicles in Colorado, electric vehicles up to upwards of three quarters of a million to over a million potentially. And there's an interesting quote from a study that Rocky Mountain Institute did that if we electrify all of our light duty vehicles in the US that that would increase electricity demand by about 25%. So it's quite a substantial impact on our roads, on our electric grid, on our air emissions. So there's significant impacts with all the expectations that were that have been thought to that are going to occur over the next 10 years. So it's something substantial that we really need to consider. And the next steps for just this presentation are we're going to present to the sustainability board on the 17th next Wednesday. We are presenting to city council on the 30th. Following council approval of that new rate, we're going to be educating the community about implementing the rate over the next few months and then this summer we intend to actually start charging customers that ballot per hour at the stations. That's pretty much all I have. Any questions? David, I see your hand raised there. I think I might have saw something in the presentation in our packet talking about expanding the locations of the stations, or maybe I misread that, but are there, did you discuss that or do you have anything planned that you can talk about? Well, no, at this time, that's true. We are, what we're doing is we're monitoring the usage and we're kind of looking at how the market's going to unfold. So we want to encourage EV use and we want to make the infrastructure available, but the market is changing so dynamically right now, whether it's the public entities, cities that are going to install stations or kind of businesses, it's still kind of up in the air where who's going to drive that market in the future. And Colorado, the state of Colorado is doing a lot of effort in putting a lot of money into building highways of electric charging stations across the major routes in Colorado. So we're kind of keeping our eye on it, but we're looking to where it would make the most sense for a long month and we want to do it in a smart way. So we're kind of waiting to see where a good place would be and then we'll study it and we'll put ones out there that we think are the best solution for our residents. But we don't have any plans for the next one specifically, but it is in the plans. We want to put more in, we just want to do it in the most intelligent, strategic way possible. Thank you. I see Sandra's hand raised. And if you're raising your hand and I can't see you, just tell me. Thank you. So tell me, how would you pay if you were charging your electric vehicle? Do you pay by credit card? Is that like you would at a gas station or how will the city get the money? Yeah, and that's one of the great things about Chargepoint. They have a whole mechanism to charge. What you do when you have an iPhone and you sign up on Chargepoint and you have to put a credit card in no matter what, even if it's free, you still put a credit card into Chargepoint, but they send you a barcode, you scan it right on the station and it charges the card, then Chargepoint will collect that money for us and send us a check every month. Okay, thank you. Jack, this is Joe Long. Thanks, Joe. A question that keeps bouncing around in my mind as we're driving our goals are to pretty significantly increase EV utilization. And I start looking then at concurrent use and although we've got these linear measurements of available hours, we still faced with a pretty big challenge of concurrent use. So seven people show up to charge the vehicle. Is the fee that we're proposing to charge include an allowance for expansion? In other words, is there some kind of profitability or is that just a cost-covering fee? For now, that's a great question because we want to be able to recoup our costs, the costs that we've already put in and the ongoing costs. But as there is more usage, the cost is based on the valve on actual charging times because it's a dollar an hour. So the more customers that actually utilize those stations, the more revenue is going to be brought in. So that kind of as the market goes up and as more people purchase EVs and use the stations, the collected revenue from the stations will go up, allowing us to expand. So there is kind of a built-in allowance to expand out as more vehicles are using our stations, if that makes sense. It does. Great. Thank you. Liz, did you have a question? I do. The question I have is, as we begin charging for the electricity, is there any conversation about moving what had been paid for by the gas tax to these electric vehicles? You mean for road upkeep and that type of thing? Exactly. We haven't really explored that yet. That's a federal and state issue mostly, but obviously we have to deal with it on a local basis, but we have not included that in our cost analysis. At this time, we only have the five stations up. And again, I think it greatly depends on how that market ends up being driven, if it becomes a commercial marketplace, or is it more of a public marketplace. So it's a lot to be determined on that front, but that's an excellent question. That's something that we're going to have to figure out. As more gas cars are replaced and that tax decreases, we're going to be short of funding for needed transportation upgrades and maintenance and repair, for sure. But no, that's not in this current number. Great question. Yeah, I was actually in the state of Oregon when they were going through that about four or five years ago. They had such a high percentage of electric vehicles, they started looking at a tax based on number of miles per year rather than the gas tax. So that's how they solved it. Any other questions? I just had one too. Thanks for a great presentation there. I noticed some new EVs going in at the Walmart up on Main Street. And I was just wondering, is that city or is that private? That's private. Then that's, you know, that's part of the issue. Let me see if I can stop sharing. That's part of the issue is figuring out where these stations and who is going to be put them in. But those are private stations, and there's more and more going in all the time. And they have really interesting, I was looking at some of the ways that they pay for their own stations. A lot of these big box retailers or other grocery stores use reward points. You know, if you have reward points, you can plug in at the store and get your car charged for free. So there's all sorts of interesting incentives and cost recovery out there that's still in the very nascent stages of this market. So yeah, so those are those are private, but and that's why we got to be careful where we put them because we don't want to pay all the money and put them down and not have folks use them. Yeah, and the other question I was going to think of is since we're using public funds, then we have to be careful not to undercut private because you can't basically use public funds to undercut competition from the private sector. Exactly. We don't want to compete if that's going to be happening in the market regardless of what we do. We want to encourage that. So so that's why we also have to be careful. Yeah, very good. All right. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate you hanging in there. All right, great. Yeah. Thanks for letting me host the meeting. Thanks everybody. I won't host anymore. Thanks a lot. All right, let's see. Next item up is comments from board members. And so I'll just go in the order on my screen here. So Liz, you're at the top of my screen here. Just thanks to everyone. I really enjoyed the information, especially to the cooperation between the city and RTD as they thought carefully about where routes need to go in the future. I thought it was clear, good thought had gone into that. Thank you. Thank you. Joe, how about you go next here? Sure. Yeah, I honestly, I was left with a lot of questions after seeing the RTD RTD data. And honestly, probably want to spend some more time with others to see ultimately how some of these routing recommendations are made when you see some of the trending of utilization pre-COVID relative to long-mount population growth. The numbers don't seem to be correlating. So that's part of where my questions are stemming. That makes sense. Yes, it sure does. And hopefully we will get some demographic data later this year, at least on the local routes. Sandra, I have you next up here. Well, I too have questions about RTD and the routing. And so I'm interested in having more information on that. I want to make sure that the people that rely on RTD are getting the best service possible and getting where they need to get. But I question when the bus starts at eight o'clock in the morning and ends at six, if you've got a job that's late at night or, you know, you can get to work, but you can't get home. So I have questions about that. And I really appreciate the information about the EV stations because really I know nothing about electric cars, but I do know that we need to be working towards that. So I thought I heard in the state that they were over the next five years, we were supposed to have, it seems like hundreds of stations added long different routes. So I know that's coming and I need to know more about it. Thank you. Oh, thank you. Yeah, it sounds like we need to get some more wind farms going here, right? 25% more electricity. Courtney, I have you next up here. All right. As you said as well, I think I look forward to the RTD presentation. Since we had it last year, that was the last meeting I think we had in person. So before COVID hit, so I appreciate RTD coming up, you know, they came up in person last year and presenting everything and looking at the routes and adjusting them as needed. But Sandra, you have a very good point as to those hours that are available. You know, a lot of people don't work a regular eight to five type of job, especially ones who need the bus. So that would be interesting to see the demographics and if we could tie that to workplaces and job status. And I kind of think that would be very interesting to see if they can provide that to us. Thank you. David. Yes, I'm also, I was also happy with the RTD presentation in that I know that it felt there was some flexibility in the routing that I hadn't seen in the past. And you know, I haven't been on the board that long, but it just looked, it was refreshing to see that changes were being considered. And that the Longmont board that was helping to determine what those routes were some like, at least based on what they had said that they were being listened to. So I found that very encouraging. I'm also very much in favor of the EV. We've had an electric car now for just over a year and we've got to fight each other in the family to see who gets to drive it. It's just it's marvelous. So I'd recommend it to anybody. That's all I have. All right. Thanks, David. I, you know, I look around Longmont and I just see an incredible city being grown here from the new hospital to the parking garage to the rapid transit to Boulder to the EVs. This place is happening. And you know, I just, I'm very grateful for our city staff who work so hard to try to watch all this stuff. And yeah, I just, I'm very, just very happy to live here. And yeah, I guess I'll just leave it at that. So all right, I didn't miss anyone except for council member Pat, correct? Okay, people moved around on my screen. So now they're out of order and I'm like, wait a second. Thanks, Jack. I want to echo what you said about our staff and especially give kudos to Phil Greenwald for our local routes. He works very hard on them and he works very, very well with RTD and has a great network connection there. I would like, I remember when RTD first came to the council meeting and that the new director mentioned that in these local routes that we should may have smaller buses rather than the big ones. So I, I am curious as to where that conversation is going to go in the future. Right now, I'm sure there's no capital money for that. But I think that would help us a lot on our local routes. So that's it. Thank you. Okay, sure. Let's see. I guess next up here, info on upcoming transportation related meetings. Do we have anything? We do. We have a meeting that's coming up sponsored, excuse me, sponsored by the Northwest Chamber Alliance for the 11th. And I believe four o'clock. So we'll send you out the information. It's, it's kind of late coming to us quite frankly, but we're excited to get the information out to you. It's a, it's basically representative Jonah, Jonah Goose with a listening session as well as a number of state senators and state representatives talking about the different levels of the transportation need and transportation funding that's coming forward both through the US Congress and the state, the state representative and the state legislature. So there'll be an interesting session and I'll send that to you as soon as we're out of this meeting. I'll send you the pamphlet from the Northwest Chamber and I think you can just log on. It's, it should be fairly straightforward. Excellent. Yeah, especially given all the irons we have in the fire right now, it'll be good to hear what's, what's coming out there. Okay. Let's see. Next up here, I guess items for upcoming agenda. It looks like we have the tip, the project status updates on the transportation improvement program. Anything else, Tyler and Phil want to add? Yeah, the other one looks like we have on there for next, there'll be some information, transportation and community investment fees. So we'll have some information to share about that in our next meeting as well. Thank you. It helps if I turn the page over. All right. So 730, I think I will give you 30 minutes back here. So unless there's anything else, I think we can adjourn. All right. Thank you very much. So Stacy. Thanks, Phil. Sorry about the issues up front, but we got, got through them. That's okay. If I need your help, you know, I put it in the notes. Thank you. Have a good night. Thanks. Bye bye.