 We'll call the Transfusion Advisory Board meeting for November 14th, 2022. We'll do roll call, please. Taylor Wicklund, Patrick Hinterberger, Liz Osborn, Steve Lainer, David McInerney, Diane Christ, Chairman, you have a quorum. Great. I guess we will go to staff. Great. Thank you so much. First and foremost, we need to introduce Jane Madrid as your recording secretary for tonight. So thanks, Jane, for volunteering in the place of Stacey, who is out, I think, on vacation. Great. Thank you for doing that. Also wanted to let you know a couple of things that are happening internally. One is that we've hired a new transportation engineering administrator, correct? His name is Kyle Hayworth, and he started Monday, November 7th. So we're very excited to have him on board. He will take the place of Tyler Stamey for a lot of that work that Tyler was doing. So wanted to make you aware of that that's happening as well. Also wanted to make you aware that on December 3rd, the mayor is having a transportation session. That's a Saturday. And so let me check the time for you on this. My apologies for not having that ready. But I think it's like nine to 11 at the Longmont Library. We will be having that session with the mayor. It's going to really focus on the regional issues with transportation. So we're going to have members of CDOT there, members of the regional transportation district there. I'll be there. Lucky you. So we'll chat about kind of long range planning pieces. There won't be a lot of the day to day activities that Jim's responsible for. It's going to be more about the long range planning pieces. And moving on to the transportation mobility plan that we hope to do next year, which is really our master plan. We don't use the word master plan anymore, but we're calling it mobility plan. And so but that is the full encompassing plan. We've always kind of tied that in with our Envision Longmont or a comprehensive plan. It's always been where we put the transportation and kind of we really wanted to work it together with the land use. We feel like the land use is pretty well set now and we don't want to do much changing there. And it's really a lot. We did a lot of work with that. So now we want to do the update to the transportation piece because transportation is changing all the time, right? We're different different ideas all the time with with transportation, and especially after it's been it's been almost 10 years since we did that did it last time. So we need to need to update it. So we're excited about that and we'll let you know more about that. And certainly that'll be coming to this board as well as we talk more and get further along into that process. We'll talk to you about that as well. So December 3rd, put it on your calendars and let your friends know. It'll it'll be a fun city wide event. So I'll turn it over to Jim and maybe Caroline for some issues with with Gay Street. Oh, go ahead nine to 11 at the city library just north of here. Thank you, Phil. Just a couple of of items. We are wrapping up hope to be wrapping up this week. The Gay Street mitigation project was a neighborhood mitigation project. On the north side of Gay Street or the northern end of Gay Street. We did we followed our process. We had a vote with the neighbors several public meetings and they they approved the plan. So we are working next phase will be hopefully within the next two weeks to install several traffic calming measures in the form of speed tables. I think there are two or three for each one for each block. Three, sorry, sorry about that three total in that area. The neighbors said earlier in the year petition for that we followed our process and they did vote for those. So we did find some locations that were acceptable to all the neighbors. And so that will be moving forward. Next item is OK, just something for the board's information. Public Works and Natural Resources has been in the process of a reorganization for the last several months. We are actually no longer going to be Public Works and Natural Resources. We are creating a public works group that will actually be titled Public Works. The current or the previous organization ran in what we called a matrix organization where we kind of we had an operations group and then an engineering group, business services group. We shifted some of those around and created a new department called strategic integrations. That was our old business services group. And then operations we kind of redefined that as a water wastewater group. So previously I had a group of water and wastewater engineers under me. They are shifting over to be under that under the water wastewater kind of department. And then the operational end of of streets and drainage will shift out to be under under my leadership. So it's more of a more traditional public works group that will handle, you know, not only the the design and improvement erodes, but also the operations of them as well. Filling potholes, replacing signs, installing signs, striping that sort of thing. And then the remainder of the group, this traffic signal group, our DRC development review group and our inspection team will still stay under me. But you'll see some, you may hear about that, may see a, you know, we can probably send out when the org charts are approved finalized. We can get those over to you so you can see that change as well. Thank you. Yeah, thank you both. So I, I missed this. I should have done this. We should do the approval of the minutes from the last meeting. So I guess we will, we don't need to review the meetings, but are there any, any comments about the minutes from the last meeting? And can I get a motion to approve the minutes? Okay, I, now we'll jump into probably the starting off with the tip update. You may still want to do public invited to be heard just for fun. And do we have any public members who would like to be heard? Okay, great. Next order of business will go to the, the TIP update. Great, thank you so much, chair. My name is Phil Greenwald, transportation planning manager with the city of Longmont. And we just want to make sure that you're up to date on the informational pieces related to our transportation improvement program. We go for dollars whenever they come available, obviously. And there's, this has been a different kind of year for all of us because of the infrastructure, the bipartisan infrastructure bill that was passed earlier. So we've seen a lot of that, those dollars move into this grant program, which is a federal grant program that's administered by the Denver Regional Council of Governments. And so they're the ones that administer it, make sure it's a fair program as far as getting dollars out to everyone. And I think we've gone through this a few times, but for some of the folks that may not recall or may not have been here, there's, this year there's been, well, in the last year, there's been four calls or three calls so far of dollars. And the first two calls, one and two, were really short-term dollars that were really meant to be spent very quickly. So it was 22 through 27, 25, sorry, 22 through $25. And that's a federal fiscal year, so it starts September 1st. And but those calls went out and we were fairly successful in different ways on those. And now we're currently hearing back about call three. To be a little bit more specific, calls one and three were both broad regional calls for projects, so across the whole region. And that's the way we used to always do it. It was just a call across the region and you would just throw your projects in there and the best ones would float to the top with the scoring. And they draw a line and if you were a boulder or Denver, you'd get lots of dollars from that program because you had lots of staff to be able to write up a good application. After a while, that was seen as not fair necessarily to the rest of the region. And there was a lot of folks that just kind of sat on the sidelines and watched the process or maybe threw in one or two projects. And would kind of yell and scream on their year and let us have some money, let us have some money and that's kind of how it worked. The last two versions of this have delved into something that's called sub regional. And so that's at the county level. So we're in Southwest Weld County and we're also in Boulder County, obviously. And those are the two counties we compete with all the local governments for dollars. So it's been a little bit more interesting, a little bit more fair, a little bit more competitive, I guess it spreads the wealth a little better. So we've been pleased to be part of those calls. And we've been very careful about how we go after projects, because we've had some examples in the past where we go after dollars, get this nice big chunk of money, and then I throw it at Jim and say, Jim, we got this money, can you spend it on this project now? And he's got to, we have to work with staff, we have to work internally. We have to make sure our resources are there to do this. And yeah, it's fun getting money, but you have to be able to spend it in a certain time frame or else you lose that money. So there's a lot of different strings attached and we have to be careful of that. And we've tried to be very diligent about those dollars. So just wanted to let you know, we came to you with this chart. And so it's just in your packet of all the projects we were going to go after when we first started this process. And most of the people on this board said, yeah, sounds good. We'll go after these projects. So the chart is showing yellow, if it's yellow highlighted, that funding is pending. So we have those dollars allocated to the city of Longmont for that project. And so we're pretty excited about that. Sorry, the green is really the funding has been approved and the yellow is pending. So both mean that the green means definitely we're going to be able to spend those dollars and we have those dollars coming to Longmont. The yellow means that for the most part, it's gone through all the processes and all it needs is a final blessing from the board of directors from the Denver Regional Council of Governments. And at this point, there's really not much of a chance, I mean, not much at all of those dollars going away because it's gone through all the other processes of being selected. So we're pretty excited about that. So you'll see on there, the Colorado, the asterisk is there to talk about. We used to call it SH 66 and now CDOT wants us to call it CO 66. So that's reason for those and that was from a previous spreadsheet that we put together for you. But that Colorado 66 project from over to Pratt, there are dollars pending for that. That one is a little further away than we'd like just because we've got some new, some varying information on that one. That one's, we've got a lot of construction dollars from the state to do a widening piece of that project that's been promised for over 20 years. Also have some county dollars, Boulder County dollars where they've actually said, hey, we think it should be widened 20 years ago. But we've been moving money back and forth through other projects. So this one will construct, basically CDOT will have to do the widening piece of it. And the money we're going to ask for is the multimodal aspects of it. So we're going to ask for the sidewalk pieces to it, the bike pieces to that, the offset and how we do the different right away pieces that are required for that project. So that one might need to change that language a little bit for the next iteration of this list once we're done with round four. So I'll get back to you after we're done with round four or call number four. The money we definitely have money or the project we definitely have money for is the Countyline Road 17th Estate Highway 66 construction. So that's going to be adding some safety, shoulders, bike lane or bike area, bike shoulders for that segment of roadway. It also be actually good for bicycles and pedestrians because we have no sidewalk in that location at this time and not in probably the near term future either. State Highway 119 or Kimpratt Boulevard, Nelson to South Pratt Parkway. That one needs to be modified as well. We're going to go, that's money that we're going to go into a different funding category for this call number four is where we're going to go after those dollars. We kind of got some late news after this, after this communication went out. So that's going to go to a call four project, but it's still very popular with the group, with the Boulder County group. So we're hoping that that will move forward. Not quite as Bat lanes, but as a design, more of a design project at this time. Because it's a very expensive project. The Loop Trail over by Union Reservoir. We're moving that forward through the Southwest Weld. Group, and so they're very positive on that as well. Thinking that that's something that they want to move forward on. We haven't finalized that project list either yet. The main and 21st intersection improvements, more of the design. That's more of design again. That's not going to be construction dollars yet. We need to figure out what can go in that location and how it's going to look first before we pursue the construction dollars for that. So might be a bike pad underpass, might be something at grade. But it's going to be dependent on the study that we need to do for that because there's so many different variables out there. So anybody who's been through it on a bicycle or walking, it's one thing to drive through it. It's a whole different thing to be out there at street level on your feet or on your wheels. And it's pretty tenuous I guess as far as like being a very safe intersection for folks bicycling or walking as much. So that's what we're looking at. Those are the projects. You'll see kind of what's been going on with call one, two and three on the back. And again, excuse me, there's been some changes. So we'll get some more information to you as it comes forward to us. Just as this is all kind of very dynamic. So with that, I certainly want to take any questions. That's really the information to you. And as you can tell, it changes almost every other week here. So any questions? So we took a hard look at that grant opportunity. And one of the challenges with that grant is it requires a safety or traffic safety plan to be in place before they would award any dollars for construction or for projects. So we elected at this time because we know we're working on our mobility plan to hold off on any type of submissions. We could have also gone and chased a grant through that Safer Streets for actually preparing a plan. But being short of traffic engineer this year, we were not prepared staff wise to be spending a lot of the work, even if we did hire a consultant for that. So we elected and knowing that this is the first year in a five year cycle. They'll be offering that grant again next year. So at this time we didn't feel there was any way we would have even been able to put together any type of reasonable application that would be considered. Jim, can I ask a question? Is it all staff that does these design projects or do you use a consultant or is it a combination of staff and consultant working together? For instance, in the 21st Avenue and Main Street, when you're talking about a pedestrian underpass or whatever, that was going to be just a design, a look to see what could be possible. So is that something that takes up a lot of your staff time? Or do you parcel that out to somebody that can come with some ideas? We, for the most part, we hire professional consultants to do the design, some of the planning work as well, with staff managing those types of projects. An example would be, I'll say we're about ready to bid out the Boston Avenue Bridge project. We hired a consultant to take on that bridge project. But the city staff, we have a project manager assigned to it. And then when it goes to construction, that same project manager will be managing the construction with the help of a consultant as well as city staff to do inspections. But for almost all design, with the exception of our water line replacements, we hire consultants. So it's useful to have the money in these grants because then you can hire in some talent to augment the staff. Yeah, and all grants come with strings. So depending on what grants you're using, if you're construction dollars with a federal project, you have reporting requirements. So the city has recently brought on board a grant writer within our strategic integration team. So she has helped organize a lot of our grants for all reporting of those as well as kind of keeping track of them. And it's important to note, like we've got across several areas of projects, whether it's storm drainage, streets, roads, traffic signals, and the grants that are coming out. There are quite a few more coming, whether it's through the state, through the federal government. We've attended a number of grant seminars. I think one of the local state representatives or US representatives had had had had kind of a symposium over in in Weld County to bring everybody together. A lot of the grant or the federal agencies to promote their grants. We had attendees there. So we do and have been providing updates to council on kind of where we're at. And I'm only focusing on kind of the public works items. There's a host of housing ones as well. I think there's one for that next slide is chasing for, you know, expanding their system. LPC is looking at grants. We're looking at grants for electric vehicle chargers. So we've there's there's quite a a lot of staff involvement across the whole city. All of our departments looking at the grant opportunities that are out there now. And this particular one for Main Street and 21st. You've got until 2025 to complete the the work or the design work on it. Is that right? Am I reading that correctly on call two? Yeah, fiscal year 2025 actually begins in September 1st of 24. So we have until sorry, it's October 1st of 24. And then it'll go until September 30th of 25. So that's our timeframe for spending those dollars. Thank you. Okay. No more comments on on the tip from everybody else. Okay, I think we can move on to the vision zero presentation. Good evening board members. Jim Einstein, director of engineering services. We wanted to provide tonight an overview that we will be providing the city council tomorrow evening on the vision zero kind of program. We've been asked to provide city council with some information. So we have in the form of a PowerPoint. We want to run through it with you. So you have this information as well. We're not asking for you to adopt anything or or look at or make a recommendation. It's for information only council hasn't it's similar for council. We're not asking a recommendation from them. It's information only and then we'll see where they take it. So what is vision zero vision zero? This is information we pulled off the vision zero network, which is kind of the mainstay for providing information on this program. It's a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries while increasing safe, healthy and equitable ability for all. It presents itself as an alternative to kind of the existing status quo that treats traffic related deaths as inevitable. And there's a chart here that kind of compares the traditional reproach that most traffic engineers have utilized for a number of years. Versus what vision zero kind of has has promoted. So the commo components of a vision zero commitment and I'll let you read these real quick political commitment, multidisciplinary leadership, action plan, equity, cooperation and collaboration systems, base approach, data driven community engagement and transparency. And plus as we move forward in it, I've got kind of more definitions on each of those. The political commitment is basically for the elected leaders to give us that direction and commit to the vision zero program. Both with funding resources and what you'll see later in the presentation is also time. Most of the vision zero kind of goals are put out several years. You're not going to change the culture in your community or how transportation moves around your city and expect to have achievement of zero traffic fatalities in a year or two years. It's going to take time. The multidisciplinary leadership creating a task force that involves a number of high ranking officials, office of the mayor, police, transportation and public health, the planning groups, public works, community services and the school district. I would extend that definition to this board as well. As we move forward with our transportation, multimodal plan, mobility plan, mobility plan for next year, we're going to be asking for your help in crafting that plan, vetting it and moving that forward. So part of that what we're going to look at is will be a vision zero component. So this is basically leadership from all areas of the city, as well as as you move forward with it, city stakeholders, residents, that sort of thing. The action plan, the vision zero program calls for that created within one year of the initial commitment is a plan with clear strategies. Owners of those strategies, interim targets, timelines and performance measures. Yes, yes. The equity piece of this, city stakeholders commit to both an equitable approach by establishing inclusive and representative processes as well as equitable outcomes by ensuring measurable benchmarks to provide safe transportation options for all road users in all parts of the city. It also, one of some of the components are cooperation and collaboration. Some of our failures currently is sometimes our traffic engineering groups doesn't always talk to PD. We don't get messages out and, you know, we work hard at it, but sometimes we fall through the cracks. So commitment is made to encourage meaningful cooperation and collaboration among relevant government, governmental agencies and community stakeholders to establish a framework for multiple stakeholders to get shared goals and focus on coordination and accountability. A systems-based approach, city leaders commit to and prioritize the system-based approach to vision zero focusing on the built environment, systems and policies that influence behavior as well as adopting messaging that emphasizes that these traffic losses are preventable. And that's the biggest thing about vision zero is that traffic losses, all traffic losses are preventable. Data-driven stakeholders commit to gather, analyze, utilize and share reliable data to understand traffic safety issues and prioritize resources based on evidence of the greatest needs and impact. We already do some of this work. We do produce a crash report that analyzes a lot of areas, a lot of intersections, some roads. Part of that is, I would say, where we've failed is we don't necessarily share all that data. We publish it, but, you know, it isn't something that gets out there enough, and I think that's one of the components that's very important is that community engagement, that we create opportunities to invite meaningful community engagement, and then we have selected representation on the task force for broader community input through public meetings, workshops, online surveys, and then just other feedback in general. And then the final component is transparency, that all of our processes are transparent to city stakeholders and the community, including regular updates on the progress of the action plan. I think that's part of the accountability piece is that we have progress, we have those reports to city council and to the appropriate boards. So those are the main components that Vision Zero Network pushes out. Some of the strategies that are tied to those is leadership, collaboration, and accountability, prioritizing community engagement and equity, setting a timeline to achieve zero traffic deaths. That's going to be critical in the action plan. Collecting, analyzing, using data. The roadway design that prioritizes safety. Some of our roadway design, I will say, is basically designed to push cars. That's kind of been the traditional measure is do we want, you know, we want to move as many cars as through town as possible. And so I will say that some of our roads need to be adjusted, updated to provide for better mobility for other users. Big component is managing speeds. You will read that a lot is there's data out there that basically, you know, if you reduce your speed limits, you know, people have a better chance of surviving a crash at 25 or 30 miles per hour than they would at 40 or 45. So some of the elements of Vision Zero commitment from the public safety end would be red light cameras, speed cameras, license plate readers, traffic enforcement tools, and then just traffic enforcement in general. So what will it take? It's going to take resources, it's going to take some funding, and it's going to, as I indicated earlier, it's going to take time. So what we're looking for, looking at are some of the next steps we're proposing from, this is a kind of staff proposing it, is that we are, we've already been directed for to undertake a transportation mobility plan update to begin in quarter one of 2023. We do have that funded for next year. But we propose to incorporate Vision Zero elements addressing safety in that plan would include an implementation step in the, in that transportation mobility plan. We feel that's the best way to move it forward. Do you want to take the closing thoughts? And so kind of to wrap this up and I'll apologize to Jim here a little bit. We did put in the in your board packet. The idea that this could be an action item, certainly. And if you want to make a recommendation to city council for tomorrow night's meeting, we'll carry that forward for you. So there was three options that were, were put in there. But just to kind of close things up and think, think a little bit more critically about this too. And maybe the bigger kind of the higher level is that Vision Zero really started, you know, as, as something in a Scandinavian in one of the Scandinavian countries that's really tied into a lot of transit, a lot of bicycling and a lot of pedestrian activity. And so to just drop a Vision Zero plan without thinking about the broader range of these things and more in a transportation mobility plan setting, to just drop down a Vision Zero plan is not going to work. We know that we've seen it in other North American cities who have adopted Vision Zero and it was very altruistic, you know, to do this and, you know, we wanted to stop all traffic deaths or any deaths related to traffic in any way, but it can't be done as a singular effort. It has to be done tied in, in what Jim brought up was all the other pieces that need to be part of that. It can't just sit on its, by itself and not be part of a bigger thing. So we just talked about successfully incorporating Vision Zero includes, we talked about this already and this just ties the three pieces together. You have to expend dollars in traffic safety and infrastructure to make this work. You have to have the resources, the people power in program coordination and education. So it's not, you need to have people who are running the program and people who are educating us, the community in the program too. So there's other elements and that's just the tip of the ice program, not even getting to a lot of the other pieces that need to follow. I mean, you need to, we've talked about the public safety buy-in to this and the willingness to have resources at that level to be able to start to make sure that the speed limits are being followed, where we need them to be, where the red light running, all those things that you know and you've seen in the newspapers have led to traffic fatalities in our city, we need, that's another piece of this. And so it's talking to people in the community about what their expectation is on them as far as when somebody enters a crosswalk, the law is, as soon as you start to approach that crosswalk as a pedestrian, cars are supposed to stop. You ask 10 people out there today when they're supposed to stop for a pedestrian and I'll bet you five of them give you a wrong answer. So we need to change that mentality, that community level of input. So, and then just we just have to almost just beg for your patience in this because it's not gonna be an overnight thing. This took, the Scandinavian countries we're talking about, you know, in the 1970s they look very much like Denver or Longmont and they took 30, 40, 50 years now to get their act together, right? And get to the place where they are because of putting all these different resources together. It was also a mentality thing that had to switch there too. So this is not a short term, hey, we hope to have zero deaths next year. We certainly do hope to have zero deaths next year but it's gonna be a long term commitment and just the idea that all modes have to be safe, comfortable and reliable. That's all modes across the board. We've done a very great, good job of making automobile travel safe, fairly safe, very comfortable and ultimately very reliable but you can't say that I don't think today about bicycle travel, walking everywhere in town and certainly not taking the bus. So those are the things we need to work on and that's kind of the bigger picture piece of how this fits together. So with that, we certainly entertain if you want to make a recommendation to City Council for tomorrow night. We've put a couple ideas out there for you. Again, this is more of an informational piece so Council's not gonna take action tomorrow night on this, what they're gonna do is give staff some direction on how to move forward. We're hopeful and so this will be a piece of our presentation if you come up with some recommendation to City Council, we'll certainly take that forward tomorrow night. Thank you. Before we, I think, get to the recommendations, do we have any questions from the board in regards to anything around Vision Zero that they've just covered? I have a couple questions because Phil, we've had a conversation about this. So as a user of the roads, both pedestrian, cyclist and driver and alarmingly, I'm finding it more when I'm driving, I see a lot of distracted driving. Folks are in the shoulder. In fact, coming over here today on, not on ninth but Tremor where it was, person was literally just in and out of the shoulder, the bike lane to the double yellow line is a double yellow line. So my question is in regards to that distracted driving and even simple things like the Texas Yellow, the yellow yields, calm Texas yellows. It seems to me that there's a component of community engagement and education that that might be a large key to helping Vision Zero, but even these things kind of get moved along to where folks are aware that I shouldn't be in the shoulder, I should occupy my space in the intersection with the blinking yellow, just like it's a standard yield against a green. So I guess we don't really have anything at the city in terms of education or communication that's gonna be devoted to this in terms of Vision Zero or some of these other things that I've brought up. That's one of my questions. And then my other question is, is that you mentioned prioritizing safety and road design, how do we do that in existing space? Because we know that there's a lot of dangerous spots in the city that how are you gonna prioritize safety now that the design in essence has already been done? And then Phil, you already answered my question on the thoughts on kind of how long a process, because I know it's an ongoing process, but we're talking decades here as opposed to seven-year plan or even a 10-year plan. So go back to my first question about engagement, education. We have to flip a coin here. I threw a lot at you. So yeah, the education piece, we did mention it a little bit in our presentation. It's, I mentioned just a few items, and so you're bringing up some really great issues that we need to concentrate on and get more information out there. We did, you know, on the website, there is something that talks a little bit about how the blinking yellow arrow is supposed to be treated, how many people go to the website and actually see that and understand it. It's gonna take working with our communications team, which is now finally fully staffed as I understand it. So we're gonna work with them, and we're gonna work with them regardless of what happens tonight or tomorrow night. We work with them always to get the information out there. So to hear what you're talking about is something that we just need to take to them and start talking about. The distracted driving is a really tough one because I just feel, there's just a gut feeling that a lot of the fatalities are probably tied to that in some way, and how do you get somebody off of a phone without making it almost unusable while you're moving as fast as a car? So I don't have any answers to that, but I think there's some good, again, that's the community coming together and understanding what you need to do as a community as far as when you're on the road, what your responsibility is when you're on the road. So that's something that has to be instilled, and that's gonna take, as you can imagine, I mean, that's gonna take a lot of time or some change in the technology. And maybe the last thing, excuse me, the, we'll call it traffic mitigation with licensed readers. We know red light cameras are fairly controversial, speed cameras as well. They can be effective, however, there can be a lot of folks who, you know, kind of don't buy into that. Has there been any sort of, I guess, studies, kind of like the idea of a road diet? You know, we talk about road diets, and after they've been implemented and planned, residents, people who use it, users find out that they don't mind the road diet, right? So with licensed readers and red light cameras and those sorts of things, is there any sort of, let's say, post-deployment surveys that show that most folks aren't as weirded out by those sorts of things as they are before that they're actually put into place? That would be, this would be a great opportunity that I should have invited one of the members of the PD. Public safety is taking that lead, but I think those are ideas we could certainly bring forward to them that if you're investing in some of that technology, how do we know that it's actually gonna be effective? But I think those are times they have budgeted for 2023. We are actually, they are working on gathering data currently. They are purchasing a couple of those radar signs that we have posted, similar to what we've posted, traffic is posted out there, but they're portable. And they're using them to collect data to see not necessarily to flag drivers who are speeding, but to collect data, how many people are speeding actually. So we're gonna share that data as they collect that. That's one of the items they're actually purchasing this year. But those are very good suggestions on establishing whether that the systems you're putting in place are actually going to be worthwhile. Thank you. Just real quick, Chairman Laner, you had a question about design and infrastructure. As we work through or work through some of these safety projects, some of the safety projects are as simple as at signalized intersections, changing some of the how that signal operates. One of the items I think on a few years ago that we undertook was in conjunction with the improvements on Pike Road and Main Street, CDOT came in and provided double lefts. We made those double lefts protected. That actually what that does is that anyone making a left has to go on the green arrow, not on a flashing yellow, not on a green ball. It is protected. It reduces the efficiency of the intersection, but it makes it extremely safer. What we saw was a lot of the crashes there were sidewalkers, almost t-bone intersections of people trying to push the light as people came out of town and started speeding up to go to a 55 and a 65 mile per hour to go south of Longmont. Those kind of improvements were done a few years ago. That intersection of Pike Road and Main Street is now off of the top 20 list, I believe. That's an example. Other improvements could be as simple as when we do some of our chip seals, we narrow lanes to slow people down. We add bike lanes. We did that on 3rd Avenue this year, 9th Avenue last year. A lot of our streets have maybe wider than they need to be. So some cost effective measures are to provide some additional striping. Some roads will cost, will like Kauffman where you wanna provide room for buses, cars, bikes and pedestrians are complete rebuilds and those can be expensive. So it can be any of those kind of options. We have a lot of tools in the toolbox to do small scale adjustments to all the way up to complete rebuilds. It would, I think, just depend on what we find from some of the data. And I think you were saying, hey, we've in the past designed streets maybe more for the vehicle and not for other folks. We did include a picture on the bottom center there of a stop sign that's been put into what we call a bulb outer or where we actually extend that curb, it's a curb extension really as well. So we extend the stop sign out so it's more visible. We extend the pedestrians so there's less crossing exposure in the street. So those are some of the things we do at where we maybe we're deficient before on the design. We come back in with some other treatments that might help. At risk of being always Google. I did wanna suggest getting word out there. Let's to perhaps the city to put these educational pieces out where people's eyes are, which is Google ads or some other advertisement that kind of goes out there. And you can select it to be people that live in certain zip codes or what have you. And that's one way we can get this information to their eyeballs where they're at. Also, it seems like a good place to start is just figuring out where we are. Figuring out how many deaths we're having and where and where we need to put our eyes and then come up with some ideas to help in those areas. And I think that dovetails with what you're saying Liz in that awareness, raising that awareness and people realize, oh my gosh, we've had 20 deaths at that intersection. That's not acceptable in our town. Then people are more motivated to participate and engage and hear what solutions are available. I think it's worth doing all of this. I just think it's such a big project that we have to start almost systematically with information so that we can engage. Are we having an impact and we know where we start and we can see some progress. So just as a quick comment, we will be bringing forward the crash report at the December meeting and that will have a significant amount of data. It'll have the fatalities from last year. It will list a number of the accidents components from about from five years. We do it in a five year cycle, basically five years of data. And then you'll see a lot of the trends. You can see a trend that in 2020, in 2019, I believe we had 12 fatalities. It dropped significantly in 2020 with the less people driving during COVID and then it did go up a little bit in 2021. But we'll have that data for you and we publish that every year around this time. We're a little late this year, so we will bring it forward at the next meeting and you can see some of the data and some of the intersections you can see that are where we see some of the accidents and we can provide the data for types of accidents as well. Not very good. Okay. I think we're good with the call. So, well, I would just like to comment that I'm super excited about this because I've been advocating for this about a year and a half now and it's about time. And, but also the only discipline is I do think we do need to focus on physics more than enforcement. Enforcement's easy to talk about, I think a cop can't be everywhere and that's what they'll probably say. But then also for the public, because I've read that this happens in Holland all the time, the city will or they'll get public opinion and then set out like temporary examples either, you know, Phil when I saw you up in Fort Collins an example there or set up a little neighborhood street that might be simple ballards or a flower pot and then get people's opinion from there to allow, oh, this works, this doesn't, but then it's a visual representation to really, really, I think spark people's imagination as well, so that's good. Yeah, I'm for that. We have these three recommendations here that the staff has put together and we could probably go over those and see if those are sufficient and we could pick out of those three. I guess I'll move a motion that we do consider recommendation. Do I have, I'll make that motion if anybody wants to second it. Okay, oh, and vote all in favor of us choosing a recommendation, say aye. Any opposed? Okay, so the first recommendation that we see is we move forward with the full set of city resources and community involvement to move forward with a vision zero plan and implementation policy. Other projects would need to be delayed to develop the budget for this full level of vision zero effort without a specific budget in 2023. Option two is to continue to develop the plan needed to implement vision zero, return to tab, transportation advisory board and city council with a fully developed plan to begin its budget, to begin to budget for and implement vision zero beginning in 2024. And then our third option is to continue to monitor vision zero community efforts, recognizing that many additional resources will be needed to meet vision zero standards without becoming a vision zero community. Well, if I'm gonna say anything, I would say number three is probably off the table. I think one or two is probably what we should be looking at because I think everybody on the board is in favor of something. And I think I have kind of agreement there. So we'll move to one and two in terms of options. Are there any comments from anybody on the board in regards to either one of these options? It is, yes. And so that's, that means you'd have to, you're requesting the council forego a project that's already in the 2023 budget to move this ahead of it, but Jim wants to say. So one of the things to also note about the budget is, our budget for the most part, when we talk about taking out a project would involve the street fund. Vision zero requires staffing. We say resources most requires staffing from other areas of the city, from public safety, from communications, from our community resources team. Okay, and if they don't have that in their budget for next year, something else has got to get pushed. Okay, so one of the also things that I think we noted earlier in the presentation is the first part of vision zero requires, basically calls for you to have a, if I can find it, an action plan. Okay, basically that is the planning for vision zero for the first year. I think we were driving the recommendation on two is that you need to continue to, you can adopt vision zero now. The first steps are to develop that plan, which doesn't take, you're not gonna be looking at building things. You're not gonna, you're gonna be creating the plan that sets those goals for the next number of years. And that's what our recommendation was, is we were moving forward with the mobility plan. We would incorporate that action plan in the mobility plan, which we have funded. I don't wanna sway you, but item one kind of would be with the budget being set already, might be more of a challenge for city council to go in that direction. You took the words right out of my mouth. That was basically what I was getting ready to tell you that it will, number one will be the most challenging and I don't wanna make a decision for anyone cause it's coming to us tomorrow. I agree with you on number three. I think number two would be more feasible because number one, the council will ask several questions, meaning we need to know what projects you're gonna put. That will be delayed and how would that affect what we already approved. And so we know this is priority, but pretty much everything we approve is priority. So how do you determine? You get what I'm saying? So I think that, yeah, so I just wanted to say that part just to put a little birdie or something in your ear on that. Thank you. Did you hear anything that I said? Yes, we heard it. We just tried to get you recorded on that. All right. Do you need that to be repeated? All right, so I looked at, I went looking for a project to delay in order to be able to start Vision Zero efforts earlier. And I found one that seems to have $250,000 allocated to it for 2023, but there's no funding for anything beyond that. So that one seemed to me like a project that could be delayed for at least a year or two. And those funds could be used to hire Longmont's first Vision Zero coordinator, someone with a proven track record of implementing a Vision Zero plan in a community. And I don't know if council would be receptive to that kind of idea, or do we always have to, you know, move budgetary lockstep from year to year? So if I understand the Hover Street improvements project for TRP-122, I believe that funding is for acquisition of right-of-way Longover Street. I believe the design is currently underway and has been funded in previous years. So I don't know if that's a viable alternative. But again, as I indicated, that is money and dollars out of the street fund. It could be reasonable. You can certainly, you know, put that into the recommendation. It may be more beneficial to look at the project budget as a whole at the end of the year. We do have usually have projects that we've completed in the year where there is additional dollars. Sometimes it's put back into fund balance. So, you know, from my standpoint, you know, staff's been working on the Hover Street project for quite a while. I'm not sure why we haven't maybe, you know, part of the project or part of the problem with looking at a five-year budget is we try to balance it out and prioritize some of our projects. I will let you know that we are seeing a street rehab program. Some of our challenges is recently we may need to incorporate more dollars into that in the future simply because our payment condition index has been dropping. One of the challenges also would be that some of the other projects we estimate the dollars on and until we bid them out, we're not gonna know whether we actually have that funding. So, or whether we'll need funding. Kind of a wishy-washy saying, saying I don't have an answer for you. So, it is, it can be a proposal. Okay, and so that's just one project that came to my mind. I mean, maybe there are others that would be more suitable. But my response to your suggestion is that if we can justify carpet replacement and boiler replacement as street fund budgeting items, then we can certainly justify vision zero for street fund monies. Okay, looking at it from a slightly different direction, but with the same intent, I'm wondering if some of these projects that have gotten the green funding, for instance, the County Line Road and the Main Street in 21st, I'm wondering if there can't be a component of that that uses some of that funding to assess the risk in terms of vision zero and to make some improvements or suggestions at that time, which would move this project ahead a little bit faster and that the one is in 2022 to 2025. You know, and then it would be a way to get some optics on where we are, particularly like at 21st and Main, I'm sure that's gonna come up on your list that you provide next month, Jim, in terms of some significant impact for life and limb there. So, I'm just wondering, looking at it from that direction, whether they have to take money from a project that was otherwise gonna be utilized or if we can incorporate it into multiple projects to some level and what your thoughts are on that. I think what we're saying to, or what you're asking is for us to take vision zero concepts and put them into every project, which I think is what you wanna ask or recommend to city council as far as we move forward with a vision zero process. So, maybe it does start in 24 because you have the budget 80 dollars in 24 or you budget dollars in 24 in the next budget cycle, which starts in what April, March. So, we start talking first quarter about next year's 2024 budget. So, if we have that heads up and can do that, we could certainly take whatever elements we get from city council tomorrow night because I'll make recommendations and put them into every project that we do. It is something, you know, it's always top of list, top of mind when we're doing any project, is safety is number one. And so, I would say we do that regardless, but if it's specific to vision zero and we put it in there as a vision zero focus with the project, that's something that consultant can look at as part of the project, absolutely. Go ahead and hit the right button, there you go. There it is. Thanks for the presentation, gentlemen. My gut is telling me to go with number two. I don't see you guys asking for a certain budget amount at this point. And so, but item number two seems like you guys are going to formulate that ask for next year's budget cycle. Does that sound like a good synopsis of what you guys are saying? I think based on council direction tomorrow night, yeah, we'll hear from them what they'd like to move forward with. And to me, that sounds reasonable. I don't want to divert staff's resources or time to anything else at that point. And I don't doubt that, you know, whether or not it's called vision zero or not a guiding principle of the engineering staff and any consultant that we have is going to be to eliminate any traffic related to fatalities, which is to say that we can be doing vision zero without calling it vision zero until 2024. That's on, right? That's what we've been doing for this. Okay, for the last 20. It informs design, it informs what projects we choose. It's all that, right? So with that in mind, my gut is telling me to go with recommendation number two on this and to give these guys the opportunity to come with a fully flushed out plan for the budget cycle for approval in 2024. Yeah, regarding a 2024 budget, what are your ideas for what would be in that vision zero budget? Well, when you look at number two and we should have added more language for you and you can certainly modify it any way you want. But when we go through the slideshow, we did talk about this really is gonna be an element of the transportation mobility planning process, which we know we wanna start in 2023 and we have budgeted dollars for that project. So I think number two is kind of going at that same idea of let's put it into a fuller plan, a more integrated plan process that looks at all modes and vision zero is a component of that larger plan and then that implementation piece will tell us what we need to do and we'll start putting dollars just hearing these discussions and tomorrow night I'm sure we'll hear more about how we need to start the budgeting process. Two years ago, we put in for a vision zero planner, transportation planner for vision zero specifically and was not able to get that obviously incorporated into the budget. We'll continue with that request knowing that it's coming and it's something that we need to have some resources, some people to be able to do. So we'll continue that into the 2024 budget, but I think we're really focused on in 2023 is working on that TMP to really set the motion forward for the future of transportation at Laumont. So when would you envision a dedicated staff person for vision zero starting in 2025, would that be? No, starting in 2024. So we'd start, we'd put into the budget in April or March, in April when we start the budgeting process, we would start with a person dedicated to vision zero upon our staff. So that's one FTE. One FTE. So and also just so you're aware and looking at kind of what it will take to implement vision zero, it will take additional staff and just one person kind of running it. That would be the champion of it who will take charge and kind of make sure it gets done, but there's going to be additional data collection needed above and beyond what we're doing now, which will require another FTE. Some of the reporting I think requirements will require maybe another GIS analyst. There might be with the amount of kind of stakeholder engagement we may need in other communications specialists, our neighborhood services team to work some of these may need additional resources. I think that's what is part of the action plan and what you see you need is you plan through 2023 to implement it in 2024. That's what we would be looking at. That's why it's critical that if they adopt vision zero now, we need that year to plan that action plan. So even if we tried to push projects around now, you're not going to implement anything till 2024. Just a couple of thoughts. I realize there's budget constraints as you so put out and we kind of knew that I think the buckets of money, but I was curious about Dr. Cog's position on vision zero. In other words, do they see that as a component of funding when they're either voting on, because I know sometimes they will vote on projects and they look at the projects. So that'd be my first would be that piece of it. And then the other thing is, is that since this is an interdisciplinary effort, meaning you're going to have public safety involved, we're going to have communications and all that, how is the plan put together that you're going to be able to pull them on board and or portions of their budget, are they going to be allocated to a vision zero initiative like public safety with the license plate readers and or red light cameras. So I give you two questions again. I apologize. So the first question. Dr. Cog's position on vision zero. Yeah, they support vision zero. They have a lot of data and a lot of information out there today that helps with that. In fact, we tried to kind of tag team because the resources for a lot of this were to go to, you talked about it earlier, the grant program for the safer streets piece. A lot of that had to go to somebody who had already planned in place. We tried to tag on with the Dr. Cog plan and say, hey, look, you've got a regional wide plan. Could we be part of that and maybe get some dollars, some funding for just doing an action plan for the city, specifics to the city. And they kind of said, well, that's kind of, we've done the action plan, you're writing those coattails, but you need your own action plan and that's what would trigger the dollars. So they're behind it. The reason why we didn't really adopt it early on was because the Colorado Department of Transportation was moving towards zero deaths. And so we were in that program as outlined in the council or in the board communication that you have. And so that's where we put kind of all of our eggs into that basket. And now everybody's switched over to Vision Zero, rightfully so. So those are some of those considerations. And your second question was the, within the city and the budgeting process for the future if Vision Zero is adopted as a plan, would other departments then make carve outs for budget that would be associated with a Vision Zero? And do you have, in other words, could you get that type of coordination across departments? Because I know how difficult that can be. Well, that's why I turned that slide to political commitment and multidisciplinary leadership. That's one of the discussions we have to have tomorrow night with council. And if they tell us to do it, it's on the city manager to make us do it. So the public safety chief's aware of this. He's actually provided one of the slides. So the best answer I can go is we're told to do it. Everybody's, for it to be successful, everybody's got to be buy into it and provide the resources that we need to get the program done. Agreed. And with the action plan that is required as part of Vision Zero, there's an annual reporting structure to that. And so if things aren't falling into place, it's up to one of us or the person who we hire to come to council once a year and explain where we are and what the status is and who's on board, who's not. And so we need to make sure that everybody's moving together. And just my last, I would hope that we could also include our board in terms of an update. If there is a Vision Zero plan on almost a quarterly basis, I would like to think our board would be involved in that very hands-on. I'd like to propose that we recommend that the transportation mobility plan enthusiastically embrace Vision Zero principles during its development. And that's what I would recommend to the city council. I would second that if we want to do a vote on that. So I think we're looking at option two as what we're voting on. All those in favor of option two, I guess we could, should we do it each at a time or should we just say yay or nay? Yeah. Well, I guess I have one question is because Phil you mentioned that we already kind of try to follow Vision Zero principles in projects and just from a design standpoint or implementation, how does that actually transpire in current projects? So it's probably difficult to answer. Well, we never designed a project, right? Hoping or thinking, not even hoping is the absolute wrong word, but ever thinking that it's being designed for a fatality to happen someday. We design, but we do everything in our power to make sure the design is as safe as possible. But obviously, with Western US design, we set up intersections that ultimately have a lot of conflict points, right? For cars and for pedestrians and for bicycles. So I think we just need to kind of, that's gonna be part of the Vision Zero process is to re-look and have those resources available through Vision Zero of how design can change and how the paradigm can change in certain designs so that we can bring those other elements on. What we're trying to do right now, I mean, you've already seen this close up and a number of you have seen it with the Kauffman Street project, we call it the Busway project, but there's a lot of bike elements to that too. And what that really is, is reducing those turn radiuses. So they're not as truck and car friendly as far as speeds go. It really causes a driver to have to slow down. And so it goes back to the physics element of, I have to slow down my giant two ton vehicle to be able to make this turn or one ton vehicle, whatever you're driving. But I have to slow down for this turn to make it. And boy, in slowing down now, I have a better visibility of who's on that corner, what's going on, or who's in the intersection, what's going on there. So there's already that element in design that we're trying to do, but obviously there's much more that we can do. But how do we get there? But we're trying to use the most up to date levels of safety that we've. That's where I think vision zero, and then the mobility plan, I hope will change our paradigm where we are thinking about the blind person getting home from work. Because I know the story of works at Home Depot, but how do they walk home? So that's, I think if we reverse that paradigm and start at the most vulnerable people and work our way up from there. We are intending to, might throw Jim a curve ball a little bit, but he's heard this from me many times. And now he's my neighbor next door to me, so. In the office. He hears it a lot. Yeah, in the office, not in the real world. But the idea is that the transportation mobility plan will reverse the pyramid or the triangle of hierarchy of users. So we'll really work with the most vulnerable on top, and they're the most important, and then it works its way down. So we start with pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, freight movement, and then automobile movements. So those are, that's kind of what we're starting to set up as far as the scope of work. When we start to talk about the transportation mobility plan, it's had a reverse kind of that way of thinking that's been in the city for as long as I've been here. So we're gonna try to flip it a little bit and come at it in a different point of view. I don't know if that answers your question, but it's just kind of what's in our head as far as the scope of work for this. And obviously the very first piece on top of all of that is safety. It's always gonna be our first level and maintaining the system as well, the current system. That's, I'm excited about that flipping the pyramid. What I think though is missing as we talk about the TMP is we're wanting to also implement this interdepartmental thing as soon as possible. I think that's might be what's missing from what we're talking about is we really wanna encourage city council to put their will toward those departments. So there's as much conversation, as you mentioned before, we need to make sure we have the police, but the schools and everybody else needs to be part of that. And I think what we're wanting to do is urge that communication and that cooperation sooner rather than later. Yeah, is there a vision zero protocol or plan that's approved by federal DOT and Colorado DOT that Longmont could just drop right into its transportation mobility plan? Or are there a lot of different competing versions of vision zero plans that Longmont would have to choose from or adapt? I think there's some very good elements right now that are in the Denver Regional Council of Governments vision zero plan because that does kind of get more to an urban structure and maybe CDOTs is more about the rural elements. Single crashes, single driver crashes where you kind of just go off road and you're not paying attention or you fall asleep at the wheel. So CDOT focuses a lot of that piece. And then Dr. Cog, Denver Regional Council of Governments focuses more on the urban driver and the different things we've all been talking about or you've all been talking about tonight about distracted driving and the vulnerable users and the conflict points and intersections in a more urban setting. So we would probably go to that one to kind of frame it but I think that every vision zero plan has a very unique piece from every community. It can't be one size fits all. It really does. And that's why it does take time and resources and money because you really have to craft it for the individual community. It can't be a boilerplate piece. It doesn't work that way. And that's one of the reasons why it's taking us, I think, so long. If it was boilerplate, we could have just gone to the city council two years ago when we went to the retreat and said, it doesn't take anything to drop this down and then we can get money for better projects if we do this. But we really had to tell the whole picture, the whole story about all the different elements and all the different jurisdictions, or the not jurisdictions, but the different departments that need to be involved. And so we really have to craft it with all those elements in mind. Speaking of departments and jurisdictions, does our local school district have a safe routes to school plan? Basically they do, yes. But we used to toggle on and off. It used to be the city would take it one year and the school district would take it the next. And that ended up not working out very well, but we kind of have our version and then they have their version. Their version of safe routes to school is, very much, their philosophy about safe routes is once you get on a school bus or once you get onto the property of the school district, that's where the safety of that student begins. And ours is obviously broader than that. It's as soon as you leave your door, basically, and get onto the bus or walk to school or bike to school or get in the car with your parent who drives you to school, those are our safety elements as far as when we're talking about safe routes to school. We've worked with the school district to develop specific routes. And Caroline has done a lot, has done some of this work as well. And we run the crossing guard program too. So again, that's not on school property. So the city takes on that role of getting kids across streets safely with crossing guards. So there's a lot of disconnect. And so that's one of the things that's just gonna be very unique to this community is about knitting that relationship back together as far as how the school district and the city work through these issues of getting children to school. To and from school. Any other comments from the board? Just real quick, one of the entities that I saw was missing off that multidisciplinary leadership was development and making sure developers are on board with anything that can be done and holding them to the standards when they are building things to encourage vision zero. That's it. I don't know if we need to make a motion to make a motion to see if we wanna vote. But I think we've narrowed it down to one and two, it sounds like. Do we have, we did have a motion out there. I did propose a variation of two and I'll say it again that we recommend to the city council that as they develop the transportation mobility plan they embrace vision zero principles. I'm gonna go a little farther and say that includes the will to get multiple departments on board at this time. It has to be our only recommendation to the board but I think it's an excellent start. Okay, excuse me, we have a motion and a second to Liz's change to option two. We can take a vote on that right now. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Liz did you intend that as a variation of option two or is it kind of a standalone? Okay, so I think we've gotten some clarity on this and I think we'll move on to the, is it the flex ridership? Yes, great. Thank you so much for your input on the vision zero plan. We've very much appreciated it as a staff and we will take it forward tomorrow and share that with the city council. So thank you for that. Moving on to the next item. Hopefully you all know that there's a bus that runs between Longmont and Fort Collins called the flex. We call it the flex bus. There's a lot of similar named programs out there from RTD unfortunately for their, they call it the flex ride program for their call-in ride and so it confuses people and they did that after we did the flex ride quite frankly so it's a little confusing but regardless we help pay into a program that provides that transit service between Longmont and Fort Collins. There's also an extension that goes down to city of Boulder. We're not supposed to get on the bus technically in Longmont and take that flex bus down to Boulder because there's a competing RTD route called the Bolt which does that service. I can't say that nobody's ever tried it before and I can't tell you that people will get on in Boulder and don't ask the driver if they can't get off in Longmont which is also a no-no but really it's to provide that service, the missing service that we did not have before this up to Berthard, Loveland and Fort Collins. So it's a very vital route. If you look at the statistics of where our employees come from for Longmont, you'll be surprised that a lot of, well you won't be surprised but it's surprising to me when that kind of flipped a little bit to be more of a Northern community and it's also where a lot of us go to work which is also surprising to me because you always think well we go to work in Boulder and Denver and Broomfield and those kind of places, well that's true but when you look at the actual statistics that are out there now, I don't wanna give too much away and this isn't gonna be a surprise to anybody but we can't but there's companies out there that track cell phone movements and so they can find out where people travel on a daily basis and it's much more accurate than when we try to do surveys on Main Street 10 or 15 years ago and stop people in their cars and ask are you making a stop on Main Street? Are you going, where's your end of your trip and those kind of things so this is much more accurate data. So you won't be surprised by that. They were obviously very much impacted. The flex bus was very much impacted by COVID. All transit agencies in the whole world were impacted. Many of the European and Asian countries came back very quickly because that was the primary mode of travel for them so they were able to put on masks and get on mass transit pretty quickly but us in the United States were a little bit slower to reboard the buses and trains because of that scared factor of those things. In fact, you'd see commercials that say don't use public transit during this time so we're finally seeing some movement back. You'll see that there's a chart showing kind of what happened with COVID and in the year 2020 in the orange line on the back of that, it took quite a dip. We're seeing in 2022 finally getting back to somewhat, we're about two thirds of the ridership which is from pre COVID. So that's great to see. We still feel like it's a very important function of transit in our city. So we are asking the board to recommend to city council they approve the $221 to fund our portion of the flex in 2023. So that's our request of you to recommend to city council for their action later this year. Thank you. Any questions and I'll go to the first one because I see it just popped up. I just wanted to say I have ridden the flex. I really, and it was great. It was a great way to get up to Fort Collins when I had to do some business up there. I know that during COVID my son was attending Colorado State University and he was able to live at home and get to college. And I think that that's a great opportunity as we get kids that are doing front range and then need to go to CSU. That's a great, they might not have the money to have a car to get there and back. Having the bus is immense and as a student they can get around Fort Collins with their student pass but getting there from Longmont is absolutely essential. Once again, thanks, Bill. This $200,000, that doesn't make the flex bus free, right? This is just for a reduced fare. What this does is it helps pay for the operations of the bus. So the bus, it's amazing to me. I won't talk about the comparison between the transport folks and working with RTD as far as fares go because transport, they're in the business of just moving people and that's pretty much their single philosophy. They had a fair structure for Fort Collins and then it kind of went down to Loveland with the first iteration of this and they kept the prices at $1.25 per ride for a regular fare. So they were kind enough to keep that and extend that down to Longmont and then to Boulder. So you get actually the CSU to CU connection via Front Range Community College in Longmont in a way. So this just helps pay for a portion. We're just paying kind of the Longmont ridership portion of this, Fort Collins takes on the lion's share because they have the most riders. Loveland takes on a large share because they have a lot of riders and then it kind of trickles down Longmont's was the third one and I think Boulder's now taken over because we did see the students come back before we saw commuter traffic come back. So the students have really kind of taken this route under their wing and they've been the primary riders now in the last two years. So Boulder is getting, has more ridership than us now but we were always easily number three on that list but we are paying for our 12% of that overall operations and this has nothing to do with the fare buy up that we'll come to you in December with to talk about RTD and the fare buy up there. Okay, great. Thank you. Yes, I haven't ridden this bus. Are you saying the fare to ride from Longmont to Fort Collins is $1.25? Yes, sir. Wow, it seems like a bargain. It's very much is so. And right now, Ben will tap you on the shoulder and remind me that actually they're not collecting fares right now and that it's free to all users because they're trying to figure out what to do kind of post COVID here. I see. So it sounds like the fare box covers nothing to very minimal part of their operational costs. Right, and we're covering most of those operational costs city by city and then the counties as well. And we're... And the eco passes, I should mention that the eco passes are taken on this bus as well. So you can use your eco pass when there is a $1.25 fare, if you don't want to pay that, you can use your eco pass to get up to Fort Collins for free and the Boulder County covers that expenditure. I see. And technically we're supposed to ride only in a from Longmont to Fort Collins and not to Boulder. Technically that is correct. RTD has kind of that overriding jurisdiction of the whole district. And so they dictate who gets to go inside the district and they were very clear that their bolt bus is the provider of that service between Boulder and Longmont. Okay, thanks. I don't want to get too ahead of ourselves but I would like to move that we recommend city council approve the $200,000 to fund our portion of the flex bus in 2023. I second that motion. Okay, all those in favor of taking the staff recommendation on the flex bus to approve the $200,000 in change, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you again. Appreciate it. I'll start at the end. Taylor, if you have any comments that you have for tonight in our meeting. Just thank you for the presentation on vision zero. I'm super excited. So it's finally happening. So that's all that. Not much to say thank you for your presentations today. It is a pleasure to be part of this learning experience. I appreciate your efforts to make this city safer and encourage public transportation. And yeah, thank you. First, thank you for the presentations. I'm really excited about vision zero and especially about the flipping the priorities. That matches what I said at the end of the letter that you all have saying that this is my last meeting on the board as I am going to be moving out of the city and can't be on the board if you don't live in Longmont. That's kind of the bylaws. It has been a pleasure and I hope that we continue working toward equity and access for everyone. Thank you. Yeah, I want to thank Jim Phil and the rest of the transportation staff for putting together all this information. It's very good. And I'm with Taylor. I'm on board with vision zero. Really want to be involved with that and see that happen. And as well as this flex bus and all the information you bring every meeting so. And lastly, we're going to miss you. You know that. You helped tonight. So thank you. Yes, thanks to staff for the information and for answering all my questions. Kudos and many thanks to Liz. And I also look forward to further discussions regarding vision zero implementation. Thanks. Thank you staff for all your hard work. I see all the work you've been doing on projects around town and trying to get them done on schedule and always looking for money for new design implementation. Appreciate that. And especially that you spearheaded bringing this vision zero forward and are wanting to make it as robust as possible as we go forward. I really appreciate that. Thank you all for your efforts. And council member Yarbrough. Of course. Thank you. You all are amazing. And I'm so sorry that I didn't get a chance to get to know you better. But I've learned a lot from you. It's amazing that I've been here for a year. Oh my goodness. It's crazy. I just wanted to say thank you for being open. I am also excited for this opportunity that will be coming to us tomorrow. I do just want to bring up now that I have been here a year. Learning more about the structure and how everything works about budgeting and how everything works interdepartmental decisions. And it may sound really easy. Like, oh yeah, we're just gonna get the police department and public safety to come in and do their part and just don't work like that. Just doesn't work like that. Not that easy. And not only that, I just want us to be mindful that staffing has been very challenging, even consultants. I mean, there are some departments within the city that have been, I mean, months to get a consultant. So although we want to move on this very quickly, I just want us to think about all those variables that of challenges that all departments have had. And this is part, you know, I know this is so important for us, the city council as well, but I also know that we will be asking 150 questions like how much are you expecting for public safety department to span? How much time do you need? You want a full-time employee? How much would that cost? And, you know, so there's a lot of questions that we're gonna ask that without a plan in place, what are they gonna tell us? What we hope to, what we want to see is, so that's why I was kind of pushing a little bit more because I know the challenges within some of the departments, although they are pretty much on point and they're already doing everything. But I just know where we are and what we're asking amongst us as a council. So I didn't want you to think I'm just pushing back on what you all were talking about. I just know what's gonna happen. But thank you all for being here tonight. I miss you all for two months. So looking forward to seeing you again next month and thinking about you, Liz. Okay, items for the upcoming agenda that will be scheduled meeting for December 12th. I know Crash data, but Phil, can you fill us in on anything? Yeah, I just wanted to let you know that we'll have that Crash data coming to you in December. The excitement we'll build, I'm sure. And somebody might even watch from afar, who knows. We also want to bring that, I mentioned it really briefly with the flex piece, but the Ride Free Longmont piece where we do the fairs. It's, we're working on an intergovernmental agreement right now with RTD on that. So we hope to have more information in December and it might have to carry through. I think we have a general idea of the cost. So we bring that to you. And I just wanted to run one thing by you. Typical board structures have kind of a final call to be heard for the public. And we do have a member of the public who showed up and was maybe not clear on the start time. So I don't wanna, I leave that to the board to move and support maybe a final call of public invited to be heard, but it's up to you. That's your purview. I move that we hear from the public at this time. I second that. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Come on up. Hi, good evening. My name is Michelle Bennett and my address is 203 Francis Street. I'm here to discuss the traffic conditions on Spruce Avenue in context of the new development that is being proposed for 70 units on Spruce Avenue between Francis and Sherman, I believe, or Grant. So what I've prepared for you here, I don't know how long I have, what I've prepared here is something that I'm also going to be introducing to the city council. And I have been doing my own research on the ability for Spruce Street to handle the amount of increased traffic that would come from 70 units and the age of the infrastructure itself. Included, and I've based almost all of this off of what the Longmont city guidelines say for new development. However, I want to mesh the two, which kind of gets a little, I haven't figured out how to put it in towards yet. So the purpose of this paper is to validate the serious concerns of the neighborhood as well as engineers that I've talked with in context of adding a large amount of additional traffic to Spruce Street. So the handout goes over the purpose. It includes a list of references in the back that I used. I've interviewed with many independent and private engineers, traffic engineers as well. I have wonderful little visuals as well to explain what our concerns are. So like I said, the paper was written using the city of Longmont's latest local street design traffic flow guides, C dot guidelines for local street designs, as well as several other sighted references. Now, new developments, we know they're happening everywhere, new developments usually create their own little road system within the development. And so they designed these road developments. They designed them to accommodate for the development and the people who are going to be moving passing through the development. And also making sure that there are good exit entrance ways and emergency evacuation ways. However, this development that is going to be plunked down in the middle of old town, century old infrastructure is not going to accommodate their own little road system. They're going to be using ours. And that is going to put stresses on Spruce Street. Spruce Street has been in, Spruce Avenue has been in a state of homeostasis for 100 years. And we can deal with small increments of changes and the traffic flows. And we all learn how to deal with each other. And right now we've learned how to bypass without using other hand signals and whatnot. And it's at a very delicate balance now. It is also a street that is recognized as shared bicycle lane as well. So Spruce Street is used heavily by pedestrian and bicycle traffic to get down to the greenway, which is just a block away. I live on the corner of Francis and Spruce. I've lived there for 26 years. I feel like I kind of have my hand on the pulse of what's going on and in the neighborhood and how that street is used as well. So basically what this is saying is it's pointing out all the problems with the street in comparison to what a new development would create. And that's kind of hard to put into words. So what you're gonna look at is comparing a 100 year old infrastructure to what should be in the design for a new development. We do not meet that criteria. At all, the street does not meet any of that criteria. But still 70 units, approximately 150 cars. And I know we calculate it through trips, but it's not just about the trips. It's also about the pedestrians and the cyclists. And as you have all been talking about here this evening, it was like, I feel like, all right, I'm right there. I have one minute. Okay, so anyway, my recommendation is going to be that a more in-depth study be done on this area before allowing the developer to put a certain amount of units in there. I think it's really critical and I'm hoping that my paper really will show you why it's necessary. So I'm hoping that you guys can help me out. Help us out. Thank you so much. I'm glad I made it. Thank you. Any questions from the board? Yeah, I'm aware of this area. And do we know where we're at with approvals or zoning or anything on this area, like planning purposes? Where is the developer at? Do we know what's going on? My understanding is they have not submitted yet. So we have a, go ahead. So the developer actually just submitted an application for changing the conceptual plan on the site. So it is the beginning of the development process. The annexation agreement, as all annexation agreements have with the city is, they provide a conceptual plan, which they then lead into, if that gets approved through planning and zoning and city council, then as part of the annexation, they're required, they can come in with a full blown application. At this time, the property, I believe was sold a short time ago. The new owner is electing to change from the original conceptual plan that was noted in the annexation agreement and has now applied for that. That has been submitted to city staff for staff to review, to ensure that it's in compliance with the city standards and city code. And then it would be at that point, if it gets approved through staff, would move forward to planning and zoning commission. And I believe because it is a change to a conceptual plan in the annexation agreement, would then go to city council as well. So it's very early in the development process. It is, again, it's basically a sketch of what the guy, he would propose with the number of units. It is required to have a traffic study with that. They have provided staff has not yet undertaken our review. I believe it was submitted either last week or this week. And during the process of review and approval, there will be, besides that transportation plan, improvements done to the surrounding streets to make sure that this development is safe. For conforms with our standards? It would conform with our standards. If it does not, there would be mitigation. If the, an example would be, if we find some of the intersections are overloaded, they would require intersection improvements. So we have to see what the traffic study says. Is this development still proposed as co-housing? No, I believe the original proposal was some type of co-housing. This is for 70, I wanna say, no, 70 can change it. Is it 70, I wanna say like townhouse units? But 70 units. I see. So this is very early on in the process. And as Patrick pointed out about traffic study will need to be done, it'll be voted on. Is there any way that, and I know it's not vision zero, but is there any way to the discussion we've had tonight about this idea of principles guiding the transportation plan moving forward that in regards to this development, would any of that even be taken into account when you start looking at the actual development plan when it comes up to the transportation department? Again, going back to kind of what our earlier presentation noted is that we look at all of those with a safety element as top of list. And so we would look at it that way. I don't know if necessarily, since we have no action plan to say that it follows vision zero is a little nebulous. So we'd follow all the tenants of safety with that project as we do for all projects. Anything more to add about, okay. For our enlightenment and perhaps for Michelle's as well, what types of transportation improvements are developers typically required to make in order to get city approvals? That would depend on the type of development. We recently are in the process of finalizing, they're about to go for building permits, the Mountain Brook development where that developer actually had to build roads. They would be a collector road as well as the local city streets, depending on the development. Some other developments that might have private streets off of a road may have to build right turn lane. And there may be some widening, dedication of right away, pedestrian improvements. If there's no existing sidewalk, we would, they would be required to build those pedestrian facilities along their frontage. We have required some developers to provide access to on an existing city street that's not gonna be developed for years, pedestrian facilities to access a bus route. Because of, it was actually the same development, Mountain Brook where they built the home, not homeless, excuse me, the Veterans Community Project where we didn't anticipate them having vehicles, private vehicles, we had asked the developer to build a sidewalk down Nelson to access, to now on Anderson to access Nelson where we had a bus route. So it could be depending on what they're proposing and the size of it will depend on what is required. Most developers, we don't require them if it's a larger development to build a traffic signal, but they are required to fund the Transportation Community Investment Fund for their, that's part of their building permit fees. And from that, we would then, the city would undertake, you know, analyzing the intersection if a signal is required and then building it. Some developers, we require them to actually put in a traffic signal. The example would be the Costco Development, their funding in conjunction with the city, the traffic signal on 119. So it could be just depending on the development, it could be a lot of things. Okay, thanks Jim, that's very useful. Any other questions or comments from the board? Any other public members that would like to come up and say anything? And thank you, Ms. Bennett, for the information. I'd like to almost kind of, I don't want to say table this, but if we could maybe understand this more, Phil, from your Transportation Department, eyes on a future meeting that would be beneficial, I think, for everybody. Okay, if there's nothing else, I think we're gonna move for adjournment. Do I have a motion? We move to adjourn. And a second. Okay, all those in favor of adjournment of tonight's meeting, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Great, thank you very much, everybody.