March 11, 2024 — Transportation Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] Welcome everybody! Welcome everybody to the city of Boulder Transportation Advisory Board meeting for March eleventh, 2024. Go ahead and call this meeting to order and then turn it over to Sydney. our technical host, for the evening to go over the Technical rules. Yeah. So thank you for attending the Transportation Advisory Board meeting to strike a balance between meaningful transparent engagement and online security. The following rules will be applied for this meeting. This meeting has been called to conduct the business of the city of Boulder. Activities that disrupt delay or otherwise interfere with the meeting are prohibited. The time for speaking or asking questions will be limited to 3 min. Each person shall register to speak at the meeting, using that person's real name. No video will be permitted except for city officials, employees, and invited speakers or presenters. All others will participate by voice. Only. The person presiding at the meeting show enforce these rules by muting anyone who violates any rule.

[1:01] The Q. And a function is enabled, and it will be used for individuals to communicate with the technical host. It should only be used for technical online platform related questions. Only the hosts and individuals designated by the host will be permitted to share their screen. During this meeting. Thanks, Sidney. Well, welcome back, Brian Schuhart or former colleague. I see he's on the the call. Now move on to agenda. Item 3. Which is appreciation of service. I think I think I'm going first. Well, thanks. Yeah, thank you for being here, Ryan, and just wanted to take a moment to say few words, and then I'll hand it to Tila, and I also will share a little parting. Get so just appreciate all of the time and energy that the 3 of you have put in over the years different varying lengths of tenure.

[2:03] but yeah, just thank you for your service to the important work that we do and and I'm especially grateful for just your commitment to the work and your visionary leadership. Especially with Ken, of course. So on that note. Let me share the team. Our sign shop. Put together. These partying gifts for each of you. This one's like he is. As your turn, and then on the back the. So there's one for each of you. but yeah, well, we'll get these. Meredith will help us get these to you and thank you, and I'll hand it over to dealing, too. Well, those are even cooler than I thought they'd be. We didn't screw up our quorums at roles. I'd resign right now.

[3:03] So yeah, thanks, Natalie and thanks, Becky and Alex and Ryan. I'm gonna talk to you in like reverse order when II met you, and you know, roped into this crazy thing. Becky, I was really so glad when you apply, and came out of the woodwork. I hadn't really realize that you were in town, and I thought when you applied, I'm like, Oh, my gosh! I hope this is the one that they pick, because this is she's gonna be phenomenal. And you really have, like, you've been an outsize presence kind of up away from these meetings like E. That's been a real lesson, and just sort of rolling up your sleeves and doing the work that needs to be done, and that's really a sure sign of good leadership. So I'm sorry to see you go. As I said when you you were, you know, thinking you would have to resign at some point this year. I would love to keep you for as long as we have you. And I just want you to know that it's it's been a short time, but you've made a real impact and a real given us a real lesson on how to sort of connect with other boards.

[4:06] and to really sort of realize what kind of voice and influence someone on Tab can have just offering some of these connections. I'm really surprised on the parking reform letter that you were able to talk to have you know, environmental design or Environmental Advisory Board. Just that not only were they that they signed on, but when I speak to them sort of on the side. Other people that I know on those boards. They're aware of the issue. They're aware of the connections. And it's a connector like you that makes stuff like this. Really effective. Ryan. I told you not to run for council I told you to run for Tab. and I remember like probably when we met, we had just met on like email. And I forget what it was. But I'm like, Oh, this guy, I really gotta figure him out and like. point him in the right direction. And I remember we went on a bike ride together

[5:00] shortly after you'd arrive, and you know, travel to multiple use paths. And I just kinda kept poking at you like I really think you should try to get on Tab. And you said, I don't think we need another way, guy on the board. And you're entirely right. We didn't need another way, Guy. But we did need you. You're the right way, Guy, and for all of the white guys I've served with, and there have been many my type, one tab you are the one who kept raising equity and diversity. You were the one who kept raising other viewpoints. You were the one who said, I have small kids. You know. What does this do for lower income people. How do we include those voices? You were so mindful of it from the very beginning, and that was a real lesson in in inclusion. So jokes on you. You just got handcuffed for, you know, 4 years, and I only got a year left, so ha! Ha! But enjoy your time on city council. And II look forward to to you being a continuous ally. Let's let's see what we can get done this year. Let's see how much

[6:01] education and convincing. We can do not just tab sort of shouting into the boy, but having someone who can amplify and echo the sentiments and and explain really to the real decision makers in town why these things are interconnected and why they're so important, and why we need to pursue them. So I look forward to working under you with you, and without you, once you leave Tab and then, Alex, it's been gosh! It's been a long time, so I remember I was at a just an informed the public event at the at the Public Library with Bob Yates. Mason Moyer. Was one other person, and I've been on at the table, but it was just sort of a general information about boards and commissions and the time commitment and the kinds of things that we do and was, you know, great little just welcoming tent. And afterwards I hadn't noticed doing the audience at all, because it was a lot of grey hair. I'll I'll admit there's a lot of people, and this is a subject, a sort of subject also, in terms of recruiting city Council members. It's really people who have the spare time to give

[7:12] and or aren't so strapped for money that they can't afford to give their time away for free that public service like boards and commission membership and City Council service call, and you're not. You're another white guy. But you're another. I guy with some excellent expertise you brought with that with you. and I remember you approached me after we had finished the question and answer at that event. And there was this, you know, this baby face kid, who came up to me takes one to know one and he said he he was you and you, you asked like, can you know, are you just kind of like a a rubber stamp? Is it pretty pro forma? Or can you really actually change their minds and change directions and stuff? And I had to bit because I have worked under a number of directors, and some of them are more open to thoughts, and some of them do think that tab, or have seemed to think that tab is you know, just to step in the

[8:05] in the charter that they have to go through on certain types of projects. And I said, Well, you know it does kind of depend. And sometimes it takes years. But I have seen a a lot more respect. For cab members from city staff and from transportation directors in recent years. And if you have something really smart and persuasive to say, there's they're learning to listen. They're starting to listen, and I think maybe you can. And I think with your efforts in particular, you and Ryan on the core arterial network, you really proved that that was right. And, as I said once that got approved by council a couple of years ago, you've really moved the needle on that, and I think that that you should be proud of that legacy. You should be proud of what you've accomplished. You should be proud. You stuck it out for a full term here. I know it has been frustrating and at times very combative, and I am so proud to have served with you. And to have not misled you, I suppose, at the beginning I hope that you realize you have made a difference. You've made a change, and I really thank you so much for for the work and the effort and the frustration and the anger we've worked through. Because I think you are leaving on a on a terrific high note. So thank you so much.

[9:17] I'll miss you guys. Thank you very much, Tila. It's nice. I said all this. Hmm. I don't know if you all wanted anything, otherwise we should. We can move on to the next what we yeah. Others need to say, thanks, Becky or Alex, do you wanna you wanna go. I can go anytime. I'm whenever okay. Yeah. Well, II, personally, am just really appreciative for all the tab members and and helping me get up to speed. There's so much to learn, so much to cover And despite working in like an adjacent realm. In my day job, you know I knew nothing about what goes on in Boulder. Nothing's work here and needed need had a lot to learn. So I really appreciate everyone kind of taking the time to to help me in in with your various areas of knowledge and expertise. So I feel very fortunate, and also that we could work

[10:24] together so well. That just felt like, really quite, quite a privilege. So so thank you for that. And yeah. And and Alex, so 5 years is a is a lot of it's a lot of work to be on a board. And I really admire. You kind of yeah, your your work throughout the term, the throughout your term, and also as others have said, with ken, just that that helping kind of educate counsel on the importance of prioritization, and like what will have the biggest effect in our safety pursuit of safe roads. I think, has just been

[11:02] so important and just like really born fruit over the you know, the time I've seen the last 2 years that I've seen of of work. and and Ryan. Thank you for running for counsel. II actually, I tell you, know, a lot of people in my job who asked about what they can do to change, you know, basically in their city. I'll often tell them like, will you? You know, either you're unique. You need to persuade your leadership, or you need different leadership and and you know not only, you know. supporting, you know, getting people in office, but putting yourself in office is sort of the biggest, the biggest task. You know, the biggest effort of all. And it's it's no small small thing either, to run nor to then serve. So thank you for that, you know huge, huge kind of service you're doing, and it does make me so so excited for for for what's to come? From from council. So thank you for that. And then, lastly, of course, lastly, but not least, I really appreciate everything staff does to make

[12:02] make all of this work all of the work, to to manage our resources, transform our streets and and just and to edge. Educate all of us. And there's always new new Tab members, new council members, new community members. I'm sure it's a constant process of of helping us all kind of understand how all the many facets of your work you know how they work and and and why they work the way they do. So I really appreciate that. And I'm I'm so excited for a lot of the big big things on top this year, and I'll definitely be be keeping taps on it. Okay, I'll just if I could say a few things. Tila and Natalie, thank you for for this very thoughtful ceremony. I didn't know what I was getting all done here for us, so it's it's really exciting to do, Becky and Alex. Tila, you are my fairy godmother, you've heard me say this. But you you for this whole process, I my memories that I had emailed, I think, Tab about. II wanted to get across, put over Broadway and Kalmia and I showed up to a meeting after the You know, initial public comment period, and

[13:09] I don't know how I had your cell phone number, but somehow I came up with it, and I don't think you knew me and You let me come on late. You thought this guy has something to say, and you love to say it, and I you know I was. I was. I was learning from you then, and I was learning from you and II watched you speak it council on micro mobility, and also at the tab meetings, and I just was really taken by your your demeanor, and being able to ask for our decision makers to really pause with important issues and death and mayhem in our streets, and to not just kind of go past it, but to actually sit with it. And that really affected me. And I've tried to take that on, and I've been very honored to be able to work with you and learn from you and and to learn from all of you and Natalie. You've been just a great leader, and it's been so fun to get to know you and

[14:08] You're so gracious in letting me kind of you know, on the advisory group here. You know. Just say, Hey, here's what we gotta do, and no, we should do that. And you spent well at this point, spent an hour with me today listening to me, and it's just I'm I've greatly enjoyed you and the team and frankly, I came off Tab to do this run for counsel because because of the transportation department team and a lot of the advocates in this community that make this feel like work. That is both important. But it's very doable. And there's a there's a community of of people who really want to see it happen so? I'm in awe of of the whole team here. The transportation department team and just really grateful for the chance to work with you in this way. And just one more thing, Alex. I think I told you this, Alex, and I don't know if you remember it. But I remember a phone call with you, and I was talking about our we just we have to really strengthen our nexus with climate goals. And I went on and on, and you said something like, Brian.

[15:06] you're gonna have to run for council, if that's what you want. So thanks for giving me the idea. Here we are. and treating. Thank you for everything you do. And I'm just ben enjoy getting to know you and look forward to working capacity, so sorry to join on. But thank you. All this is real honor. Thanks, Ryan. Yeah. 5 years was was quite a long time at first, but I can't believe it's it's already come and gone. I've had the privilege of serving with a lot of great members. Bill, Johnny Hutch, Lauren, Mark Ryan, Becky, Tranny Tila. So a great group, or several groups of people that I'm much better off having had the opportunity to work with. Glad. I don't like attention. So I glad I'm glad I get to share the spotlight with with Becky and Ryan here and I think it. It's also exciting to know that there are 3 3 new seats in an incredible group of of applicants who applied, and so

[16:05] very excited for util, and turning to to move forward with whoever Council selects. It's been a huge honor serving the community. I've learned so much from community Members staff. My colleagues on the board made some good friends gotten involved in some some great community groups, and be off the tap, but certainly involved with things that I never would have been aware of or involved with, had I, had I not served so it's been a huge honor. Anything else for agenda? Item 3. Then here's on me. We can all get together now and talk. Now you're off as a Thursday. Let's have that happier. We've been talking about forever, and we can talk about whatever the hell we want to, and reply, All

[17:00] okay. right. Thanks for thanks for coming in tonight and join us. Thank you. Thanks. Everyone. Okay. bye, for now see ya. Okay. Next up agenda. Item, for approval of the February 2024. Meet meeting minutes. Did anybody have any comments or request it? Edit it? Not seen any entertain a motion to approve as they are. I move to approve the group minutes. I second all those in favor unanimous with 4 votes. Great job as always. Meredith. Just a point of order.

[18:02] trimming, or you vote being on the amendment since you are absent last month. I guess I can't. So okay. And now, agenda, item 5, which is public comment. Any member of the public wishing to address the Transportation Advisory Board about a transportation matter has up to 3 min to do so. If you're interested, please use the raise hand feature within the Zoom Platform, and our technical host will call upon you. Yeah. So it looks like Paul, and then that will be followed by Lynn. So, Paul.

[19:00] I'm going to give you permission to unmute if you want to. Awesome. Yup. Awesome. Thanks. Yeah. First, thanks for everybody's time and hard work. I know the problem. Sure. working to solve are not easy. So I appreciate your time. Yeah. My name is Paul Sabini. I'm here today to voice my concern for pedest pedestrians and in particular, young children that live on Lyndon Avenue between Fourth and Broadway. Just in the 4 houses that touch my property. There are 9 school age children. This is 4 houses out of over 5 50 that are on this section of road. These these students are asked to walk and ride their bikes to school every day and live on a street that has a speed limit. That's way too high for a neighborhood, in my opinion. It's 30 miles an hour. There's no shoulder on the road. There's no sidewalk on the south side. There's minimum visibility from any driveway and nothing to slow the drivers down the entire way from forth to Broadway.

[20:05] On London. I've lived in Boulder for 25 years. I own a small business down on Pearl Street. I ride my bike to work at every day. And the dangerous situations I see on this stretcher road are alarming, and inevitably something tragic is gonna happen. If something's not done. So, you know, lowering the speed limit is probably the easiest and cheapest thing to start. But long term, you know, something more substantial is probably needed like a sidewalk on the south side. And something to slow the drivers down. They kind of people in the the area that don't live on the stretch. Refer to this section of road as the Lindy 500 because they see how fast they can go to make their commute shorter as they race race to the road. It's a very short section of road. So you know, going from 30 miles an hour to 20 would probably add somewhere around 15 s to people's commute and make it way safer for everybody else. I've been in talks with the city for

[21:11] probably 4 years. Now about this stretch, and nothing's been done. So you know, Boulder prides itself on being a safe place to commute really encouraging people to not use their cars. I do that. My kids do that. All the kids in the street do that but it really doesn't seem like anybody's listening to the concerns we have. So yeah, I'm just here to speak up for for the pedestrians and the kids that live on this section of road and hope that that somebody hears us. Thanks, Paul. Thank you. Lynn Siegel. Yeah, I don't know how you take all the abuse that you're subject to, really, because of the massive.

[22:01] a housing boom in boulder up at the hill. I had to ride on that one foot section on Broadway like against the traffic. It's like I'm hurrying across from town to from across town on my bike all the time I'm rushing from one meeting to the next, or something up on the campus. And it it was. It's just scary, you know, having this walk on my bike in that section and and this is just happening all over town. And you know potholes in the dark. And and you know the faster like what this last guy was speaking about. People are more in a rush mode because they're so stressed in their jobs and in everything that it. It's just. You know. I watch this boom, this building boom because I go to planning board, and I see over the years and years and decades.

[23:08] It doesn't surprise me when I see another thing, because I've watched hours of that project getting approved through planning board, and it just must be frustrating at Tab for for being at the end of having to deal with that in terms of the congestion and the accommodations to all these extra bodies. And the Tod is not so much of an improvement, because you're actually getting more bodies bodies that are subject to the greater amounts of congestion and cars, because people will always have their cars. No matter, you know the incidents, you know, in incentives to get them off their cars. So one of the things that I've just been thinking about is the airport situation. And I really think Tab should weigh in on this, because

[24:02] that's gonna add a huge amount of congestion to boulder along with. See you South. These are things that you are gonna have to be, you know, like saying, I quit, you know. Let somebody else deal with it, because there's there's just no way you can. You aren't. You know, the developers aren't paying. You're always in some form of deficit. And you know, the interesting thing is, I saw a film on the only airport in Palestine is not had limited destinations. Nineteenth since 1967. It's basically been decommissioned. And I thought the irony of that airport. And now they're planning a settler colony on the side of the airport. It's so analogous to boulder like our settler. Colonies are housing. Everything is like. It's this homage, this god like appreciation of housing.

[25:03] you know it means when I remember meeting you for the first time the night of my Tab interview, and I appreciate you sticking through all the 5 years with us. Can I? Just time in really quickly on Paul Sabini's comment. So I'm I'm really glad he raised Lyndon. I think it's a really great example street of where we might like to see some speed limit reductions. And you know, that's, of course, something we're gonna turn to later this evening. And so, for instance, applying the the the rubric that city staff is is testing out for for assessing street speed limits. Linden has proposed no change in that section, and another another leg. We've heard about quite a lot. From public commenters is spine. Also proposed. Not no change on spine. So I'll raise those later on. But they are, I think, really good examples to sort of sort of discuss where the where the engineering judgment might might be.

[26:09] Tip the tables in a different way than than just automatic application of of the criteria would would not tell us to change something. Thanks, yeah. Now, any other. Well, first, are there any other people wishing to speak during public comment. Take that as now. Now. Did you have any responses to the what was brought up during Polycom? No, I think, to those connection to the next item. It's helpful. And I'm looking forward to kind of getting into the discussion. I think. just to the point that you to. You know this. These aren't necessarily proposed recommendations. It's kind of where we're at this point, right? So definitely appreciate the point you're making. But let's, I think it'll be good to dig into this.

[27:02] Thank you. Okay. then we can move on to agenda. Item 6, which is the vision. 0 Action plan. Update first, with regards to the community, mobility, planning and implementation, speak and signage update. And Devon's with us tonight to present to Simon. Thanks, Kevin. Yeah, thank you, Natalie and Alex. Let me get my presentation up. Sorry, Sydney. I'm getting an error that says I cannot share my screen. Yeah, let me promote you to co-host. Alright. Thank you. Can everyone see that now?

[28:07] Okay, well, good evening, everyone. My name is Devin Jocelyn. I'm the city's principal traffic engineer, and I'm serving as the project manager for this project. Before I begin, I just wanna acknowledge that this project has been a very collaborative effort among people within the transportation and mobility department as well as our stakeholder group and our consultant engineering. And I also wanna acknowledge the data contractors that we hired to collect very accurate and timely speed and volume data on a number of these roadway segments that were evaluated as part of this methodology. And lastly, I just wanna acknowledge again that this was fully grant funded through a community mobility, planning and implementation grant of $125,000.

[29:03] So with that, I'll dive in. This is the plan for tonight. There's 5 main things that I'll cover. Some of the material is technical, and I realize that some folks may be seeing this for the first time. But hopefully, by the end of this presentation, you'll have a much better understanding of what and why we did for this project. So to recap the project. Really, there were a few main things that we wanted to do with this project. One was to review and incorporate industry best practices create a context. Sensitive approach for setting speed limits on arterials and collectors improve the consistency for communicating speed limits and reduce speed related crashes. And really this is all done under the safer speeds. Umbrella within the safe systems approach. But we recognize that speed limit setting is just one component of establishing safe speeds. Some of the others being photo enforcement, which, as you know, we're working on expanding as well.

[30:11] So here are some of the project successes. I just wanted to put these up front just to again showcase the real innovation and thought that has been put into this project. Up to this point again, it was grant funded. But the thing that this slide highlights in particular. is that this was really the first time that we've ever done a systematic, citywide evaluation of speed limits. And as part of this effort we completed really, what is the largest ever city wide data collection effort. And that's what's shown on the map. To the right. All of those points represent data points where we collected speed and volume data on arterial and collector streets. In support of this project. In total, we collected data at 206 new locations across the city.

[31:06] And really all of this led to an innovative methodology that incorporates roadway context and innovative and industry best practices. This is kinda where we've been and where we're going in terms of the project schedule. We started this effort last summer in August with a key stakeholder meeting. We've had 3 of those touch points along the way with our stakeholder group, and this is our first official touch point at Tab. We had an earlier touch point very early on in the project to give a very brief overview at the start of the project. But you'll see now that we're transitioning into the final stages where we'll be preparing our final recommendations and a public facing final report. And then it's around the June timeframe that we are required to have all the documentation wrapped up in terms of the grant. And at that point we'll transition into implementation

[32:14] again. I want to acknowledge our stakeholder working group. This consisted of members of Community Cycles Center for people with disabilities. The Boulder Chamber, as well as our Transportation Advisory Board and this group was very helpful along the way in providing feedback on some of the peer cities. Both, you know who we should talk to and what we should look for, and then some of the best practices to be considered, and how those should be considered. In the most recent meeting. They reviewed the draft methodology being presented tonight, and they gave input on the speed limit table advised on the format and appearance of some of the maps and graphics, particularly for people who are color blind, and then suggested that some of the ranges be adjusted to lower bounds in some contexts.

[33:08] So in terms of the methodology development. I just wanna highlight again that this has to do only with streets within the city limits and and streets owned by the city of boulder. So this this excludes State highways that are running through the city of Boulder. See? That is developing their own speed limit, setting methodology that is in. It's in itself more context, sensitive but it is cedar who has the authority to set the speed limit on State highway state highways within the city. This project focused only on collector, minor, arterial, and principal arterial roadways. We did not look at any local streets. Local streets are planned to remain 20 miles per hour, whether posted or not.

[34:03] And just the way that we went about this project was to segment roads by existing speed and functional classification, and we ended up with average segments about a half mile in length. So in terms of the methodology development, I'll just get this all on here, so you can see it while I talk. again. I spoke to the best practices. Review that included things like us limits to some nchrp research as well as looking into the Cdot methodology more closely in terms of the attributes considered that involved things developed within a workshop with the working group. And essentially we looked at what roadway factors should be considered when setting, setting a speed limit that fed into what we're calling the process, we use to evaluate the need for lower speeds. And

[35:05] what I would say is unique and innovative about this methodology that we've developed is that we have a point system that we developed based on the priority of factors. And this takes into account the prioritized attributes and the national research. Those items all feed into what we call an output and speed limit table. and then there's a flow chart as well that goes along with this. I won't spend a lot of time on it, because I think it's just helpful if you see it as I as I go through this here tonight. One of the key factors was key attributes considered was the land use. and that was taken from the zoning classification. Within the boulder municipal code, and the way that that is mapped across the city is shown on the right.

[36:00] As you can see down the table on this slide as well. Most of the zoning within the city, and for the segments that we evaluated falls into the residential mixed use and public zoning category. That was the majority of the streets that were evaluated that fell into that category. In terms of the roadway context, we developed a list of 16 boulder specific factors to consider within this methodology. and you can see the points assigned to them in the table on the left, and then the overall category and weight assigned to each on the right. So we had a total of 100 points possible to be assigned from those 16 factors 35% of those fell within the consideration of crash crashes along the roadway. 35% were given to multimodal considerations.

[37:07] 24% to the roadway configuration and 6% to trip generators along the roadway segment that fed into what we called our tier, 1, 2, and 3, which was the need for lower speeds. A tier, one segment receive the highest number of points anywhere from 55 to 100 points, and represents a roadway segment that, because of its context. has a higher need for low speeds. and then you can see the explanation there on the slide for the other 2 tiers. Medium being kind of a medium need for low speeds and tier 3 being the lowest need for low speeds. And also on this map you can see the high risk network highlighted.

[38:00] and I'll speak to that a little later, about high risk network segments were handled separately from this process of the tier. 1, 2, and 3 so here's a quick explainer about the output and speed limit tables. Really, it's the street segment, adjacent land use and context that informs the use of the output and speed limit tables. and that is shown here on this slide. The output table is what defines a rounding percentile to inform a recommended speed limit. And you can see everything explained here on this slide. But I'll just try to give a quick verbal example to to help it make a little more sense. So, for example, if along a roadway we had a recorded fiftieth percentile speed of 33 miles per hour and a recorded 80 fifth percentile speed of 38 miles per hour.

[39:05] Doesn't matter what the actual posted speed limit is, you would go based on what's recorded as the fiftieth or 80 fifth percentile speed for our methodology. But in this case. if we were to apply the rounded down fiftieth percentile to 33 miles per hour, that would tell us to Brown down to 30 miles per hour. If you apply the closest fiftieth percentile that would tell you to round up the 33 miles per hour to 35 miles per hour. If you were to take the rounded down 80 fifth percentile, you would take the 38, and round it down to 35, and if you were to take the closest, 80, fifth percentile, you would take the 38 and round it up to 40. And I realize that was a mouthful. But II just hope that it helps put those terms in a little bit better. Perspective.

[40:03] In terms of the speed limit table. The speed limit table is what defines a range with lower and upper bounds that sets the limit of what speed speeds can be recommended to be along a roadway. So you can see things explained here. It goes by land. Use class in the columns, and then the roadway type in the rows. And again, the the vast majority. roughly, 75% of the streets that were analyzed fall within that middle land, use category of residential mixed use and public. And and actually, I forgot to mention that for this speed limit table that also includes business zoning within that same category. But you can see here the downtown ranges go from 20 to 25 miles an hour, regardless of roadway class residential mixed use

[41:06] follows a little bit different range 20 to 30 for a collector, 20 to 35 for a minor arterial, and 25 to 35. If it's a principal arterial and the ranges for the industrial agricultural land use are shown there on the right, 25 to 35 for a collector, 30 to 40 for a minor arterial and 30 to 45 for a principal arterial but really, what I wanna highlight here as well is that you'll see that those streets that have higher ranges apply to a smaller number of segments. This slide explains the flow chart for the methodology, and this is where the high risk network comes into play. You can see that's the the very first layer within. The methodology is to ask, is the segment part of boulders high risk network.

[42:03] And if it is automatically, we would default to going to the output table and saying that we would use the rounded down fiftieth percentile speed which would give us the lowest recommended speed limit. The second layer is shown there in the middle of the flow chart, and that's where that point system comes into play that I described earlier. Depending on what tier the roadway is, defines where you look in the output cable for what speed you round and how you round it. Layer 4 comes into play when you compare the output with the speed table ranges. and there's essentially 3 things that can happen when you do that it could be below the range, within the range or above the range. And what happens if the speed is below the range. As we are saying, we would use the lower bound of the range.

[43:06] If it's within the range, we would use the recommended speed from the output table, and if it's above the range we would use the upper bound of the range shown within the speed limit table. and then that fifth layer is really one to emphasize here. That is the use of engineering judgment to validate and refine results along roadway segments. So moving into part 3. This is where hopefully, things will start to click for you and and make sense. This is some examples. That we've chosen of se of segments that have had the methodology applied to them, and have varying ways in which it applies. So the first segment is a wrap a ho! Avenue! And it's the segment.

[44:04] Oh, let's see, what's the exact segment from Seventeenth Street to Folsom Street. Now this is a segment that is on the high risk network. it has a posted speed of 30 miles per hour and 80 fifth percentile speed of 33 miles an hour and a fiftieth percentile speed of 28 miles per hour. This is a minor arterial with residential mixed use zoning so you can see that information shown on the slide. Because it's on the high risk network. We go to the rounded down fiftieth percentile speed which basically leads us to a recommendation of 25 miles per hour. What I forgot to mention earlier was, you can see that along this segment we had 3 data points collected along this segment, and that's what's shown

[45:02] in the slide where it says, 2829, 28. That means that at each of those points they had a in this case 2 are the same, but one was a slightly higher, 50, fiftieth percentile speed. but that was averaged across the segment to a speed of 28 for the average fiftieth percentile. And then when you round that down to the nearest fiftieth percentile, you get 25. And because 25 is within the range for that type of roadway that ends up being the the recommended speed. So in this case we're recommending a 5 mile an hour reduction on that segment of Arapaho Avenue. Moving to the next example, we have Edgewood drive from Nineteenth Street to Folsom Street. This is a segment residential mixed use collector. When we put it through the points system, we get a tier, 2 street

[46:08] with the data you can see shown there. and sorry I'm moving fast. But collector tier 2 says again, you'd use the rounded down fiftieth percentile speed existing speed limits 25. The data that we had recorded along that segment was at 2 points. One said the fiftieth was 29 miles an hour, the other said it was 23 miles an hour. Average of that is 26, which, when you round it down to the nearest 5 mile an hour, increment, you get 25. So 25 falls within the range for that street. So the recommended speed is 25, which matches the posted speed of 25. No change recommended for Edgewood.

[47:00] This shows basically how we assigned the the points and the attributes that were reviewed along that segment to get the tier. 2 classification. The third example is 50 Fifth Street, from Flat Iron Parkway to Arapaho Avenue. This is one that when we put it through the points it comes out as a tier. 3 street. It has an 80 fifth percentile speed of 43 fiftieth of 38, and it's currently posted at 40. And again, this is a minor arterial within the industrial agricultural zoning. So we say it's not on the H. Rn. We evaluate the speed, the need for low speed. These were the criteria used to determine that, but it falls within a tier. 3. Looking at the tier 3 for a minor arterial, it tells us to use the closest eighty-fifth percentile speed

[48:07] again existing is 40. The data we had said 42 and 45, closest, 80 fifth percentile. When you do that says you might consider going up to 45 miles per hour. However, the range of speeds for a minor arterial within the industrial agricultural zoning says. 30 to 40 is the range. so in this case, we would say, the recommended speed limit is 40, which is now change from existing. So in this case, although the the method itself said perhaps the speed limit should be higher. It's the speed limit table in this case that says, because of the range being highest at 40, we don't want to change the speed limit.

[49:00] So these next few slides give an overview of the preliminary results that we have. And again, these are our preliminary results that we will do a final review on and potentially be able to incorporate feedback that we hear tonight as well to make changes. Really the the thing to highlight on this slide. and just in general, for this project is that 50% of streets remain unchanged. And I think what that means, and what that did is that it really confirms that on those roadways, we really feel like the speed was was set appropriately. 66% of the streets with changes are recommended to be reduced by 5 miles per hour. So if a street is expected to change for the most part it's expected to go down by about 5 miles an hour. No. Streets on the High Risk network are recommended to be increased.

[50:05] 70% of streets on the high-risk network are actually recommended to be reduced. and then you'll see down at the bottom. And you can see on the map only 10% of streets are recommended to be increased. But again, that final engineering judgment layer has not been applied to these results. But I do just want to back up here again. And and what I forgot to mention earlier was just again the the magnitude of what we are able to accomplish with this project, and being able to get system wide results by using this process really is groundbreaking both in the industry and and for our city. In terms of the recommended speeds. This map kind of shows the actual recommended speed limits along segments. and you can see that lower speeds are recommended near downtown. 73% of evaluated streets are recommended to be equal to, or less than 30 miles per hour.

[51:13] and the highest speeds are seen in those industrial agricultural areas near the city limits. 12% of the evaluated streets have a recommended speed limit of 40 miles per hour or higher. we say higher, but really the the highest is 45 miles per hour. In this case. and again, the engineering judgment layer has not been applied. So in terms of the next steps, we'll be working to complete that final report will apply the engineering judgment to these preliminary results and potentially make any final tweaks to the methodology. We do want to finalize the signing practice in terms of how, when we decide to implement these changes, we'll sign them in the field and along these segments.

[52:03] And then we want to finalize the implementation plan. So that is it from me for the presentation. Thank you. I know that got a little bit long, but there, there was a lot to cover. So I do appreciate your attention and welcome your questions, comments, and feedback. Thanks, Devin, I appreciate it. The work you did after taking this over from from Mark and the time in the working group that will say to my tab members that having a couple of hours with this during our most recent working group session, really helps digest a lot of this information. Hopefully, you guys had a chance to take a look at this before tonight, because it's a sort of complex progress process. Anyone have any clarifying questions. First. that pretty. I don't have any clarifying questions. I just have a suggestion I would. I would like to see our high impact network be reduced just because we know that you know we have issues there, and that.

[53:07] you know, if we reduce the speed, the consequences can be dramatically different to the outcome of a pedestrian or a cyclist getting hit. So I mean, I understand the process. And and it's I think it. It's great to hear the high percentage of roads that will be are are being recommended to be reduced in speed. But I mean just kind of my my 2 cents would be that I would love to see the high impact more network as a whole, just be reduced and speed any response to that, or should move onto the next feedback. Yeah, I think what I'll say with response to that is that really it is the high risk network that we're prioritizing with our vision 0 actions. And what that means is that those will be the first streets to see

[54:08] not only speed reductions, but but other changes. Right? So some of our our capital projects that we're working on the photo enforcement expansion. How we against phase and and do signal timing all of those within the action plan say, we're going to look at the hyrost network first. So I just wanna reiterate that point as well that it is very much on our radar in that regard. Thanks, Devin Taylor. Thank you. I had questions about the attributes and the point systems. just did seem pretty rough. And I remember when we had when we were going through sort of prioritization and pointing and scoring in connection with the neighborhood speed management program that they got. You know, cab members were pretty interested and and wanted to get into the the nitty-gritty of these. And so I just have some questions about what was considered, or why or why not?

[55:12] It looks like bike facilities. Get you 5 extra points. and having a high volume of cyclists, get you 10 extra points similar with pedestrian facilities and pedestrian volumes, I think. Was there any consideration of the quality of those like? Whether it was a detached sidewalk versus a bikable shoulder that's probably not true, because those are on county roads. or just a striped bike lane versus a protected bike lane? Or is this a bike route? Would a bike route. count. I'm just curious what the what the bike facilities metric was reflecting in. In this case it was reflecting. basically just the presence of the facility or not got you 5 points, and then the the ridership level being low, medium, or high, low, getting you 0 points medium I think it was 5 and high. 10.

[56:08] Okay, so so it was a little bit more fine-grained than what was on your slide. It looks it sounds like I'm surprised that the lack of a of a bike facility, for instance, on London which we're we were talking about earlier. Wouldn't actually get you some points, particularly because there aren't any alternate routes. People north of London are there? They're not very direct routes. So curious whether, like the lack of alternate routes was considered, and why you decided to accord no points on a roadway that might deserve bike facilities but doesn't have any. Yeah. I mean, I think we had to just being brutally honest. I think you had to draw the line at some point right, and we landed on 16 that we felt were really most representative of

[57:01] of what we were trying to achieve, and that the the weighting of those factors. you know, we were comfortable with the the waiting of those factors being what what it was in terms of the crashes, multinodal roadway configuration, and the trip generation along the roadway. Well, II would suggest rethinking that a bit. Partly because and I have this this objection every year when we're talking about roadway maintenance. You know, the heavily used roads that have the highest and the heaviest motor vehicle traffic they get in the worst condition, and so we end up spending more money repairing those roads more frequently, and we are actually doubling down on decisions that we made in the past to prioritize motor vehicle travel, and in the past the city has had to make decisions about where or where not to spend money on bike facilities. And there are often, you know, very valid budgetary writership usership. Land use pattern reasons to not have done that, but to

[58:00] Allow that to drive consideration of whether we protect vulnerable users like pedestrians and cyclists in the future might, in fact, be exacerbating an inequity or a mistake that we have made in the past about not providing a safer facility for them in the first place. So not something. We need to settle right now, but I just wanted to raise that as as a as a way of viewing what, what the what the value and the lesson learned should be. If there is no bike facility, or if it's a poor bike facility. And if there are no pedestrians there, say on Iris, there are hardly any pedestrians there. That's because it's a uniquely uncomfortable inaccessible place to walk. There's there's really no there except on the on the ends. And it's noisy, and it's dangerous, and it's unpleasant, and that's a a good reason we don't have pedestrians, but it's not a good reason to not provide a better experience for pedestrians, ie. By re reducing the stress from high traffic volumes and high traffic speeds.

[59:00] Did you, at any point incorporate the prioritization and plans from the low stress walk and bike network map? Or that that plan, and informing whether or not a, a. an area, a street, or a segment, should perhaps be prioritized, or get extra points for consideration. In this project. II would say, not explicitly, and I think the the the counter to that is that this is a flexible methodology, and it is very. It is very nimble to the point that you can, if a roadway to, or to get either an improved facility or something along the roadway character which you change. It can be rerun through the methodology, and perhaps a new recommendation given. And this is something that sort of occurred to me about sort of testing the the validity of the methodology, or or you know whether we have weighted things appropriately. I'm wondering if if you've done any sort of reverse engineering of your scoring, and say, for instance, completely removed any consideration of a pedestrian facility or pedestrian presence. Does that change the scores.

[60:16] or the the relative ranking of the streets at all, cause that could tell us that we are either paying attention to something inadequately, or it doesn't matter. We could maybe simplify how this goes forward. If it's really not changing the scores, and how we rank the streets. I would. I'm curious if you've done that, and if not, you know. Is there time to do that? Maybe we have not done that? Okay. Well, consider it. Question on the trip generators. Again, I understand. Maybe your your scoring was more detailed than what I saw on the slide in the presentation, but it just looks like it was schools, parks, and senior centers. Is that right? Or were there more cause? I'm wondering about things like shopping centers, commercial activity, trail heads or trail heads included in parks, Daycare Centers library Rec Center generally have a park with them.

[61:06] But there are a whole lot other trip generators that it didn't sound to me like I'd included. And if what we're trying to capture with trip trip generators is, I hope, the presence of more people biking, walking outside of motor vehicles using transit. How about, you know, near transit oriented development? For instance, if what we're trying to capture is the presence of vulnerable street users? We should be looking at more than just senior centers. Parks. And what was the other one? Ye? Yeah, we had schools, park and community senior center. and those essentially are binary. So it's is, is something present or not. Is it present within a quarter mile of the segment? Was the other kind of like other cities, our size. There are a number of daily trips that are short trips within town. you know, 4 miles or less that are done by a motor vehicle where travelers are are traveling at at whatever the posted speed is hopefully that are not going to parks, senior centers, and schools.

[62:18] A whole lot of shopping happens. A whole lot of commuting to work happens. A whole lot of jobs are concentrated in different areas. And I'm not really seeing an accounting for that as a trip generator. So you know, maybe we've miss identified or mislabeled it. But if that's what we're trying to do either identify trip generation or identify the local street users. I don't think those 3 categories are nearly enough to be to be thinking about and to scoring it would probably be an an excellent objection to to me, and what I just said to say. Well, if we included all those things. Then we would put basically, there would be no section of the city that's untouched. And then I would say, exactly, yeah, that's that's not where I was, gonna take it, II will. I will definitely check back with the team in terms of what exactly, was included in those 3 categories. But I would also say that

[63:10] we had the thought that it was. It's covered somewhat by the zoning right, and the zoning is really the higher level layer that guides the methodology, so many of those things are are covered. So shopping, for example, might fall downtown or in the business zoning, and then that puts it into a different tier within the methodology. II see tier, but really it's a different box within the output, right? And my sense was having not really studied it in depth. My sense was that those commercial tiers actually trended toward higher speed limits. You were, you know, suddenly going to the closest fiftieth, instead of the rounding down 50 other. You were going to the round and down 80 fifth instead of the. you know, the closest fiftieth. So it's not terribly if I'm correct in my in my reading of those tables. What you just said doesn't really reassure me. It's gotten captured, but it hasn't, to my mind gotten captured in a way that should be protecting

[64:10] the people we should be worried most about. I remember I was at the first working group meeting in August. and I remember leaving that a feeling really very interested in, very energized by by, like the intentions and the the the scope of this project. I think it's a great thing to be doing. I'm really impressed with the work that you've done. I asked at that meeting. Should we be merely studying how the world is now? Or should there be some other layer, some other sieve that impresses upon the population what we want the city to look like. So when we're collecting fiftieth and 80 fifth percentile data, we are looking at how they're using it. Now, we know we have a whole bunch of very wide, straight roads. The the findings on 50 Fifth Street do not surprise me at all. That thing was built like a highway, and it operates like a highway. But should it was my question.

[65:13] should there be places? And maybe this is where your engineering judgment comes in. Should there be places where we say, no, this is within the city. This is kind of in in the guts of where we want everybody to be. I don't care what the methodology gives us. We want everyone to just chill out the closer they get into town. This was part of our discussion about changing the default speed limit on residential streets in the city to 20 miles an hour. We knew it wasn't gonna be something. We wave a magic wand overnight, and I see this process as being a different arrow from the same quiver. trying to get everyone to calm down and trying to get them to behave differently than they would on a highway. And so II was wondering if that made it, that that landed anywhere, if there was any intentionality either now or in the future to deliberately suppress

[66:07] drivers expectations of being able to speed just because a street is pretty darn wide and everybody's speeding on it now, or everybody's going 45 on it now. Sorry I'm trying to fully processed the question. II think I mean, I would. Yeah, yeah, if you wanna try me, Natalie, go ahead. Well, II mean, I've just been listening to the the comments from utilit. And I think, like my, I think all of this is helpful, and we can take it back and think about. you know, where there's room for engineering judgment like, we're not. Gonna just let them. The methodology spit out all of the answers. So so that's I think this is why we're here to hear this kind of feedback, and then we can go back and figure out what changes we need to consider. To get to the kind of final place.

[67:09] My last question on this, I think. Did you consider as part of the balancing, and whether to round, down or up total changes, or like expected changes in travel time. So that was something. Also that the public comment Paul Sabini mentioned this evening. You know, if if Lyndon went from 30 to 20 would be an extra 12 s of delay. That's something I've been spending a lot of time thinking about, but late, right lately. And just curious whether you have it might be too early on in the process to to come up with that kind of calculation, but wondering if you've done it, and if not as a suggestion, it could be part of the messaging going forward. You know, this change is so modest for an average car going the new speed you're going. You're gonna take 6 more seconds. We yeah, we did not explicitly consider travel. Time impacts in terms of what what happens if you lower it from 30 to 25. How much longer does it take you to travel on a a. I think I think part of the difficulty with that is because we had so many segments.

[68:14] And then, you know, it's just hard to, I guess. Predict, say, a a meaningful route. But but you could certainly contextualize it along a particular corridor. you know, you could pick Broadway north of downtown or something and say, Okay, you know, we're gonna be changing the speed limit. And if you drive from Pine all the way up to 20 Eighth Street, you know it's a 3 mile segment, and you know here's kind of what you could expect, so that that could be something we do take for the implementation phase and think about how to both educate people, and then really reemphasize that it's not really much of a burden to them to to slow down in terms of their travel time. Right? Yeah. I think it's really valuable messaging when it's put that way.

[69:00] I know that community cycles raised some questions in the in their letter to us earlier. Well, last week I guess it was sort of about what the land uses and the bike facilities some of it you've covered tonight, some of it, not but I'm assuming there will be a staff response to that letter. so I don't need to pre raise the stuff in there. I think I think the the comment about the types of vehicles that are in some of these industrial areas is really actually quite topical and and valuable. Input but community cycle. I was on a meeting with them earlier, and they were wondering when they're gonna hear back, or if I'm sure you they will hit back. Okay, yeah, it literally just came in. I think over the weekend. So okay, thank you. I think if I can just add to what Tila said, I mean, I support what she's saying, and I think that the goal is to create a city where people want to walk, where people feel safe walking, where it's inviting, and

[70:01] perhaps Oh, I'm sorry. I got like some strange message here. And and taking all of those things into consideration, we know that you know what you were also adding about how really slowing speeds down doesn't necessarily mean adding a huge amount of time to your commute right? So it's just making the the the way we travel more efficient and trying to get people to travel in different ways. But in order to, it's like this circle, right? I mean, nobody's gonna wanna ride their bikes if they don't feel safe or or walk or not that they they won't want to walk if they're on Iris like Tila said, and it's just noisy and uninviting, and you don't feel safe. And there's not a side walk. I mean, it's just well, these things that come together right. So I think we should take pride in knowing that. You know, I think that we're leading the way in many, many ways as to how we're creating these environments for people

[71:01] and just continue to prioritize that above everything, you know, just making sure that people feel comfortable, that's inviting, and that people when they're driving into the city. Understand that they're driving into a place where they are. Gonna find pedestrians where they are, gonna find people utilizing other modes of transportation, and that they have to look out for each other. So that's all I've got for this. Yeah, no, thank you for that. And I think you know it's something we do keep top of mind with with our capital project work is really. How can a capital project transform a roadway in such a way that you can really set the tone and and achieve speeds that you want. Along a particular corridor, for example. And that can be done any number of ways with a capital project, as as you know. But I think sometimes it probably does take something on order of

[72:01] of that to change that behavior and and the roadway context to really necessitate a change in behavior. And lastly, Devin, I mean, after the phone call we had today about Lyndon, I mean, is there anything that we could do to mitigate the speed there? I mean, there's so much traffic I use as a cyclist training. I use that road to descend constantly. So it's not. It's I see all sorts of people, you know, like this man said, there's little kids. There's people that are walking. There's people racing their cars. So I mean, perhaps it's something to put in there, as you know, if we're gonna implement changes, perhaps make a little note, you know. Then that's something to really keep on top of the list. I mean. yeah, yeah, Lyndon has definitely been on the list. And I I've been in contact with Paul as he mentioned. So we'll continue to be in contact through the the process and again. The results tonight are not final results.

[73:12] Becky. Thanks. I think a lot of my questions are answered, and you maybe already answered this one. But just to be clear. So II was thinking about 50 Fifth Street and the East Boulder subcommunity plan, and not the particularly the stamp in case the Acronym the like area with housing, concentrated housing, and transit in the future. And but it looks like that area is still sort of treated like industrial use. So does that, then not. Is that then saying, Well, this won't be a drive. It won't be. Consider that until those facilities are actually built in the area. Or is it all. I actually don't know if the zoning has been updated. I I thought it had. But maybe I know that's been a long project. So it's not. Yeah. I was wondering if you could just speak to that

[74:06] area, and whether it's playing a role here or not. Yeah, it so specific consideration was not given to that. It was really a snapshot of what are the roadway conditions right now? And the reason for that is because, in order to do this citywide. We just had to have a way to scale things right. And a lot of what I didn't show you is the layers upon layers upon layers of all the Gis that are behind us. Right? And so it is a pretty quick process that we we established, but it's all it's all based on what's now. But but of course it can be subject to change when when conditions weren't. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And II do. I appreciate. You know how much has gone into it. And and having this sort of being able to point to like these factors, you know, this is why we're making decisions this way. I think that is great. And

[75:08] you know, I. So II really respect all the work that went into making that that possible? yeah. So so thank you for that. And I guess, as it relates to this particular area fifty-fifth, I guess, than my feedback would be that if if there is an area that has had the. I guess, I guess, stamp of Council approval for the land use change in the future. Then maybe that's one where engineering judgment can play a greater role. Yeah, I think that's a interesting point that we can take back and discuss. Because the zoning was changed as part of the plan under the planning process. So it would be interesting to look at that for specific area. That's the case. Thanks. Yeah. And I can understand why, like using the data you have now versus lots of hype, you know, there might be various hypothetical areas that will change. And I can get how? That would be hard to sort of guess that if it's not really a confirmed change. But

[76:08] if, yeah, if in this case it is, then. you know, finding a way to incorporate that be great. yeah. And then I just have one. I guess one other point of feedback is you know II love. If there was a possibility to consider particularly on Pearl Street. Going is down to 15 miles per hour. this is, I think, about crested views. Main Street, which is 50 miles per hour. Sometimes it's 10, and I know it's a really tiny little town, but it's Main Street is, you know, for a few blocks, like pretty busy in the summer. And it does kind of feel different when the speed is reduced. In that particularly busy area. And yeah, I think on Pearl Street that could be kind of a a perfect place to really signal that this is a

[77:01] high traffic, high pedestrian volume area like we want it to really be welcoming fall modes, and that lower bound particularly there. And maybe on the main street on the hill, too. Just, I think, could be really beneficial. So just one other thing to consider. But yeah, otherwise. Yeah, really appreciate all the work that went into this. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks, Becky. I like that low speed limit on Perl. Really give it the main street. 5 idea. If one piece of feedback. I really appreciate the engineering judgment that's baked into this, since I understand that these are all relatively preliminary. The one thing that gives me pause within the parameters that engineers can judge thing. It's the upper range on the land use classification of residential, mixed, decent public. which makes up a good chunk, good chunk of town

[78:03] for the minor arterials, and I think the upper bound was 35 miles an hour. and to me that that feels rather high for a place where we'd expect to have that much foot traffic generated. So it's possible that this is. This is a mute point, because it it won't. Engineering judgment will determine that it shouldn't be. But I think it should be a nonstarter, that certainly on minor arterials, but probably principal arterials as well that we're we're looking at 30 or less given. We know how much the speed of vehicles impacts the severity of of crashes. I think aiming for 30 or less where we have a lot of people on foot would be be like a slight improvement over over what's been presented. Yeah, I think response to that right now. Alex is you know we can certainly take a look at that again. What I would say is that even though that's the upper range. There was a very, very few select segments for that actually ended up being the upper bound, and II don't have

[79:15] a great example at the tip of my fingertips. But really, I think again, if you look within that category of zoning. you would be hard pressed to find one that actually was recommended to be 35, even though the upper bound is 35 right now. Okay, that's certainly comforting to hear, but it's almost by definition. It feels a little too high. Any other feedback or questions on the speed limit, setting and signing. Not seen any. Thanks, Devin, and I think you're still here for an appointee to the pedestrian crossing treatment, installation, guidelines.

[80:03] I talked to Trinity. She's interested in joining the the working group for that. and if you need a backup you can take Tila for now and then, when the new board gets to determine their appointments for sure. till I'm trying to, you guys can revisit this, and whatever else you want to revisit. Perfect. Thank you that what? That's exactly what I was looking for. Appreciate your handle on that behind the scenes, Alex. First thanks, Devin. That wraps up agenda. Item 6. Next step agenda. Item 7. First matters from staff. Yes, thanks, Alex. And thanks. Devin. Appreciate all that feedback on that item. So we have a representative from community vitality here tonight, Regan Brown, and she'll be sharing an update on this item, and Chris is here to support. Thanks. Natalie. Hi, everyone. My name's Regan. I am a senior project manager with the city's Community vitality department.

[81:06] and I'm here tonight to share a bit of a preview into a pilot program that we're launching in partnership with commutify. So let me share my screen here. Oops. and just to give you a heads up. I can't see hands when I'm sharing my screen, so feel free to interrupt me. But I also have a questions slide at the end, so we can wait till the end as well. Alright! Can someone let me know verbally you can see my screen? Yes, we could just alright. Great! Thank you. So for those who are unfamiliar commutify is a tech startup based here in boulder, and their focus is really on creating platforms to better understand and quantify commuting patterns

[82:13] as well as encourage folks to take sustainable commutes. And so this pilot program is being led by community vitality with support from transportation and mobility as well as support from boulder transportation connections. And I wanna first just provide a high level overview of the purpose and the outcomes that we're seeking to achieve through this pilot program before diving into the specific elements of the program. the purpose is really to encourage employers to use financial incentives to shift employee, commuting behavior away from single occupancy, vehicle trips towards more sustainable transportation methods to get to and from work.

[83:05] And so the result we're trying to achieve here is to support employer transportation demand management programs. raise awareness and education on boulders. Transportation options reduce single occupancy, vehicle trips, reduce emissions, decrease traffic congestion and support local business. So with that, I'll dive into some of the program elements here. So employers in the central area, General Improvement District, also known as Caged and the Boulder Junction Access District Beejad are eligible to participate in this program, which is also how this pilot program is being funded is through the K Jed and Vijay taxing revenue dollars. So we'll be conducting outreach to employers within these districts to encourage them to participate in the program, as well as to determine how much they'd like to contribute in incentive funding for their employees

[84:10] and then using our district funds. They will be used to match that employer, provided incentive up to a dollar, 25 a dollar and 25 cents per qualified work trip. So that's for a total of up to $2 and 50 cents in city matched funds per day. Per employee who does not drive alone to work. commutify will develop an interactive platform for employers and their employees to learn more about the program and as well as well as explore the sustainable transportation options are available to them. Employees will receive their cash incentives on the communify platform via a virtual debit card in which the funds can either be spent

[85:03] on local transportation service providers, or at local district businesses within cages and Bijab. and then, lastly, participating employers can apply for the State tax credit where they can receive a 50% tax credit on any funds that they used to invest in sustainable modes of transportation for their employees, in which this program would certainly qualify qualified trips and allowed expenditures on the left hand side. Here. These are the qualified trips, so modes of commuting in which an employee can earn incentive money, so that includes car pool, Van Pool public transit biking to work, maybe taking a B cycle east scooter walking or multiple modes of those trips.

[86:01] and then on the right hand side allowed expenditures. So just to reiterate. This is where an employee can spend those earned funds again, shopping and participating locally owned businesses in the district. They can spend it on Van Pool fairs, b-cycle trips or recycle membership lime, scooter trips, car share uber, lyft or park mobile implementation timeline. So we're currently working on platform development and configuration in which we plan to to begin platform testing and conducting outreach to employers. Towards the middle to the end of this month. and our goal is to launch the program or the platform and the incentives program officially on April first this year. So on April one employees can start logging their trips on the platform and start earning incentive funding

[87:03] next steps. The incentives program will run until the end of the year, so employees can earn funds until the end of December, but they actually have, until the end of January 2025 to spend their incentive money that they earn. and then we will then evaluate the program, identify opportunities for improvement, likely conduct a survey to employers, employees just to gain a sense of the overall satisfaction with the program. How can it be improved. and the goal is to really, hopefully expand this to other areas of the city, or at least continue it in years to come. If successful. So with that I will stop sharing my screen and happy to answer any questions. Thanks, Regan. Any questions but the pilot.

[88:03] Becky. Thanks. super. Interesting program. I have a my question. One of my questions is. the allowed expenditures include include, like parking, paying for parking, which seem kind of counter to incentivizing people not to be using single single occupancy vehicles. So I'm just wondering why that's included as a yeah, I hear you and I can. I can respond to that just kind of based on my perspective. And then Chris feel free to to chime in. I think one of the intense there is when some someone parks in a garage, they're less likely to be driving around looking for parking. And then, in addition to that, we did just launch our gateless system and a lot of the downtown garages. So kind of trying to promote that new technology. Chris, do you want to add on to that principal planner.

[89:07] I think it's also, if you do have someone who works for a downtown employer, and they're committed to using another mode. Oftentimes that employer, then, does not purchase a parking pass for them for one of the garages. So if someone normally takes the bus, you know, 4 days a week. But there's that one day that they do need to drive, you know. Here's an opportunity for us to provide a way to do it. Earn the money, they can spend it on the Park mobile, for that, you know, tho those chances when they or those times where they do have to drive. So it provides that incentive to to use, you know, transit or some other mode most of the time. But occasionally people do have to drive, and and we give them that opportunity. Okay, thank you. I had another question. and it just escaped me. one of I guess one question I have is the

[90:05] as far as you said, this is a pilot. Does that mean? Only, is it? Maybe I miss this and apologize? I did. If only specific employers will be included? Or is it just a pilot in terms of timing? Well, a little bit of both? So at this point it does just run through this year, and the focus is in cages. So central area, general movement district downtown and then Boulder Junction. But the hope is, if it's successful. We'll find resources to either, expand it to other areas of the city. And continue it in years to come. Okay, Gotcha. Thank you. I guess I was thinking it was a pilot within, Kated, like some certain number of companies within that area. We're gonna be part of it, I but I see what you're saying. That those areas are pilot. Okay, yeah, thank you.

[91:00] killer. And then, just to clarify on this, Chris, you and I talked about this as a commuting solutions. Lunch the other day. the employers have to opt in but the total, what is, what's the total number of employers cause? I thought that was an impressive answer that you have, that that might be able to opt in here on this. So in our downtown area. you know. And and this is pre covid for me. These numbers. That we roughly had about 8,000 employees working at over a thousand different businesses. And that's because many of them are very small shops, you know. There are a few larger businesses, of course, but many of them are small. So a thousand employers and in Boulder Junction. including Google, which has the majority of those businesses, I think Will had said there was like 1,800 employees there. so there, there's a wide number of employers and employees that cannot, you know, get into this program. But I think the key thing is, the employer has to participate, and then their employees are eligible.

[92:08] Because we're really matching the funds that the employee gives. And, as I've said, this is kind of like your your parking cash out program on steroids. Since we're we're subsidizing it to encourage the employers to do it, and then they can also get the State tax credit for, you know, getting back half of the money they put in. So we're hoping that kind of double incentive really encourages a lot of employers to participate, and therefore gives their employees opportunities to earn the sparking cash out money. Thanks any other feedback for Kristen again. Not see any thanks for doing us tonight. Thank you all. Thanks, Rigan.

[93:01] bye. and I believe I'm up next. You are. Yes, and sorry. I wasn't sure if Alex is going to introduce it. Sorry about that. Chris is here for the residential diary preliminary results to share an update on that. The let me know if you can. we can. Okay, good. Thank you. I am going to move this just out of the way, so I can see my slides. But thank you. II am really just as I know, very excited about this project. With commutify. We were about to launch this prior to Covid. And so it's exciting that we can get it back in motion and get it implemented and really look forward to working with community vitality on it. But right now I'm here to talk about some of our initial findings in our modal shift report. So this is the Modal Shift report contains the findings of our resident travel. Diary.

[94:18] we've been conducting this survey since 1990. We used to do it every other year, and then, I think, at some point in the early 2,000 s. We switched to every 3 years this survey goes in conjunction with the Boulder Valley employee survey. So we do both of these. So we'll do the Boulder Valley. We'll do the Resident, and then we take a year off from surveys. and then we continue that pattern the real purpose of both those surveys. And and this one in particular is to track travel, behavior, and trends. This one is for residents, you know, and the other one is for employees regardless of where they live. We use these surveys to evaluate our progress towards meeting those city goals in our transportation master plan. And it also helps inform staff as we

[95:07] go about planning future projects, developing or changing updating policies and developing new programs. This is a statistically valid survey conducted by a third party. In fact, the the same company, although it's been bought out, and is now kind of called something else has been the same company that has conducted it since 1990. So and several of the researchers are the same people, so they have intimate knowledge of the history of this survey, and and are really insightful into looking at these long term trends that we see in terms of the methodology. Residents are selected and are actually mailed. A a paper tra diary form and survey. If you do remember. In the past, we did have a mobile phone version and unfortunately, that company is unable to continue that after Covid. But we did make a valiant effort in in trying to do it via mobile phones. But the diary forms have worked for over 3 decades and continue to

[96:19] all the results of the survey are weighted by demographic characteristics. So we can get a representative representative sample. And we do get a a good enough response that we have a very small sampling area at the 9 95 confidence interval of just 1.3 percent this survey was done in September and October of 2023, and we had just about a thousand respondents that recorded over 4,400 trips. Our our goal was always to get at least a thousand. So we were just shy. And I wanna present to you some of the key findings that we're seeing in this. But this report is not complete. This is. Kinda give you a little preview of those right now Staff is working on a

[97:10] evaluating the findings and working with the company to to finalize that report. But we thought there would be some interesting things we could share with tab prior to looking at publication. And then, if there are things that are very, if you're interested in, we can also see if we can run some additional analysis and cross tabs. To get those things into the final report once it's published. One of the key findings in terms of the modal split of trips is that we continue to see declines in single occupant vehicle use. So this is one of the 2 Tmp goals that's directly related to the findings of the resident travel diary survey. So we do have a 2030 Tmp goal of reducing 20 to 20% of all trips being in a single occupant. See? Vehicle. You can see over time. We've made steady progress. But we are. We are not on track to meet that goal, despite the progress that we are being made that we're seeing over time. It's interesting. We've also seen a decline in multiple occupant vehicle use, you know, the most commonly this is car

[98:22] pooling, although in the city of Boulder we know from the surveys this is often either driving just with friends to social events or driving kids around. we've also seen a an increase, a steady increase in bicycling. The bicycle mode share also, and for this at this time contains E-bike and E scooter data. But we are working on separating that out and providing some additional charts, so we can begin tracking ebike usage, and then also related to our E scooter program. We've also seen increases in foot traffic over the years as well. But those highlighted rows indicate statistically significant changes.

[99:13] The second thing we track in the resident travel diary is daily per capita. Vmt, this is one of our newer Tmp goals of looking at what is the total estimated vehicle miles of travel that the average bull to resident does on on their average day. And so we've just really started tracking this with our last Tmp update. right now, we're looking at about 11.9 miles per day. For the average border resident. And you can see that it's broken down in terms of single occupant vehicles and multiple occupant vehicle trips. Taking into account the the vehicle occupancy of those multiple occupancy vehicle trips. Our goal by 2023 is to reduce that to 7.3. This is

[100:07] directly related to our climate goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80%. So we did some some math to basically figure out when we started looking at this. what would vehicle miles of travel need to decline to reduce the portion from travel behavior. To meet that Ghg reduction goal. Of course, there's other things that go into account in that vehicle fuel efficiency, electric vehicle adoption in use. So travel behavior is just one of the components. But we figure out we needed to get down to 7.3. So again, since we've been tracking this. We have seen a steady decline in Vmt, and also I went back and just kinda calculated it throughout the years, so we can see that back in 1990 average border residence, we're almost doing 16 miles

[101:04] a day in a vehicle. The height was reached 1996 at 17.7 but then again, we are just under 12 right now, according to the survey results. We've also been tracking transit trips, you know the whole time as well. We we certainly have seen a statistically significant increase in the amount of people taking transit. And you know, in this case the highlighted role of making at least one trip during their travel diary period, and that is a 24 h period where we asked them to record all of their trips over a block. so you know the amount of people taking at least one transit trip on the day that they were asked to do that survey. It has doubled since 1990, but we are seeing a decline. Since, you know. Say, 2,009 and you know

[102:01] we could certainly say in in the recent future. This could be due to Rtd service cuts and it also related to ecopass access as well, but this is certainly a trend that we are watching carefully. We do know that the Eco pass is one of the most powerful tools that we have in our in our Tdm toolbox to change travel behavior. So we have been keeping track of not only access to the ecopass, but also the use of the Eco pass and the impact it has on overall travel behavior. One thing I just wanted to point out on this slide is that we we did with Covid. See a. Ca significant decline in the amount of employers that are participating in the Rtd program. The city is, very much engaged with boulder transportation connections and the Boulder chamber chamber to reverse this trend. And and now that you know, we've got people coming back to the office, even though we're in this hybrid environment getting them to. Return to the Eco Pass program just because we know how powerful it is, but you can see that we have.

[103:13] For years we we had over half of the population, having access to some type of ecopass, whether it was their employer, or the neighborhood, or through. See you, but we we've slipped above that halfway point in this last survey, and most of that is due to the decline in access through employer as I mentioned, the Eco pass is one of our most powerful tools in changing travel behavior. You can see on, on the left, the 2 bar charts. The difference is people taking transit over the years, whether they have an Eco pass or not, and you can see people with eco passes are significantly more likely to take transit. But on the right side it goes beyond that. Not only do they take transit more, but we also see that they bike and walk much more as well. So this is something that we've seen over time is that once people have an Eco pass in their pocket, not only does it affect their transit use, but it affects all of their travel behavior. So this is why it's again

[104:22] one of our most powerful tools. But we also have other things that that we see over time impacting travel choice. We see that access to vehicles is another prime thing that changes travel, behavior, and whether or not you know, a household has one 0, or many vehicles really affects the travel behavior of the people in the household. You can see that the single app single occupancy vehicle use is almost double of depending on the a level of access to vehicles. And certainly bus bike and walk are significantly higher for those that have less access to vehicles.

[105:13] One of the trends especially since the pandemic that we've been tracking is telework status you can see that there's been significant changes in telework behavior among our population almost a doubling of people that claim that now they work from home every day. So 12% in 2,018 and now almost 23% in 2023 we can also see is the one to 4 times a week is has basically tripled as well. And only about let's see, when I was gonna say, oh, only about 25% of our survey respondents said they do not telework ever so. That's a significant trend that we're gonna see. And certainly, you know, not making a work trip. And you, you know, there's 2 in a day has a significant impact. But of course, there's negative things to tell work as well, especially when we think about our reliance on sales tax dollars for everything, especially funding transportation. So

[106:27] double-edged sword, of course. Like to just close out with. you know, this slide, which I've always found interesting is, you know, if if every resident in Boulder behaved like a university student in terms of how they travel, not maybe all their behaviors, but in terms of how they travel, we would be meeting our our Tmp goals. And I think, you know, we can look at. You know, students definitely make different types of trips. But they have access right now to their college pass. Eco, pass. They have bike share memberships. Now, we're seeing the use of lime scooters, you know. This survey was done just after the citywide launch. So lime scooters really hadn't exploded yet. It will be interesting. See it next time. But those are

[107:19] you know, significant travel behavior changes we've seen by students. And if we could all do that, we'd be meeting our goals. Trinni. I see you have your hand raised. Can I answer a question now? Yeah, I guess my my question has to do with how the participants were selected and what they're the trending age and sex is, just yeah. find that interesting. Yeah. So we we do a random selection of households within the city, so we randomly select households to receive the survey, and then there are instructions on who in the household should sure to answer it. Based on actually, it's based on their. The person who has the closest coming up birthday is how we randomize that. But they're randomly selected.

[108:11] just a pure random sample of households. But then, once we have the findings, we do know the demographics of the city from various things like the census and national household surveys and stuff, and then we can weight the responses to to those demographic characteristics based on age, gender and age gender, and think we do income as well. and I guess. were there any youth involved in the survey like any teenagers, any other. No teenagers. This is a survey that is well, it's 16 and up so it's if you can drive or not.

[109:00] Is the survey but there are, you know, issues, of course. Anytime you have minors. We don't have a lot of of young people, but we do usually have a good amount of Cu students that answer and given that, they're, you know, almost 30% of our populations. And it's important to to include them as well. I was just curious about how the 0 fair for youth program. I mean, if that was kind of I don't know helping these numbers. Yeah, I can certainly, you know, dive in a little deeper into that especially. We do ask specifically about school trips and how they went to school. Most of the time. It's, you know, parents answering the survey about them, maybe dropping their kid off of school. But if it is someone younger than they do answer about their school trip, and we do separate like yellow school bus from Rtd, so we would be able to find out that sample size will probably likely be fairly small. And so, you know, for something like that the sampling error would be would be larger.

[110:16] Well, thanks so much, Chris, you're welcome. Alright. So I did have. This is kind of my last slide. So in terms of our next steps, we're we're continuing to review the the raw data and the results and the report itself. We're identifying any additional cross tabs or analysis. We may wanna run this is specifically related to our equity work. So there is some additional demographic analysis happening right now, and also with micro mobility. Since that's something we wanna highlight. So you know, there, there are dozens and dozens of questions. So when you think about the the possibility of cross tabs

[111:03] and analysis, you can run. It's pretty much endless. And so, you know, we've we've got to figure out, you know, where. What are we most interested in finding out and so Staff is working on that right now. I'm I'm would be happy to hear any, you know thing from any ideas, from tab of things that you would be particularly interested in, and if we have the data in it, we can certainly, have. have the that analysis answered for you. We generally, you know, see this report published in the second quarter, so we have plenty of time to to to look at the report and run some of that additional analysis and then, just as a final note, purchasing is having us do an Rfp process to select a new vend vendor, as I mentioned, or we've been using the same, essentially the same vendor since 1990. Which is great, has its advantages. But also I think this will be a great opportunity

[112:02] to look at what other vendors could offer in terms of technology. To really maximize response rates, so that you know, we can have a very good, statistically significant low sample error survey. So that's up next. So happy to answer any additional questions you have. if you like. I can unshare my screen, or we can. I can go to a slide if you want me to go to a slide as well. See you. Thanks, Chris. I was like this kind of stuff. And I forget, and I know it's been asked and answered in previous years. Do ride share like uber lyft kind of things do those count as movs? Are we categorizing them and counting them? Yes, they they are. They are. If you say, you're in a multiple occupant vehicle. You have a number of different sub choices of that category, including uber and lyft

[113:08] you know, Van Pools regular car pools. And then, if you are car pooling, we do ask, you know, if it's like with adults or other children as well. Okay, interesting. I've been here so long. I remember when this is a new fangled thing. Yeah, there's a lot of nesting answers. Yes, and I think the only other. The comment that I had was when you were talking about. You know, if everybody behaved like a university student we would meet our goals. That's nice to hear, because, of course, the university students are often in these forums cast, as like, you know, evildoers and couch burners and terrible things. At least they're good travelers.

[114:01] and I think the one thing that you did not mention that's affecting their travel behavior is, of course, the university has very little inexpensive private motor vehicle parking and so we know that pricing parking appropriately can actually shift behaviors. And I think this is a data point. We can point to this as it works in bolder 2 we're not so special on that front. So, anyway, just thought I would mention that if you're going to be discussing this further, I think that that is a very salient point about affecting their their travel choices and travel behavior. Yes, and in our employee survey we do track. Whether or not people have free parking at work, or if they pay to park we do know that I think about 90% of people have free parking, you know, it's really in our downtown border junction and the University Hill area where we have paid parking. And I think we know from our our downtown surveys, because we all always when we do the employee survey, we over sample the downtown, and we see that strong connection of the carrot in the stick of you know we're gonna charge you for parking. But here's a free eco pass

[115:08] and we've seen, you know the the sov mode share for our downtown drop below 50%. And you know it. It's hard to find another central business district in a sap in a town. Our size that has that. But that's because of of both the carrot and the stick. Yep. and of course, parking availability, free parking at your place of work is assuming you have free parking at home, and that's also complicated for university students. True, very true. Just some observation for me. I know we've been told previously that we haven't seen a reduction and average daily traffic on a lot of our regional streets. We did, you know, in the heart of the beginning of the pandemic, and then it's it's rebounded. But that's under the condition. The working conditions have changed pretty dramatically, doubling the 5 people of working from home 5 days a week, and that one to 4 was from 10 to 32.

[116:07] I think that just underscores that most trips aren't commute trips. And we've historically, really invested and the the regional Br. T. Projects. But it's the the lot of shorter trips that really make up people's day to day commute patterns and hope that's what we're gonna try to prioritize with Cam. But it'd be interesting to see, like the total Vmt eliminated by the change in and work patterns. Because I think that's a pretty it's gotta be a huge number when it comes to emissions and and that's something we we can calculate. I haven't calculated that yet. But it's certainly something we can do, and and it may be more practical on the Border Valley employee side of things. Given that we know where people live or their nearest major intersection, and we don't know their place of work, because that's how we do. The surveys is through the employer. And we can look at

[117:05] the average days a week of telework. And and I think we can quickly find out what that Bmt Delta is due to increase in telework. So maybe more on the employee side than the this residential survey. But I'll I'll still look into that. I'll look into that good idea. Thanks, Chris. Anything else for Chris this evening. So Becky dropped off about 10 min ago previous commitments. You listen about. Thanks, Chris. You're welcome. Have a nice night, everybody. Thanks. Natalie. Anything else from staff. Nope. That's it. From Staff Cool. That brings us to matters from the board. The main thing we had on our agenda was finalizing our

[118:05] letter to city council in advance of their retreat. Early next month. We discussed what to include in it. Briefly, last week I provided some copy on can, Becky on parking and Tila compiled it all and sent it out shortly before the meeting. I don't know the best way to go about this. yes, Tila wrote it so, Tony, do you have any initial feedback other than to thank Tila and you guys for all your work. I think you did a great job. so I had a chance to look at it little bit before we jumped on, so cool did I saw one question here about the extents of the thirtieth improvements. I think it's pretty much. The whole street is in. from baseline to the diagonal.

[119:03] They're all in various stages. baseline to Aurora design, funded Rorda. Colorado, one project, Colorado to a wrap a hoish. Another project! Alright. I'll just take out that or I could a bit. I also, in looking at the slides that Devin shared earlier. It didn't look like this section of Iris Avenue is on the high risk network. Turns into diagonal can staff confirm any of this

[120:01] Devin. I don't know. Are you still with us, Devin? the high risk network for Iris? What segment? Yeah, let me pull up one resource really quick, just to confirm not all the way. The twentieth and not all the way to Broadway is what I'm seeing. Vision, 0 action plan with the draft. March 2023. Yeah, that's the final. Still, just has a draft. So can I just change it to a portion of this corridor? Sure. I'm just working in the Google block I shared earlier. So so that that is correct. Iris Avenue. The high Risk network segment goes from Nineteenth Street to 28 Street.

[121:04] and and then again, east of 20 eighth from. I guess we call the 20 Ninth to Foothills Parkway. I included the Becky's original point about the Npp. Except I just said, suspend it, which is something Cab has asked for before, as opposed to, she was proposing. We expand it citywide everywhere, which I don't like. So I didn't realize at the time that she was gonna drop off early. She has signed off on this draft via email to me earlier. but I might be more comfortable just taking out any mention of the Npp. That's point C under number 2 at the bottom.

[122:02] It would also help us pages. You like it. Yeah, it reminded me of with Ken proposing not just new things, but some ways to free up bandwidth. And this felt like an attempt at that. and in a way where you know, the sports probably created. or we've had staff and consultants come to present things to us and given them nothing useful response to the immediate thing. And so if I think this is a fair thing to do to for staff, if that's gonna potentially continue honestly, it would probably be up to the city manager's office to it. That's who we've asked to do before. So okay, any other feedback. The Cambridge style thing was a surprise to me. Make sure stuff didn't fall off. I suppose the one thing, Alex, I should point out that did fall off was the discussion of the upcoming downtown mobility study downtown.

[123:17] It's not the right word, but I was like it's coming up. We don't really have it. Ask for it. I didn't really think it deserved room in this letter. Okay, well, that 30 feels similar to that, or just something coming up. But okay, so on the keyboard style ordinance. That was something that Becky raised in her earlier, you know, proposed draft before the February meeting. I know that she has talked to a couple of City Council members about it, so it won't be fresh to them. I'm not sure. And she and I had talked about. I'm like I'm not really sure the ordinance is the way to go. But there was some discussion at the last month's tab meeting kind of about an ordinance versus

[124:03] changing how the let me out here they the codes and standards, design and design standards. Work. And then I think, Alex, you were the one that said maybe this would be more appropriate to include in the next Tmp update. So I mean, we just we hadn't really landed on anywhere in particular. But there had been discussion of it, so I just kind of threw something in that I thought would meet Becky's original thing that I could maybe agree with. But it's up for us to decide. I'm happy to pull it out entirely trini hasn't really been to that discussion. Okay, so with Becky. Shortly after a meeting, other community members and that council member, too, about it. And I think where I'd be most supportive. If it is, if it started just by focusing on ken, and then maybe cause those. I think our corridors that

[125:02] there's a finding number of corridors and their corridors that staff are most familiar with. And so there's a understanding of some of the constraints, and I think, if Counselor pass an ordinance, it could provide teeth if it's limited in scope, which can is. And then so my concerns about being a having a broad, ranging ordinance, I still think that might be something that's most done is update. So so the last sentence in that section, the consider development of a Cambridge style section, we could say, council should mandate at a minimum, that all project can. Projects meet the multi motor safety standards identifying our existing plans. Yadda, yadda! Yadda! And I can pull that sentence up to the top where we say, you know, reinforce development of can. and then take out the rest of see like remove just development of a Cambridge style ordinance. But have this say statement that, like specifically for can projects, we should at least be meeting as minimum standard.

[126:01] How do you feel about that? Yeah, that'd be a good gesture from council as far as what their trainee are you in agreement with this? Okay? Mean, obviously, I tried to. Make this multi part list look less multi part. how we've evolved in our approach to these. Yeah, it's nice lot of sections and footnotes. And

[127:05] so I've added to the end of one a on reinforce development of can in particular council should direct that all can projects meet the multimodal safety standards identified in our existing plans, comma or meet national best practices for multimodal safety outlined with the National Association for the Transportation Officials and Active, of which Boulder is a member. And I'll just change ongoing work on staff, identify prior ongoing work on staff, identify priority quarters and other upcoming projects include Colin, and then 1, 2, 3. There. Okay. remove the rest of C parking form. Okay, any further edits, changes, suggestions, reorganizations.

[128:03] If you make the fitness little smaller, put it all fit on. Yes, it will. So in another II drafted this in another program, and all of the previous text fit in 2 pages. Then I moved it over here to to words or to Google. Docs share it better. And it red did some stuff. But I can translate it back. It'll fit 2 pages. No problem. Okay. The one thing that's the mention of pick tick. I feel like the why there might be lacking a little bit the gloss over like it's happening. You're sort of explaining urging council to accelerate, it so the why of why? It's happening. And the why, of why, to accelerate it? The wider accelerator I guess you got in the last sentence there just feels like a it's it's probably fun.

[129:02] Okay. I'm good with it. Well, as is excellent. Thank you. Trimeny. You have me oh, can you? Can you guys hear me? It's just I'm I'm I'm in the document. I guess the only thing is what we discussed Alex, about having. Can projects be seen as something that has to be pre authorized by city council, and not like individual projects that need to go through this process. I mean, would that be a good place to incorporate that verbiage in this letter. I mean just to avoid all the time that that an effort that is put into a process that since it's already been approved, you know, why would we have to? You know

[130:07] they go through community engagement and go through all this. you know. I mean. that's just I were talking, and I guess I brought up the point I think I picked up from Ryan, where he's emphasized like change models and focusing on networks, not litigating things quarter by corridor, but implementing something that's got a more comprehensive vision to it and some training. Maybe you're getting to the point that that could be better emphasized in this introduction to the can piece. Yeah. So that was kind of part of our discussion last time, you know. Like, where where does this live? Does it live in an ordinance that happens as part of the next Tmp update. Is it a Cambridge style? Ordinance specifically about? Can is it bigger than that

[131:03] are intended to connect to another. That sentence. bulking that sentence up might accomplish what to try to emphasize it. Someone wanna take us to have it. Oh, I thought Alex was gonna do it about each one forming a critical function to an overall network. How about hand quarters are intended to be thought of as a network. Well, it's supposed to be like the basis of a network. They're like where we're starting.

[132:03] But it's supposed to like model. How, how, how the network would work so camp quarters are intended to be a model of a safe system of roadways for A variety of daily travels across boulder. I don't know if that changes the okay. Yes, I'm not quite understanding what you want to change that. If if we lose one link of the the net network. The whole network suffers. If we litigate each segment on a segment by segment basis. might not reach the conclusions that we would, if we are evaluating the system. Okay, how about can? Corridors are envisioned as an interconnected network

[133:03] dirt? Yeah, that's better. And maybe we should specify that they should not be thought of as independent. Okay. because otherwise not independent. Disjointed hmm. rather than yeah, independent road segments for isolated road segments. how about isolated? Good.

[134:01] Okay, does that help? Hmm. yep. cool. Yeah. Great. I think they're all in the Tnt, so it's not like, it's. this is just like a strategic plan of select Tnp. I don't know if you ever mention that we don't mention the Tmp. Much safety standards. It's identified in our existing plans. I can just reference. The Tnt. There. Sure. chuckle. The the new tab members are gonna have a ball learning all the acronyms. Well, if we get thirsty she'll already know most of them

[135:10] anything else. Tony? Nope, let's do that excellent attachment that comes with this. Yeah. So that's Becky's letter. That all that other board members signed that got sent to Council in December. I have that so I'll attach that Meredith. Is that correct me? Yeah. Is that the way I should do it, Meredith, submit to to you, or should I submit to city council directly, and then copy you, or don't remember how we did it before? I think I think it's well I've seen. It's kind of been like going both way. I think you can probably submit it directly.

[136:05] that's probably the way to do it, and then just copy. Okay, we'll do. Sounds good. Thanks, Tila, for compiling all this. Think next step, feature, agenda topics. What Becky and I heard at our last agenda sitting meeting. There will be all of the bringing on board the new members next month, but also a fairly full agenda. Yep. things are ramping up summertime. So that's next Wednesday. Is that right? Usually agenda setting? Usually Tuesday afternoon. Tuesday? Okay, I was gonna say, I have a conflict on Thursday, but I think I'm good on

[137:05] Tuesday and Wednesday. Thank you. Trainee, if you can make it, I think it'd be useful for both on yeah, if we need to. You know, after April, we can reset this right? Yeah, that's based on picking my calendar. And then, of course, I think we're gonna probably we'll be talking about the retreat timing and topics is little odd, because this year the Council retreat is later than usual. Usually. Usually it was like a several month gap between the Council retreat on the tab retreat. But This time they're gonna be closer in. But I still think we should probably be planning for a retreat in May. Yeah, maybe at agenda setting next week, we can start to like, lay out some ideas around. Yeah, cause by then we will know who the new members are, and I can reach out to them and see what their availability is looking like

[138:10] cool. Just to be just to be clear. You guys are going to be sending out an invite for the agenda setting meeting. Right? Okay. thank you. It's next Tuesday at 3. So that's a problem. Okay. Alex brings us to agenda. Item, 9, adjournment. Can I please get a motion to adjourn lot of good restaurants closing in 9. Second

[139:01] emotion, Tila, is that a second? That's a second. You've been a king of kings. Thank you, sir. Thank you for your chairmanship and your leadership. Enjoy the rest of my pleasure. Alright, bye, bye.