June 10, 2024 — Transportation Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] Cloud, now cool. Thank you, everyone it is 6 0. 1 pm. On June 1020, 24, I'm calling to order the June meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board. Veronica, son, are you going to be our technical host this evening? Yes, I am. Can you walk us through the rules again? Thank you. Can do. Let me know if everyone can see the screen. Back, in. Perfect. Alright, we're pleased to have you join us to strike a balance between meaningful, transparent engagement and online security. The following rules would be applied. This meeting has been called upon to conduct the business of the city of Boulder. Activities that disrupt the layer or otherwise interfere with the meeting are prohibited. The time for speaking is limited to 30 min. No person shall speak except when recognized by myself, and no person shall speak for longer to the time allotted. Each person shall register to speak at the meeting, using the person's real name. Any person believed to be using a name other than the one they are commonly known by will not be permitted to speak. Please use the raise hand function to be recognized for public comment. If you're on your phone. You will need to press Star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.

[1:17] No video will be permitted except for city officials, employees, and invited speakers and presenters, all others will participate by voice. Only. The person presiding in the meeting shall enforce these rules by muting anyone who violates any rules. The QA function is enabled. and will be used for individuals to communicate with myself the technical host. It should be used for technical, and all my platform related questions only if an attendee attempts to use QA. For any other reason. The city reserves a right to disable the individuals. Access to the chat. Only the host and individuals designated by myself will be permitted to share their screens during the meetings. Thank you. Thank you very much. So typically, we would move to an approval of the minutes. But, as has become our recent custom in recent years. We wanted to

[2:09] sort of halt the regular business of the meeting to acknowledge that there has been another traffic related fatality in the city of Boulder. This time it was a child in a parking lot, I understand. being run over by a large truck. the driver of a large truck. Excuse me, we have to acknowledge that what we're striving for is a city where no traffic fatalities happen. We obviously haven't reached that yet. And it is striking that we have a variety of different modalities. Through which people are dying on our roadways in in our public areas.

[3:00] of course this was a probably a a private parking lot, but nevertheless a motor vehicle, death in our town and in our community. And I think it is worthy of noting and reminding us of our our top priority, which is that people should be able to get around safely and without killing anybody else. Does anyone else have anything to add at this moment? Well, on that grim beginning? We can move to agenda. Item 4. Excuse me the approval of the minutes. From our most recent meetings we had to in May we had the regular May Tab meeting and our retreat on may 20.th Do any time members have any. Let's start just with the regular meeting on May 13. Any adjustments, corrections. To the minutes of that meeting.

[4:03] seeing none. I think now I'll ask if anyone has any adjustments. Corrections to the retreat minutes. I confess I haven't reviewed those. Written. But they were sent out. Is that right? Great? I've had my chance. Does anyone else have amendments or corrections? Okay, we will later on, I think. revisit and and debrief about the tab retreat, but for now I will happily entertain a motion to approve the tab minutes from the May 13th and May 20th meetings. I move to approve the minutes meetings. Thank you. I'll second it. Like with my. Else jumping in so

[5:01] alright all in favor of approving the minutes. Raise your hand. I can count noses. You can say I, Jen, I think you've frozen. Don't know. The minutes are approved. I'm not sure if it's a vote of 4, 4, or 5, but the minutes are approved. There you go! Hi, Jen! Hi! You're unfrozen. Do you vote to approve the minutes as well? You're muted. Then. Sorry. My Internet shocked. Oh, no, that's too bad! I know. I mean, I'm trying to keep the camera on, but if it's real bad I'll just have to turn off the camera. Okay. Alright. Do you approve the minutes. I approve. Thank you. Alright unanimous. Thanks very much.

[6:04] Okay. We will move on now. To invite public comment. I'm gonna let Veronica take over again to handle this. I'm not sure I see any members of the public who wish to speak, but this would be the time to raise your hand. Let's see, I do see one. Oh. Thank you. It's going back and forth. Let's see Lynn Seagal. I'm gonna ask if you can unmute yourself. I just wanted to know the circumstances of that traffic death. And could I see the board, please? I'm just seeing my name on the screen. You might have to toggle. Eric. Now I see you. Okay. There's different views on Zoom, so you might be able to see just active speaker versus the whole panel. I think that's something you have to do on your. So I'm just looking at my name now. So is that all you need to know? That is the details of the crash. Yeah. And I wanted to make my statement. I I wanted to know. I mean to. Tomorrow when I go out, you know, and get myself killed. I'm not gonna learn anything, cause you haven't said anything.

[7:13] What do I need to watch out for? Most of it is probably like I'll be standing on my bike like, right next to a mondo truck that cannot physically see me. you know. I mean, they're just these big monster vehicles all over the place. And you know I've the problem for the city is that there are too many people here and people drive cars. I don't care. You know, you're gonna hear next week 22 0 6 perl. It's gonna be argued. Oh, the people aren't gonna drive cars. Yes, they are. They're gonna take Uber to the storage lockers.

[8:01] Okay. growth is the problem. Growth is the problem. Developer subsidies is the problem. It's your problem. It's Tab's problem. You want these deaths to continue. Go right ahead the way you are, because your mission has to really be with the other boards. You're just the one that gets used to solve the impossible problems they create. That's a big problem for you. If I were you, I'd say I'm not going to do it just saying you're not the fall board. but you are to the others that are making your lives miserable.

[9:03] I'm sure there's going to be people complaining about Iris and about Folsom and about everything, because it's an impossible situation and it needs to be stopped. This growth needs to be stopped. And you know what we've got it sweet compared to Gaza. 274 killed yesterday for 4 hostages and 3 hostages. Israeli hostages were killed in the process. That means one that and. Ewan. Net, one hostage. Always food for thought. Thank you anyone else, Veronica. It looks like we have, Howard Howard. If you can confirm, you're able to speak.

[10:00] Can you hear me? Yes. Yes, perfect. Okay? alright. So I'm calling about the unmitigated traffic flow through our neighborhood and majestic heights. I've sent you guys some emails. I don't know if you get them. I seem they seem to get rejected. I've talked to the City Council back in 2020. I requested a 3rd speed bump for South 43rd Street. I went through 3 directors in a matter of 3 years. Okay, so everybody's basically put their. you know they. Nothing's happened. I collected signatures like I was supposed to. Nothing's happened. So what we have is, we now have a high speed thoroughfare through our neighborhood people cutting through the majestic height streets to avoid Table Mason, Broadway intersection.

[11:01] These commuters do not care. They come flying through. We have 20 mile an hour speed bumps, which I think the speed should be changed to 15. So you can hear the suspension system. I wish they would break flying over the speed bumps. They're clearly going faster than the 20 mile an hour. So what what's gonna happen is someone's gonna get hit. Someone's gonna hit a car. They do this when there's snow on the street. I mean, if the city of Boulder isn't going to do anything about it, then they should at least plow it. I've counted 30 to 40 cars an hour during rush hours, which is, you know, 7 to 9 and 3 to 5. It's relentless. So I believe that Google Maps apple and those others are directing people up our street. 43rd is conveniently between all the other streets, from 41st

[12:01] through 46. Some streets don't even have speed bumps. So this is a severe situation. and I have gotten nowhere. I've sent letters to city Council. I've dealt with the traffic. You know, people I have names of people I've dealt with also, it's just out of control. So if the city doesn't do anything, I'm buying some huge orange traffic diversions and fill them with water and see if those idiots hit them. So this is. There's no more traffic mitigation program that the city of Boulder has 2022, the City Council, for I do not know what their reason is, abolished it so meanwhile you have Longmont, Louisville. eerie. They all have traffic mitigation programs, there are none for the neighborhoods. So basically, the city is failing to protect their citizens.

[13:02] I'll be glad to have the city traffic. Come and put one of those little black lines and see how much traffic we're getting excessive amounts of traffic, and they don't give a rat blank about our neighborhood, destroying our culture. Thank you, Howard. that's your time. I understand your ire. I do recognize your name. Thank you for reaching out I will respond to you by email offline out of this meeting. It does not look like there's anyone else muted with their hands raised. Okay. But that being said, let us move on, then to agenda. Item 6, about the oh, cip program. Yeah, thanks. We're gonna have Garrett and his team presenting on Cip tonight. The draft Cip and looking for your feedback on that, so I'll hand it over to Garrett.

[14:09] Good evening, Tab. My name is Garrett Slater. I'm the capital Projects manager for the Transportation and Mobility Department, and I'm joined by James Smith, our pavement program manager, and Lindsay Merr's a civil engineering manager, and our capital Projects team this evening. And so, as we mentioned last at last month's meeting we are here to present me information on a series of of 2 of 3 where last month we provided an overview of the already approved 2019 to 2024 capital improvement program this evening. The purpose is to provide an overview of the 25 to 30 draft capital improvement program for the city, and I will now start sharing my screen.

[15:00] Okay? And hopefully, you can see the title slide here and we'll go ahead and move forward. That. we will revisit briefly the topic of what a cip is and how it's funded, and that's where the benefit of our our newer members to continue the education process of what the cip is and its role in providing enhancements and capital maintenance to the system, and then provide an overview of our proposed programs and projects, and then review the next steps. So again, a reminder of what the capital improvement program is. It's the primary way that we are able to make enhancements to our transportation, infrastructure, and our overall system to accomplish the goals that we have outlined for ourselves in a variety of plans such as the transportation master plan. the low stress walk and bike plan, our vision 0 action plan. And so it is our intention to bring all of these objectives to fruition, and the best way to do that is through our capital improvement program.

[16:06] This is not the entirety of our transportation and mobility department budget. There is a separate operational budget that is reviewed by city Council and is not reviewed by the Transportation Advisory Board. The city Code speaks to tabs role being to provide input and and provide a a, an advisory role on guiding capital investment. And so that's why we review this aspect to the of the budget with you. So if you say, Well, I don't see anything in here about Philip potholes or snow response. That's because those things sort of live in the in the operational budget and not in the capital budget. So the capital improvement program is how we both take care of in a on a major maintenance aspect as well as it enhancements deliver on the goals and objectives that we've outlined in all those plans I talked about, and we try to follow making those investments in a manner that's consistent with the priorities that are outlined in the investment policies from the 2019 Tnp. Where we say that system operations vision 0 and taking care of what we have are our top priority.

[17:18] So we also have a new framework that we're working with for those that have been paying attention for a number of years. We had a sustainability plan, and then it grew into the sustainability and resiliency plan. And now it's the sustainability, sustainability, equity and resiliency framework that have the objectives of the community being safe. healthy, and socially thriving, livable, accessible and connected environmentally sustainable and economically vital. And each one of our line items in the capital improvement program need to be aligned with these objectives that are part of the share framework from which all city investments need to be consistent.

[18:01] So this cip that we're putting in front of you. It comprises a nearly 120 million dollar investment, and that is also includes 38 million dollars in grants. which is much, much larger than you would typically see due to the C streets for all 23 million dollars in funding that will be spending over the next 5 years. And so that we saw that number bump up over the last couple of years the the 6 year Cip has been around the 100 million mark, and because of the infusion of the ss, for a. It's now closer to 120 million, and that grant number bumped way up also due to Ss for a it. It will vary from year to year. So we don't spend at the same rate from year to year, and that's due to the timing of the delivery of projects. There are a number of processes that we have to go through in order to deliver capital projects which might entail obtaining floodplain permits acquiring right away, and easements relocating utilities. And all of those efforts take considerable time before we're actually able to get to the physical construction work.

[19:13] And so that means that there will be some years where we spend more than others, and so the average can fluctuate on the program side. We can anticipate those costs a little bit more evenly, and the average about 9 million per year. So funding is made possible through the transportation sales tax fund that makes about 70% of our program possible. Other funds that come to the Cip entail grant funds gas tax Funds and Development Fund. But the the sales tax is the primary driver of what we do in transportation, and as we've highlighted in the this month's memo as well as last month's memo, we know that point 1 5 of the sales tax is going to sunset in 2029, and that will certainly have an impact on our ability to make enhancements and invest in the system as we look to the future.

[20:13] So the other fund we have is the Transportation Development Fund, which collects fees and taxes related to development and growth around the community. And then those taxes go into projects that are and support responding to that growth and development. And the same is true of the Boulder Junction Fund. There are currently no projects identified in the Boulder Junction Fund, and that's because we've delivered on all the projects in Phase one. It is likely that in the next year or so that there will be some projects that are recommended for investment in phase, 2 portion of Boulder Junction. But that's still a question market to be determined in the future. We also are, taking every opportunity to consider the pursuit of grants to match with our local dollars, and we talked last month about this, that over the the decades the primary funding source for our major projects has been the Denver Regional Council of Governments or Dr. Cog.

[21:15] Federal transportation improvement program. That's the primary mechanism by which Federal funds blow to local agencies. And so we submit applications on a roughly every 3 to 5 year cycle, where we tried to demonstrate the competitive aspects of the projects we would like to invest in, and why they should be considered for funding, and the last couple of rounds we were pretty competitive, and we hope that that will continue to be the case into the future. We also have other grant funding opportunities through cdos, such as hsip tap and see it for us to school. And we've also, I've been pursuing other Federal opportunities, we pursued a protect grant and partnership with cdots to replace the Co. 7 or wrap the whole bridges over Boulder Creek last year. That was not funded. Fortunately we did. Don't we know that the say streets for all Grant was funded.

[22:11] and as our ability to take on New Grant pursuits opens will continue to keep our eyes open for those Federal Grant opportunities and those cycles here over the next couple of years. So working against us, of course, is the reduction of purchasing power, as the cost of construction outpaces the consumer. Price index. We know that. The cost of being able to deliver a square yard of concrete or asphalt has gotten much more costly over the last few years, and this is seen in the Colorado construction cost index that's maintained by CD, so the the numbers have moved down, which is good for us. But they're still up double digits, which is still not great news. So overall. Things have been continuing to move up, and you can see the the trend line, the green trend line of how costs continue to go up in the construction marketplace which, arose the ability of our funds to be able to deliver on the projects and programs that are important to us.

[23:20] So over the last several years we have had our cip divided roughly 50 50 between programs and projects, and you'll see that this year we are showing a slight edge in favor of the projects, and that's because of the funding boost from the Ss. For a grant. If it were for that, then you would see that the programs would make up probably 51% of the overall program. And so now we'll take a dive into how we split that up over the modes. So this is something that we've spent a number of hours talking about in prior years with Tab as we present the cip, we take a sort of

[24:04] a, a, a high, level, qualitative view at the modal investment of each of the projects that are in the cip so that we can see how we're working to make improvements across all the modes of travel around the community. And you can see that. It's fairly, evenly split, and 2025 and going out into 25 and 30, and then to see how that compares. We also have this chart that goes back to 2,005. That shows the variation in year to year, where sometimes you'll have a project that's heavily transit focused, and it might skew the numbers towards transit. Sometimes we're spending more on projects that have a bicycle and pedestrian components, and there will be occasionally years that it'll be for roadway. So, going back to 2,007, you might be wondering why there was a a big bump in roadway spending. That was a year that the city was making significant investment in the southern sections of 28th Street.

[25:09] So it was partly for road, but partly also for for other investments and bringing up the multimodal components of 28th Street at that time. So this. the the numbers that you see and the modal chart here are also depicted on a project by Project Basis on the right side of the table. That was a part of your attachment, a. And so these are the programs that we're going to provide an overview of which are largely focused on sidewalks and pedestrian facilities, multi-use paths. pavement bridges and streetlights and vision 0 mobility enhancements as part of the payment management program. Here is a list of all of the projects that are in the the cip, and we won't be going through each of these line by line. But we're happy to answer any questions you might have later in here. In a moment Lindsay's gonna provide an overview of some of the the more higher profile projects that are in the cip.

[26:20] We also have these projects that are in the Development fund. And we don't currently actually have a specific projects that's funded for the Development Fund. We have development coordination for projects where our cip might be interfacing with a private developer, and we want to make a minor enhancement, and we also have the the Grant match opportunity that is funded by the the Development Fund as well. So key changes in the cip from last year to this year is that we are proposing an increase to the payment management program, mobility enhancements line item.

[27:03] and the last years cip, we had that shown in about $75,000 a year, and we have increased that, and I'll I'll go back to that where you can take a look at it. So we're showing it for 25 at 150,000. Then going to 200,000 and up to 250,02829 so we're showing an increase to that line item funding so that we can do more with the payment management program to make the the vision of the low stress bike network and the vision. 0 action plan come to fruition. We are also showing reduced funding for the tipt line item funding. So I'm gonna move back over that. So you can see that on the top line here that has been reduced to 1 million a year over recent years that number has been around 3 to 4 million, and that is the primary way that we provide local match for our Grant pursuits. So due to a number of

[28:07] factors that are working against us the Transportation fund we needed to take a look at where we could make some reductions. And this is a line item that we are looking to reduce. Most of these other projects are already committed to with. or they into the the capital maintenance condition. And so when you look at where we can post some reductions, the Grant match is is the one. So that is something we wanted to bring to your attention. Of course we've got the addition of the Ss. For a project, and then 2 capital maintenance items, the Sumac Avenue reconstruction, which we talked about last month which includes a cost participation component with the adjacent residents.

[29:01] And then the Folsom Bridge redecking is new. So the bridge deck on Folsom over Boulder Creek is in need of replacement. And so we have identified that to be taking place in 2829 timeframe. If we don't take action on redecking the Folsom Bridge. We will have to replace the entire bridge and 3 to 4 years after that, at a 3 to 4 times cost of what that is, just for the deck. So that is a new item, and that it was a result of the bridge inspections that we've been doing over the last year determine that that action needs to come forward as a part of the cip. All right. I'm gonna hand it over to James to talk about the programs on comprise the majority of the program side of the Cip Ledger. Awesome. Thanks, Garrett. Hi, everybody! I'm James Smith. I'm the pavement manager.

[30:02] I'll be talking about the cip programs just given an overview 1st off we'll talk about the payment management program. So the city established the payment management program for boulders, 300 Mile Street system, which includes inspecting, rating all streets on a 3 year interval to maintain awareness of existing conditions and guide where payment repairs will be made in the future. From spring through fall. We prioritize streets, re or sorry, prioritize streets, receive different types of payment treatments depending on the current condition of the street tree treatments, such as crack seal, rejuvenation, and chip seal are generally used to preserve and extend the life of pavements in good condition, while other treatments, like mill and overlay, and for reconstructions are used to rehabilitate pavements in poor condition. additionally depending on the street. New road striping alignments may be incorporated into Pmp projects, and that's the p and P. Mobility enhancements that we talked about earlier.

[31:08] And also the Pmp. Is receiving supplemental funding from the Ccrs tax for 24 through 26, I think the next slide, Garrett. So these are, I'm sorry my screens a little slow. So these are our sidewalk repair programs or pedestrian facilities. The city of Boulder sidewalk repair program charges specific areas in boulder each year to repair damage sidewalks and install access ramps at intersections. This is our annual sidewalk repair program. In contrast, we have our sidewalk maintenance program also means a miscellaneous sidewalk report repair program. And this program responds to reports of damage, sidewalk or Ada issues throughout the city.

[32:01] and then we also have our pedestrian enhancements which delivers machine sidewalk links in pet crossing treatments. Next slide our multi use path enhancements are focused on the confluence path area and the 2024 specifically on the Belmont multi-use path connecting Boulder Creek to 61st Street and Multi-use Path. Maintenance is focused on maintenance of path payments and pathway bridges. Next slide the bridge asset management this line on this line. Item funds, major capital repairs to transportation infrastructure, primarily bridges due to the several creeks and irrigation ditches that cross the city. There are 300 bridge structures on the transportation network that must be maintained.

[33:02] This funding makes investments in the bridge infrastructure to extend service life to avoid needed to avoid the need for total replacement like Garrett was talking about earlier. With that I'll pass it over to Lindsey. Thanks, James. So I'm Lindsey Mars. one of the project managers in the cipher group. So I'm gonna talk about the cip projects. And so, as Garrett had mentioned earlier transportation cip projects, we receive funding from grant sources. But with these grants there's a required local match which is funded out of the cip fund. And so on average, this is 1 million per year. This is actually a reduced amount due to the reduced transportation fund. The local match is required for all the tip projects that were awarded for the 22 to 25, and then the 24 to 27, and future projects.

[34:03] Also will. The cip fund will need to provide local match for all the safe routes to school and tap grants, as well as all of the other Federal Grant opportunities that Garrett had stepped through earlier. And so I'm gonna quickly do a refresher on some of the transportation cip projects that are proposed for funding. So this is the Baseline Road Project, which is focused on making Baseline road from 30th Street to Foothills Parkway safer, more comfortable, more connected. really, for no matter how you choose to travel along that corridor. And so the project has 2 phases. Phase. One of the project was implemented in 23, and it took advantage of the pavement resurfacing as part of the city's pavement management program, and installed some improvement sooner. By using those city funds. And so in 2024 the city is developing the design for further improvements as part of phase 2. After receiving Federal grant funding from the transportation improvement program or the tip funding.

[35:06] And so phase 2 project will create more changes to the corridor. There'll be additional Bike Lane protection, intersection, and pedestrian crossing improvements, some transit efficiency and safety improvements. such as the 40 Bus Island, and converting some of the phase, one improvements that had been completed, starting in 23 to more permanent features, and so construction of phase 2 is estimated to begin in 2025. The total funding need is 3.9 million, with 3.1 of that being the tip grants. And so the on. Folsom, the corridor study and the preliminary design will find ways to improve protected bicycle facilities, transit stop improvements, pedestrian facilities and intersection enhancements. And so the project will develop and evaluate conceptual transportation, design options to improve multimodal. So think all modes right. Add spikes, transit and vehicle travel along Folsom, and it'll include the preliminary engineering and cost estimates for those transportation improvements.

[36:17] The preliminary engineering will produce plans for facilities for all users of all ages and abilities, and help meet the city's vision. 0 goal of eliminating fatal and serious injury, collisions and improve travel conditions. For once again, all boats, transit pets, bicyclists. The project is designed only with funding of 1.5 million, with 1 million of that in grant funding the Broadway Bat Lanes Project. So this includes design and construction of intersection improvements to provide transit priority at Co. 93 and Broadway, at at Broadway and Table Mesa, and then Broadway and Regent intersections.

[37:02] And so there's a component of providing analysis of converting some of the general purpose. Travel lanes along Broadway between Table Mesa and 18.th So what's called the business access transit or bat lanes. And so that's planned to be done using Lane restriping and signage. and so those intersection improvements will be set in place with the eventual conversion of the outside travelings to the bat lanes and improving the transit reliability along the by, which will improve the transit reliability along the corridor of of Broadway. So construction of the intersections is anticipated to take place in 25, and the funding is 4.6 million, with 3.9 million ingrid. Lindsay, which are what are the intersections you named? I only heard 2. 0, there you go! Yeah. Broadway and table Asia and Broadway and.

[38:01] Okay. thank, you, yeah. I know I kind of stumbled over because I wanna call it 93. But it's Broadway. Everyone knows it as Broadway. So okay, so next is Manhattan safe roads to school. So Colorado safe routes just will awarded the city of Boulder 7.7 707,000. I wish it was 7 million, but 707,000 to improve safe routes to the Manhattan Middle School. And so Staff has worked with the school and the community and develop the conceptual design. And so construction is planned to take place in 25, and the funds are being used toward improved pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, you know, with the goal of increasing safety and providing convenient options for traveling and encouraging just active lifestyles in that neighborhood.

[39:00] And then let's talk about us. 36 multi use path. So C. Dot awarded the city of Boulder 936,000 to improve and extend the multi-use path along us. 36. So this is from 4 Mile Canyon Creek underpath to Jay Road. and so design is expected to begin in 2025 with construction in 2627, and the goal here is to provide better off street connections for cyclists and pedestrians up to the north boulder area. and then, finally, the East Arapaho, CO. 7, final design. So this is from 28th Street to Foothills Parkway will implement better facilities for walking, biking, and transit which would be consistent with the East Arapaho transportation plan. So this is a tip and C dot funded project, and it will take the 15 level designs scheduled to be completed later this year and advance it to final design by the middle of 25.

[40:07] And so C dots currently Co concluding those 15% design effort for the quarter from 28 to the Eastern city limits. And so this project will just continue that work into final design. And so the project funds are 2.9 6 million, with 2.8 of that into C dot grants. and then the recently awarded that SS. 4 a grant that Garrett's been talking about will be used to implement some of these improvements from this design effort. and that's falling out. Alright. So next steps is that we will. We're still offering and hoping we'll be able to get a bike tour scheduled. We will meet again at the August Tab meeting to ask for your formal recommendation of the Cip, which will then go to planning board in September and onto city council and later September and into October as a part of the overall budget approval process.

[41:12] And with that we're happy to answer any questions you might have. I thought Trini's hand first.st Go ahead, train. So I I guess I just want to express that I am incredibly frustrated with the timeframes. Yeah, I know it's not anything that you guys particularly control. But I wish there was a way we could expedite these projects. I mean. for example, the Manhattan Project or the Manhattan School Project that's been on the table for a very, very, very long time. And to understand that construction is only gonna begin in 2025. I mean, I know it's just an example of you know how things that are really clear and evident, and that will save lives. And it's just a very frustrating position to be on this side of the conversation.

[42:07] So I don't know. I don't know if there's anything that we could do to just cut some of the red tape and just get these improvements done sooner rather than later before someone else gets hurt. I mean, I don't know if you guys are familiar with that. Let's, I'll just focus on the Manhattan School project. But there's signage that advises of low visibility. And this is a road that kids need to take to get to the school. So I just when things are that dire and and pressing, why can't we just follow a different protocol to get things done quicker. Is there anything that we could do? Maybe talk to city council, I mean, is there any way to expedite the bureaucratic process.

[43:01] So on every Grant project we have to follow a protocol of the Grant Grand tour to us as the grantee and safe for us. This goal is no different. Cdot is the administrator of the safe routes to school funds, and so it's there's amount of time that goes into pro preparing and coming to agreement on on getting the what's called an intergovernmental agreement, or an iga in place between cdot and the city and then, when we come to agreement on that, and that gets executed, there are a series of requirements that we must follow as as staff to prepare and advance the design. The State requires us to go through a number of clearances. We have to demonstrate that we're not causing any environmental impact that we're not causing any undue impact to adjacent properties. And if we are that we've been fair and balanced, and the way that we've acquired easments and right away for the project.

[44:05] And then we also have to go through and demonstrate that if we are impacting utilities that they are. They've been relocated, or that we have sign off from all the in the utilities. That's a state law, whether it's grant funding or not. We have to demonstrate the level of impact that we have created on the utilities that are present in a corridor. And once you dig deeper than 6 inches that that that State law is triggered. And so these are all clearances we have to get before we can even begin to think about hiring a contractor. and then once we go through hiring a contractor that usually takes 2 to 4 months to go through the solicitation solicitation process. And then the construction. Also, takes several months. So I I wish that we could be faster. As a city organization. We've chosen to orient ourselves to pursuing grants, so that we can do more with the limited dollars we have but the trade off and pursuing those Grant funds means that we have to follow

[45:11] a few extra rules and deal with the frustration of the timelines taking longer. So we could make a decision to Orient, more towards city funded only projects and not pursue grants, so that we can expedite the process and and eliminate some of these phases, but it would also mean that we would do significantly fewer projects. From year to year. And so th those are trade offs that we we could certainly explore. So it's I guess those are all a set of factors that we face routinely. I'll just also say that one of the other factors that constrains us as staff. All of our staff right now are all very, very busy. And it. It's there each each of my project. Managers in the Capital Projects team are probably working on one or 2 more projects than they'd like to right now. And so we are ramping up on this one to to get it moving forward. But it would sure be nice if we had more people if we had more people we'd be able to to get some of these things done. Faster

[46:22] on some cases. On other cases, some of the projects. It doesn't matter how many people you have. You still have to go through that Federal and State oversight process. That was a very complete answer. Thank you, Garrett. Tina. If I could just con like consolidate it. That would. I understood Garrett to say, yeah, we could if we paid for it all ourselves in some cases. and just thinking about what the the projects that Lindsey just ran through. You'll notice, you know, that the total budget was, and then how much of the grant funding there was. And so the the leftover is sort of our local match, like how much of city of boulder money went into it? And it's I don't know. Somewhere around 10% on on most of those ish.

[47:03] Absolutely no way. I'm suggesting we stop asking for grants or applying for grants. I am one of the main proponents to getting more money for the city to be able to complete these projects. It's just overly frustrating to hear that things are happening and that we know how to fix them, and that we have to go through all of this process. And I wish, like what you suggested in your white paper, for example, that there were ways that we could just for certain things we could just say, Okay, well, these are, gonna take priority because these are like on our high impact, network, or whatever I mean, I don't know. It's just I don't know. I have to think about what I'm gonna say, so I can. Ok, I'm. A coherent thought. But thank you, Garrett. I appreciate. Your answer, and no, by no means am I suggesting that we don't ask for grants, or apply for grants. Thank you. Is that is that all you have, Trini for now.

[48:00] For now, yes. Okay. Alright. Mike was next. Yeah. I do see a lot of great projects, the ones you've mentioned and others that are happening. And maybe some of them have been a little slower than I thought they would be, but others are happening that I didn't know about. But my major concern is revenue revenue revenue. And you really went over this. given the fact that sales tax funds, nearly 70% of transportation, and it's been relatively flat for nearly 20 years, while construction costs are up significantly and asphal and concrete went up 24% between 21 and 2021 and 2023. That's huge. This is, this is something that's common throughout the country, and has been identified by strong towns. That sales tax is not really a great basis for funding

[49:01] transportation projects. And ideally we would find a lot of this from the users of our roads. but it's it's hard to see instituting something like a congestion be in boulder at this time, although it's something to keep in mind. I'm interested in 2 things that you mentioned. the highway users tax. I like to hear where that comes from, and how much of that we get, and also the fact that I believe all of our property taxes go to the county. and what what part of that do we get back from the county for for transportation. And and could that be a basis for A better, a better way of funding transportation going forward.

[50:05] So I, am informed enough to speak generally to your questions, Mike, about the funding. So the highway users Trust Fund is Washington, DC. Speak for the gas tax. So that like, that's the when people buy gas at the pump. There's a portion of that revenue that goes to the Feds, and then flows to the State and then down to the local agencies. And there's a formula for each each local agency as to how much they get. So we could work with our financial analyst, Karen Steiner to to to let you know how much we get from the gas tax each year. That's also a declining revenue source, because as cars get more fuel efficient. And as more people switch to electric vehicles. That that that is a a fund that we shouldn't be relying much on for the future. You are correct that the transportation department gets 0 funding from property tax that's incredibly frustrating for residents when they have a concerns about the condition of their street or the lack of a bike lane on their street, and say, I pay so much on property tax. Why don't we have a bike lane here? And we let them know that actually none of your property tax goes to funding, transportation, improvements or maintenance

[51:21] and the city of Boulder. The General Fund does get some measure of property tax. I don't know how much. That's also something else that we could follow up and and get you some information as to how much goes at the general fund. And 2018 and 2019, there was a transportation funding group. We're a working group that was working on a series of recommendations. And Tila, I think you might have been either a part of or affiliated with that effort that. I was on tab at the time, but it was Johnny Dros deck, and Mark Mcintyre. Okay, thank you. And so that working group was had developed a set of funding recommendations that as you're referencing is more directly connected to the the users of the system, or a little bit more sustainable. I I will just editorialize here. I I've always thought it interesting that if I decided to go pack, buy package of socks at target and boulder, that means that the transportation fund went up. And what does socks have to do with?

[52:24] But that's the way the system's been set up, and it would be like utilities when I turn on the water faucet. I'm paying for it, and there's a direct connection to to the use, right? It would be nice to be able to have a more of a direct connection to users of the system, and the way we fund it. So we could also go back and pull out some of the recommendations from that working group effort that you could become familiar with. No, I'll just add on to everything, Garrett said. Spot on the you know city council is really working with the city right now on a city wide financial strategy, because.

[53:02] you know, the decline and sales tax over time is really an issue that is affecting all of the city family, all the city departments, not just our department. So in addition to the other factors that Garrett covered like the declining purchasing power you know, we're just now seeing that we're in a more constrained fiscal environment. But it really is a city wide conversation at this time, and I'd encourage you to take a peek at at the recent council meeting, where they talked about the city's financial situation and I think there will be more conversation to come this year around the city. Wide financial strategy. Thinking. And I think if I could just add on one more, one more thing that I learned during that process was that taxes are hard and fees are easy er and so if you if you have like a great, you know, 3 Am. Thought, and it's more so for us is like adding on a fee to registering your vehicle in Boulder County, or adding on a fee to your utility bill, or something that's an easier thing. For the city to implement, because taxes involve sort of state governmental authority, and

[54:15] it gets hairier. So I invite you to to spend your best efforts. Do something other than a bake sale. But it is What we're confronting now is a problem that we've seen coming for a little bit. and it it's sort of the the forecasts didn't even take Covid into account, and that's actually made things. And and Covid related. Inflation has really exacerbated some of the problems we were expecting to see Darcy go ahead. Thank you. Yeah. I just wanted to build on Trinny's comment about the urgency of certain projects. And I wanted to ask about the status of

[55:00] the, you know, and we used to have something called the transportation Improvements lab or something, you know. Where we would try things out, you know, and I know that that was controversial in places. But I'm wondering what temporary improvements are still possible and feasible in those places where we know the work needs to get done quickly. So some kind of I don't, you know. Tactical urbanism is the phrase that comes to mind. But you know some kind of temporary project that would be cheap and easy to do. That doesn't that you're not constrained by all of the regulations around the Grants to just get done so that something gets into the streets or into the places around the schools where there's real urgency for those projects, and just wondering about your your thoughts, about the possibility of that kind of work. Garrett, do you want to speak to that. It. So yeah, I I guess point to some recent examples where we've done that with the vision 0 innovation program. You've seen those types of treatments around the community, like on Quince or on on Glenwood, and so and then right there in front of community cycles building as well. 26 in spruce. We have.

[56:16] That's true. Yeah, I have seen some of those little like chicken and things. Yeah. So I I see that you're doing that. Is it possible to do more of that. So the interesting thing is that on the corridors where we have the majority of our problems, the can right, the core arterial network. The majority of those corridors. our state roadways and the State will not let us do those sort of pop up treatments on their roads. They want a more permanent solution that the the locations where we do have control streets like 30th and Folsom. there is probably some philosophical debate as to the the value. and the utility of having a temporary versus a permanent and I I guess at this point I'll hand it over to to Valerie to provide a little of of the thoughts about where we're worth what we're thinking about the the utility of doing a short term versus a longer term. Improvement on those corridors.

[57:18] Yeah, I mean, I think, echoing what Garrett just just described. You know, our materials are really where because of the speeds and the volumes that we're working with. Those more interim treatments aren't always an effective treatment, I think. An example of where more interim style treatments like our vision 0 innovation program. Implemented a couple of years back. A good example of that would be you know, a project that we're collaborating on with our Parks and recreation department. So they are working on a new design, you know, for Violet Park for some some time. And I think it will now have a new name called Primos Park and they actually sought a safe routes to Parks Grant to do kind of a walkability assessment for that area.

[58:08] And you know, that's really the 1st step towards identifying what the needs are. And even though that project's not funded for transportation, infrastructure, and improvements they are going to be building. From the learnings of that grant funded effort to then pursue other you know, grant opportunities for either safe routes to school or safe routes to parks through. You know, the state programs. So that's an example of even though it's you know, step by step. It is a place where they may be able to. You know, Garner funds through those safe routes to parks and safe routes to school programs to do interim treatments, test out their efficacy. And then, you know, after that, apply for more capital dollars for permanent improvements through those those programs. So it is a tool in our toolbox. Certainly. But I think on arterials we're really looking at. You know, more capital intensive improvements to address the the needs that those unique needs that those quarters have.

[59:10] Thanks. i i i understand that I'm just thinking of like the Manhattan project as well like, that's not on a you know. Really, Major. really. City. It's a city road. Yeah. I mean, it would be possible to do something there to mitigate the current issues that are going to be addressed by a future, by future funded projects. Yeah, I mean, i i i think these are really great ideas really appreciate you raising this topic. You know, at this time we? We just don't have, you know, funding appropriated for the cost to design and install those treatments in such a way. We've really shifted our budget from programs like that to the can to build out projects like baseline.

[60:02] like Iris. You know. Eventually, other corridors. That you know, may take a phased approach, just like we did with baseline. So you know, I think baseline is a great example where it is an arterial, and we did do. You know, really interim treatments? As part of that initial implementation with some of our local dollars? To test out how how the operations are so, an example would be the protected intersection at Mohawk and Baseline. That's where we use some interim treatments to see how it works. Get some improvements on the ground. Now, while we waited for those capital dollars to become available through Dr. Cocktip. So there are times where it is appropriate to use interim materials. I think that's a really recent tangible example where we are already doing that. But noted. You know, you're you're you're interested in seeing more of these types of treatments where it's possible. So, Valerie building on that I I just would, was at wondering. So what happens to these temporary things once you stop using them, and they become permanent like. Are you talking about like the flex posts and all those things that were there? Could we move those around, I mean, do they have to be new. Is there any way to like upcycle these materials and use them for other

[61:20] places that we need them at. Yeah, you know. Often they do experience some wear and tear, so they're not always feasible to relocate. You know, sometimes the the structures that bolt them into the roadbed. Wear out over time things like that. So or the epoxy the glue you know they they get deemed up a lot which means they're doing their job as as treatment. So it is possible. You know, that's something that we're really interested in with our new tall curve treatment that's out there on baseline with the phase one project. you know, if there's stretches where we end up installing other treatments during the phase. 2 effort. That means we may have some leftover, tall curbs that could be employed in another condition. So that's always something we're thinking about with our material selection.

[62:12] Yeah. thank you. Ella. Yeah, thank you. Any other questions. Tab. Okay, I I just wanted to. I'm I'm not sure if my perception is correct. But Garrett. Thanks for highlighting how the local match line item is getting fairly dramatically reduced. from from sort of levels that have been consistent over the last several years. because it looked like a a number of the projects the ones that Lindsey went through are, you know, getting these like ideas to design initial design, conceptual design, final design. And that is, you know, always an essential hurdle for for then going and getting grant money to to implement them to build these things.

[63:08] But I'm I'm concerned that we are setting ourselves up for another round of sort of public appropriate about setting expectations too high like promising that we're gonna change Xyz, because we're spending money now to develop, you know, fancy designs. And like 30th Street like, you know, they did the they did the community working group, I forget what it was called, but that was before I was on taps. That was a hell of a long time ago, and now we're putting down what they envision. And and we might we might be seeing another sort of cycle of this of sort of planning and aspiration, and a lot of intensive and high quality work about thinking about what we want. But then, setting ourselves up to have to disappoint the community and say, sorry we we can't afford this.

[64:01] What kind of messaging would be appropriate or helpful to sort of set the stage for public expectations. Looking at, you know, the next 4 or 5 years of funding, because we're we're really getting to that rock and hard place that we saw coming. Right. So it it. We've been having these conversations amongst ourselves internally. But what it? What it means for the future. I I'll just be really blunt and say, if we were 3 years in the future I don't know that we would have had the local match to be competitive for a safe streets for all grant. so and because the the local matches is not insignificant, it's 5 million dollars right? And if we that that represents our next 6 years, right now of local match.

[65:02] Right. And so that, what what a missed opportunity if we we couldn't get 23 million because we couldn't come up with the 5 right, and though that's a a an anomaly. The next time we get a grant of that size I doubt any of us will be on a on a zoom call. But the there's still lots of these more regular frequent opportunities through Dr. Cog, tip like that's making the the the baseline for phase 2 possible and is making the 30th street project that's now under construction. Possible. Those are the types of projects where we need to. We put in one to 2 million and then we can typically get 2 to 5 out of the local match that we can really get a lot of value and deliver on those commitments at a realistic level. But make a big difference to a corridor. I'm I'm worried that we'll we'll go from a place right right now. We've got multiple corridors that are about to be or currently are, under construction that will go to a place where we're gonna

[66:08] be doing one or 2 projects a year. And that's it. That's that's all we'll be able to do in terms of the the grant projects you asked for a nice, concise elevator pitch message. I didn't Didn't no. Package it up for you nicely. But that's kind of the the, you know. That's the reality we're looking at. If something doesn't change. Okay, so so what needs to change? We need more more money, dollars. We do? And is this a matter of allocation in the budget? Is this a matter of different revenue stream? Is it both? Is it? What! What flavor of fairy godmother are we looking for here? And how can Tab help. So it'd be great to have Natalie here with us, so that we could hear her view, and I'm sure Valerie's got some thoughts about that. But

[67:03] I I she might kick me under the table for saying this, if she were sitting next to me, but I think we should reset, revive that that we're working group and and start putting those recommendations back out there for for steps we can be taking to to bolster sustainable transportation revenue. Yeah, I I actually had a very long and good conversation with Natalie last week about this. So which I'm very happy for, because now now I understand this a little bit better. Valerie, if you have any thoughts that's great. I don't think, Natalie I mean she she and I recall the work that had gone on that working group 2018 2019, is that when it was and those recommendations just kind of went onto a shelf and died somewhere, and I don't know why or where. I mean, I I think that there was some serious thinking about it, and some serious thinking about how politically and practically feasible any of those ideas were.

[68:00] And they all just seem like too too big a lift at the time. You know, I think I can speak to that. We. you know, as a department. I you know, I think what Garrett's mentioning is really important is that? And and I think you said it to Taylor tonight is that this is an an issue that's been known for some time. It's not a new issue. It's not like any one thing. Cause this issue. It's really a constellation of factors. And that working group did come to a place of you know, really looking at a range of of different revenue sources and what would be involved in them, and came up with some recommendations on what might be the best to pursue moving forward, and I think they had a meeting at council in February of 2020, so we can all remember what was happening around that or right immediately after that time. Then. Right. And so. you know, we went into a different mode. As a city, as a society, and that work is still viable, and, you know, really could be revisited as Garrett mentioned. There's a fantastic body of work. That you know. I think Chris Hagland, from our department along with some other folks led during that time. So that's where I think the conversation can continue. Of course, you know, we'd really want to.

[69:23] You know, have a broader discussion here at Tab especially. You know our directors present. So I'll I'll leave it that. But I will just mention that there were viable ideas that came out of that process, that we could really retrace those steps, and and continue a conversation. And you know, I I mentioned the city wide financial strategy earlier. And that's really important, because anything we do in the context of transportation funding has to be within the context of the citywide financial condition. And so you know, that's something where? You know, trying to channel Natalie, at the moment that you know, Tab would really want to think about how you have that conversation? As an advisory group with council. Because that is a matter that they, you know, elevated is one of their top priorities. From this previous council retreat. And that's, you know. A great opportunity for Tab to to pitch in some thoughts.

[70:26] Terrific. Thank you, Trini. I see your hand up again. Yeah. So I just wanted to share you with you guys something that might, you know, give us some hope. This is something at a Federal level. And we advocated for it twice when we went to DC. It's the Sarah Langen Camp Act, and this specifically would remove the necessity of the match for Federal funding. so it would allocate funds from other places and cities wouldn't have to match in order to get the grant?

[71:01] So for for what? Kind, of what kind of projects. Transportation, look. In general. Uhhuh. Look! It's called the Sarah Langen Camp. Active transportation. I saw your link in the chat. Thank you. Yeah. So if you can look into it, and that that's something that we advocated for through the bike summit. And right now with the families that we went to in DC, so like a little hopefully, I mean, I know it's getting a lot of traction. So who knows. Great. Thank you. Anything else from Tab on this. You know I'll if it's okay, Tila, I'll just. That's nice. Underscore all the great work that Garrett and his team did this year, working on the draft. Cip you know, again, we'll be bringing that to you in August. You know, for a vote of recommendation to council. But I just want to lift up that while we have some of these tough choices, and in a more constrained fiscal environment to contend with, staff are being super creative in how we make the most of the dollars that we do have. You know, I think.

[72:14] I want to. Just highlight. There was a slide that Garrett presented where he he talked about some of the big changes this year, and and that's where a lot of thought went into what can we do to continue pursuing the enhancements to our system while we really focus on core maintenance. Which, you know, has traditionally been you know, a place where we haven't been fully funded. And so we're always balancing that but I just want to. Yeah, just commend staff on being really creative this year. With, you know, this new information and and really trying to make sure that we're hitting our priorities as a department, our vision our shared goals here. So that's that's a hopefully, a helpful context for what you heard tonight.

[73:00] Thank you, Mallory, appreciate that. Alright to be revisited. Garrett, you mentioned the cip bike tour? So this is a a thing we do every year. Where we write around you pick a little root. It's I don't know. I don't know. It's wildly popular, but I always like it. And we kind of visit either future cip sites or recent ones that have been done. You do a great job. How are we gonna schedule that. I'm gonna lean on Meredith to help us with that one. Okay. Okay. I saw it. That's yeah. Is it? 2 thumbs up? She's accepted the responsibility. Excellent! Yes, Trini. Can we give some thought on how Jen could join us. Yes, so I talked to Natalie about that a bit as well. I was hoping to hear back from her before this this meeting, but I haven't yet, and so I, Jen, I will reach out to you directly. To talk about what Natalie and I discussed, and I'll see if I if I hear back from her but we have. We have several thoughts. And so I was just gonna

[74:11] do that directly with with Jen. Thank you, Trina, for raising that. Yep. Thank you. Okay. Seeing nothing else at the moment. Thank you, Garrett. Thank you, Lindsay. Thank you, James. Let us move on now to agenda. Item 7. The Us. 36 north foothills, highway bikeway visibility, study. Yeah, and I'll just do a quick introduction tonight. We just wanna welcome Alexandra Phillips from Boulder County. Who's the project manager for this effort for the county. Daniel Sheeter on our staff, will be giving a quick overview and introduction before we launch into the meat of the the presentation tonight. But, I'll hand it over to Daniel. Where's the cook?

[75:01] There was one. Valerie, and I think I might need different settings. Things, to. Screen share. Oh, there goes great! Thank you. No, there's a sprite downstairs. If you're interested. Okay, is that coming through for everybody. We'll have that. Then. Yes, it's looking good. Alright great! Well, thanks, Valerie, and good evening, Tab members. My name is Daniel Sheeter, Principal Transportation Planner and the Transportation and Mobility Department. I've been a member of the Interdepartmental Steering Committee for the Northfoot Hills bikeway feasibility study over the past year, plus. And tonight I'm excited to share information with you, with help from Alexander on an upcoming milestone for the project. as well as seek tab support for the department, to continue collaborating with the county on the next phase. So with that, I'd like to introduce Alexandra, and, as Alary said, she is the Boulder County Project manager for the project to share some background, and the preliminary findings from the feasibility study. She was last at Tab at the February 12th meeting earlier this year, where she gave an overview of the project and preview of the engagement plan. The that occurred and the engagement that occurred in the spring of this year. So with that I'll turn it over to Alexandra.

[76:11] Thanks, Daniel, and thanks for all your work on this project. We've the steering committee is met many times, so we can go to the next slide. I will talk about the reasons for the study. And of course, we start just the way the tab meeting started with crashes. That 30% of all the severe and fatal break crashes in the unincorporated county. This is not city crashes happened between J and 66 on us. 36 are also known as North foothills. So that's a big reason for this feasibility. Study next slide. And in the county's master plan that was adopted in 2,019. There was recommended a separated bike way.

[77:03] The community survey that went before the adoption of the Master plan also pointed to the need for a separated bike way, plus a a lot of public comment, did, too. And then we also applied for a Federal Grant, as you were talking about earlier, we need the Federal grants for the the large chunks of money to do the feasibility study next slide. Oh, and before I go on please do I? I think we have time for QA. At the end. But please do interject this. Some of you are new, some of you know. Quite a bit about the project. Okay, So yeah. Next slide. Thanks. So one of the things we wanted to do was, we knew. We know, that there are a lot of cyclists already on us. 36. Most of those cyclists are what we call the strong and fearless. and we wanted to be able to open up a separated bike way accommodates all types of cyclists.

[78:01] So that's what we were looking for, and that's more visioned in the the center photo of a separated bike bike way. So, Alex, just since you added invited us to jump in. when you're when you're when you're saying on us 36 we're talking about only this portion of us. 36 north of Boulder, between boulder and lions. Yes, thank you for for clarifying. So basically, the this study extends, start just at just north of or yeah, north of Broadway in the city of Boulder, and go to the intersection of the North foothills. Dash us 36 and Ca Colorado, 66, which is the road to lions. That's the extent of the study. And that's 1 thing. There's always things you can look at more and more and more. But you have to focus on getting the core done, and the the main stem of the bikeway is what I what I'll be talking about in future study and future slides.

[79:00] So yeah, you can move to the next slide. Thanks. So with what I already said. So we wanted to. Have a hard service bike way that was plowed in the winter, maintain year round. Want to locate it as much as we can in the seat out right of way sometimes that right away is quite wide, sometimes it's not. It is not an even right of way up and down the corridor. It's more like like this up and down the corridor. And we also needed to separate the bike way from the road. And there's 2 ways to get that separation by actual separating it out by 20 feet or more, if possible, or by putting in barriers, and I'll I'll show what that means in a minute. Next slide. So the sur. The study was looking at the survey of the right of way. We need to collect that there was actually no on the ground survey of how big that right of way actually was. Some of the environmental information

[80:01] to come up with the conceptual alignment. The study will also have a cost estimate, and I must say that right now we're in a kind of a funny moment of time where the study is going to be completed in July 2024. The 1st draft of that study was just released to the steering committee hours ago. So we're kind of like we've got the draft. But the steering committee folks have to make sure it's all presented correctly, and and each of their jurisdictions have everything is correct before it can go more to the public, but that will be happening very soon. And then again, the funding and I want to touch on that. We did get very important local match from the city of Boulder in 2 ways we got it. Ashley.

[81:00] is this, let me city of boulder, open space and mountain parks. Oh, that's right. Okay. So we got it from. Sorry about that. Osmp, and also Boulder County parks and open space, even though they're within Boulder County. They also they're gave some of their budget for this study. We also got a very generous donation from cyclos for community the $30,000 donation which covered some of the inflation costs that we were not counting on, and also allowed us to go a little bit more in depth than we thought we could with the initial funding, which is very great next slide. So here's the steering committee I keep mentioning. Daniel is the main representative from transportation and mobility in the city. so we met 9 or 10 times we have one more meeting coming up

[82:02] in about a week. There has been several meetings, as Daniel mentioned. I have rep I presented at tab in February also presented or there was. It was on the Osmp board of trustees agenda. In February we made other meetings, but we have 2 more coming up. One is with a Osmp board. The map, the Board of Trustees on June 12, th and then finally to the Board of County Commissioners for hearing to adopt the or or to approve or not approve the study next slide. So with all of that, looking at the environmental factors. the right of way. the environmental resources we're trying to avoid. We basically came up that the vast majority of the alignment will be on the East Side, and when I say alignment, what I mean by that is this is probably where the bikeway is going to go, but it could shift this way or that way by a little bit, but we're we're getting closer and closer as we narrow in.

[83:15] We do have the I call them the blue bubbles where future analysis is required. One of them is on the South End. I'll be talking about that a bit more. They're also just bring in more. It's not that they're not important. It's that they're so complicated that we needed all the information that we're gathering the feasibility study. And we need more time to talk about those blue bubbles. Alex, are these segments? Are these like separately funded projects? What's the significance of the segments. So origin. basically, in case we want to be able to break it up for funding purposes and move forward with different segments. We had also looked at, possibly asking the public which segments they wanted built first, st we ended up, not including that particular question in our

[84:13] public engagement, which was a remote public meeting and a in person public meeting and a survey which is outlined in your memo, because you realized that most of the crashes are in one and 2, the highest volume of traffic is in one and 2, the narrowest shoulder is in one. so it's really Not a so it was obvious which which segments kind of we're the most immediate top of mind. But there's also each segment kind of has its own issues. So it just made sense to break it up that way next slide. So when I talked a little bit about separation, this kind of breaks it down

[85:04] 2. So the top has not only this 20 feet minimum separation we looked at having a 30 feet separation, which sometimes we can do, but sometimes we can't because of right away. So we're going for at least 20 feet. But we're also. We don't have a lot of that undulating topography, Major, steep up and down hills. If you note from the side of the road that you can see, so the ideal is that top where we can separate it that way with the 12 foot bike way. This 2 photo. The 2 drawings on the bottom show one where there's no. that we don't have that 20 feet at all. but we are able to separate it with a barrier with a physical barrier. There's other places where we might have that 20 feet, but because of the really challenging topography out there which you may not even notice as you're zooming by in a car. But if

[86:00] on a bike, or, as you're just really aware of it, you can see it that we even sometimes, when we do have that physical separation of the 20 feet. We still do need retaining walls and barriers which adds to the cost of the project next slide. So here's the kind of ideal. And one way of seeing this is the photo on the right is actually the Us. 36 bike way, which is confusing because it's also called us 36. But this is the road to Denver. Excuse me, so that has that 20 foot separation next slide. and here is again us 36 without that 20 foot separation, but with a barrier. So that gives you an idea of what you're looking at. We wouldn't change the shoulder of the road itself. and there are times we would need to put in railings on

[87:00] just to for protection from the cyclists from the slope. Thank you. Thank you for that little circle of it. Yes, next slide and we did do an online survey as part of the public outreach more information on that is outlined in the memo, but I did want to point out that those that ride us 36, now 75 would ride the bike way if it was built? That was a big question people had, because those strong and fearless cyclists that like to ride, and big groups, or whatever would they actually use the bikeway, and the answer is for a large part, yes. and those that don't ride us. 36. Now would they ride the bike way if it were built, and 95 said, yes. next slide. So next steps. and we are actively pursuing funding to advance this project, and we're looking at many different sources of funding. I think your earlier discussion reflected on

[88:08] all those different sources which is mostly true with the county as well. that we're we're looking at Federal grants. We're looking at our own transportation sales, tax money. We're looking at many different sources, but nothing has been directly identified at this point. In the next phases. We'll be looking at a more detailed topographic survey, collecting more information that will allow us to really pinpoint where the alignments going to be. and the last bullet point. There is a lot more coordination with the steering committee for connectivity and the south end of the project, which is one of those blue bubbles. That is kind of the most complicated. And that's why I move the next slide. If you could move to that. And here is what we call the South End. You see Broadway there in the Dakota Ridge neighborhood?

[89:06] We've identified several different alternatives. Alternative 2, which is the purple is actually, doesn't use much Osmp land at all, is it? Okay? If I say, Osmp, open space and mountain parks within the city of Boulder and then there's different alternatives. One alternative, one, which is that teal color would use and upgrade the existing underpass. But then cut right through Osmp land. Alternative. One. A would be essentially the same route, but build a new underpass. And then alternative 3. A. Would be a very large underpass underneath us 36, and there would be a lot to work out there, because there's quite a bit of private land and not quite enough room to squeeze it in there, but we'd have to look at that

[90:02] on on how that would all fit. So one of the most important parts of the next phase of this project is to be looking at all the blue bubbles, including this one, as like all the blue bubbles, the areas where future analysis is required next slide. Oh, then, here's the big one. So the funding. So there's a lot to funding. So there's the actual constructing of the bikeway, the actual build, the bikeway pour the concrete, pour the walls. and the big graph compares how these look how the price the 51 million dollars for North Foot Hills bikeway compares to other projects, and why it's so expensive. The and several of you probably are aware of the 119 bike way which is starting construction this fall. The actual, just construction cost is just a little bit cheaper, but it was a lot simpler topography, a lot simpler, even though there are go. There is going to be a bunch of underpasses and one over pass, but the topography made it simpler.

[91:16] So those all that comparison is just the actual construction cost. But there's so much else that needs to be built into that cost. The risk reserve, the cost, escal escalation otherwise known as inflation and other things, and administrative costs, and all that. The total cost of the bike way is estimated to be 91 million, which sounds gigantic, and it is. But I was hoping that this graph could show it a little more in perspective. Of what that cost looks like

[92:01] next slide before I hand this back over to Daniel. Is there any other questions any or do? Or maybe I should wait till Daniel does his slides, and then I'll take questions. Well we can. The 1st question is, are there questions on on the information shared? And and these preliminary findings from the feasibility study that we're sharing tonight so we can start there. Okay. And then we do per the memo. We, the staff recommendation is for a a motion from Tab tonight to continue support for the project and for staff to continue collaborating with the county on on next steps which are still timeline of which are to be determined, but that that is also what we're seeking tonight. I'm I'm toggling through my screens, and I don't see any hands up. You can put your actual hand up if you have a have a question. I've been working with Alex for a little bit on this, so I'm really up to speak. But

[93:05] It looks like no questions at this time. Oh, Mike, just unmuted. Jen raised your hand. And Jen raised her hand. There you go! Thank you. Hi, Jen! I just wanted to make sure I understand everything right? So you have this plan. It's gonna cut 91 million. But finding acknowledging good. Yes, if you're asking. Yes, there is no funding yet, and that's kind of in some ways the whole process works where we really can't apply for the Grants until we're finished with this feasibility study, and we are getting to the point where we're finished with this. But we're also meeting internally with staff and with our Board of County Commissioners.

[94:00] To identify, to see if we can identify other funding. But we're needing this feasibility study to give us the the ballpark cost of things before we could start applying. So yeah, transportation projects do take time. How long do you expect it to take before you ready to apply for funding. Hopefully. Not very long. We're hoping that we can start applying for funding quite soon. We just don't know exactly the process. We will know more. after the august board of County Commissioners hearing, and even before that. So it's not like once this study is done that we're just setting it aside. We're very much actively looking at next steps. So, Dr. Why, you're already asking for approval with the funding.

[95:01] Okay, thank you. I understand. Now. Okay. For the questions. So, Alex, when this goes to the county commissioners, what will you be asking them for? To adopt the report. Okay. And talk to them about prioritization and funding they might have some edits the way, this is working right now is, I just mentioned that this report just came out today for the steering committees. So. Draft. Daniel, and those folks can make edits on it. Once those edits are incorporated, we'll be able to share it more widely, and including to the Board of County Commissioners, and a tab for and to the pub, the general public for other other questions. But one of the big things is for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt the study and to

[96:04] figure out to give us some guidance on funding. Okay. Are you anticipating this will be a difficult conversation. Would it be something useful to have for for for tab or other groups to encourage public participation. Or is this not really where we're at at this stage. I the Board of County Commissioners puts a lot of weight on public engagement. So I I think they always want to hear from the public, and I'm not just saying that because they do really emphasize that they want to know if Tab supported, if the general public supports it? The difficult conversation is. where is the money coming from? Yes, yeah. Yes. But yeah, public. Input to the board accounting Commissioners is always welcome and and much needed to say, what's a priority

[97:03] Thank you. Okay. So I suppose. Oh, Hi, Trini! There you go. Super. Quick, Alex, would this not fall into the safe streets for all grants? Because there's a new window that just opened, and I know there's a lot of money that's been left behind there. Yes, and I actually can't speak to that directly. I know we looked at that one. And this project specifically doesn't fit within their paramet parameters, and I'm sorry I can't say why I can get you that information later. But we're always looking at where possible funding could come from. Actually, as I'm saying, that I might be wrong, let me get back to you on that. One other thing that I didn't even mention is that alongside our project. The parks and open space within Boulder County is also looking at a project for a wildlife crossing.

[98:00] And there's so we're talking to see it out about that. We're talking about getting on Cdot's 10 Year Plan, which helps with funding, but also where we can pair these projects together to help with funding where that would make the most sense. So we're we're really looking at it from them very different viewpoints. And let me get back to you on the safe routes to school, cause I know that we look closely at that. Grant. I mean. We're all. Yeah. To go to school, sleep this quarter. He's called for school. He might go to school. Group. And to. That's. That's for all. Yeah. thank you. Alex. Okay, looks like that's maybe all the questions on the presentation. And so now, I think, would be an appropriate time to look at the the the motion language. Staff is requesting the tab. Make a motion tonight in support of

[99:04] the Us. The Northfield hills us 36 bikeway in general and for the Department to continue collaborating with Boulder County on the next phase of the project. so I would I I will. Yes, go ahead, Dan. Kind of giving an overview on that I just want to add, which I think we we didn't mention in detail. In the presentation, which is the open space board of trustees, mountain parks. So board of trustees will be meeting on Wednesday night, and they will be considering a very similar. Yeah, on the evening of the 12, th and they'll be considering a very similar motion there. The board will be so we're kind of sharing similar sets of information to both boards and and kind of seeking, working with with Marnie and Osmp. To guide that that item to the Board of trustees. So. And ken I'm looking again at our packet for this evening, and I don't see a memo on this, and the only reason I'm looking is to see if there's any suggested motion language, but is what's on the screen right now, sort of where where we're at for that.

[100:12] Yeah. Go ahead. Oh, there, there! Yeah, there was a memo, and there, there's a box with specific language, but it does mirror. What's on the screen? Okay, thank you. So I'm I'm like, literally looking. Now, I'm like, why, where did that go? I'm looking on this on the city of boulder website. And I do remember that there was a separate email of a new. But no, that was just presentation. If. We can confirm. What's loaded to the the city's website? But Darcy. Oh, there it is! I see it! There it is! So bear. Okay, I would like to open up discussion now among tab members about our our feelings. 1 1 thing that saved a bunch of time in the past is just to basically without actually voting. Take a straw poll among tab members about how how you're feeling and so just, you know, show thumbs up, thumbs down, thumbs sideways. I need some discussion, can I? Can? I just see some thumbs to see where we're starting from?

[101:19] I see. Okay. Jen has a thumbs down. Everybody's got else. Got a thumbs up, Jen. I would love to hear your perspective. Sorry new computer. I'm every day. Worries Hi. Good question what the amount of money every year would spending it there. I feel like we are so quick to always throw money towards cycling, and I wonder if maybe there's something else we should look into like. Maybe just.

[102:03] you know, more money should go to repaving sidewalks. I went to town the other day, and Borger and I would like apologize. I'd walk conditions. And I'm like, why are we not worried about that? And we're more concerned about biking? Didn't. Can I say something to to to Jen. Yeah. This is a multi use path. It's not only for cyclists, this is for all road users, and. Oh, gosh! So I just wanted to make sure. Doing what that makes sense. Yeah, cause, I kept saying, bike way. And I, what I mean by that is, it's built manage, or designed for bicycles and certain speeds, but it will definitely be open to pedestrians, to people walking, wheeling wheelchairs, that kind of to those uses as well.

[103:03] By the way, why are we not fixing current problems instead of like creating new solutions for new things? So, Alex, did you have a a slide at the very beginning about sort of crash rates and and deaths on this road? This is. Yeah, let's. This agenda sort of contextualize it. My understanding is that this section of road is like, is it the worst one in Colorado for vulnerable road users. That makes more shank. Thank you for pointing that dog. One thing that I I really fail to do because I'm so. there's certain. Yeah. Certain tab members I addressed before on this, but I'm with the county, and this is a county project on outside of, and it's called Unincorporated County. And there's a it's people that have lived in the city for their entire lot in in the county. See, I just did it make have trouble differentiating between what the city of Boulder can focus on, and what the county, the unincorporated county does, and it makes it even more complicated because

[104:14] city land is sometimes outside what you think of as the as this as city of Boulder. So this is a county projects on other roads, so we can't really be looking at like, let's say. city sidewalks. Hey? Thank you for the explanation again. I'm new, but I don't know the history, so I appreciate you, telling that to me. And then the other thing I want to add, Jen just. It's very closely related to our conversations on the cip. But projects of this size, complexity, and cost. They they don't. They will not happen without grant funds matching grants from the State, from the Federal Government.

[105:00] And so we're talking about a 91 million dollar cost. But we're not saying that the county of Boulder is gonna spend 91 million dollars. That's almost certainly not going to happen. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, a lot of that will have to be grant funding with local match. Bright. and because because you know, a good number somewhere around a 3rd of the respondents who are interested in this bike way. We're city of Boulder residents. There was something on the slides earlier. You have a. So you know it. We it is. It is a place that that boulder residents who are braver than I am, tend to ride. and there is an impact. And there's an ongoing impact, literally and figuratively. to cyclists. And we also know that the more cyclists that drivers encounter in an area, the more aware that they are of being careful around cyclists. And so it's kind of a a a loop. It's it's it's a feedback loop.

[106:09] where, if you can get the people who are too afraid to bike there, block their role there. Actually, out there, drivers become more aware of their role in a in a bigger ecosystem, I suppose? Where they have to be cognizant of users in different modes, and for for that reason alone is, is for me a a very compelling reason to support efforts like this. Alright. Thank you. Yeah. So our straw poll was, you know, for for kind of in favor. I'm wondering if other tab members wanna kind of speak to their their their support. Darcy, go ahead, please. Yeah, I do think this is a really significant and important project, for the reasons that you stated, Tila, that it's not only important to make the infrastructure safer for those pelotons of cyclists that go out in big groups, and, you know, take really big, long rides. It's important to for the purpose of getting more people

[107:11] comfortable with the idea of making those connections to all the trails in the in that area. North boulder. You know, having the the opportunity to go to lions if they wanna go that far. But there are a lot of other connections. Alexandra's slide with the potential alignments, go Skipped it. There. But th those little pink arrows, I think, are really significant here, because they show where people are going off of 36. So I think that's you know. She mentioned also that segment one and Segment 2 are the, you know, most heavily used by bicyclists, because they're able to, you know, make a lot of connections and and so that also opens up this infrastructure. You know this really significant highway to more people to make more bicycle connections.

[108:02] which is important to our larger goals, of getting people out of cars and giving people more opportunities to to travel in different ways. And so I think it's a really significant project. And I I'm grateful for your work on this Alexandra. And yeah, I think we should support it. I think my only other observation to piggyback on what Darcy just said is that as ebikes are becoming more available both financially and to various you know, physical body types and and abilities. I'm seeing many more older writers than I used to see, and people who Pre, you know, pre used to never consider writing outside of town. The ebay has effectively sort of collapsed the geography. and it has made some of these places more accessible to people who might have been curious about doing a longer bike right before and things like Neva road beautiful like they if you have, and and the same brain road beautiful. But it was kind of too far away for some people before. They had the ability for ebikes and other, you know, assistive

[109:15] like electric motor assistant vehicles that are that would fit and would be suitable on this kind of multi-use path. I think we're only gonna see an explosion of those in coming years. And I think we're smart to be building infrastructure that is appropriate and suitable for teeny, tiny things that are not mini cars and do not belong on a highway but ought to be considered and encouraged as ways for people to get around just to connect with the community, get outside, be a little more active. Get out of their cars. So I'm I'm so pleased we've made Alex. We've made such progress on this. It seemed like, you know, an UN untenable pipe dream a couple of years ago, and see if we see what's really pushing for it, and so to see Boulder County transfer staff a embrace it, work on it. Address it. I am. I'm so, encouraged Mike. I see your hand up.

[110:13] Yeah, I just 1st to say, this is really exciting. And I was confused when I 1st saw this on the agenda, confusing it with 1, 19. Right. And then I realized, Oh, this is a whole new thing, and this would be a great place where I could bike or ebake, which where? I'm too afraid to now. but I yeah. I also missed the part about this being Boulder County versus our board representing the city. So I'm just wondering what would be the ratio of of funding from the the county versus the city. Just run very roughly. I'll take a stab at that. The answer is, I don't know during the last grant we asked the city to put in some sort of matching funds, and I'm sure we will do the same again.

[111:06] Their the amount of matching funds would be a very small amount of the total project and the amount of matching funds that we would ask the city for would be smaller than the matching funds the county would put in. That's all I can say at this point. I'm sure I'll be back at Tab at some other time with more information, as we know it as as it as we find those grants. Thank you. Pinnie, go ahead. I just wanna thank Alex, and and and just echo what everybody has said. You know, someone that was hurt in this general area. And. I am highly appreciative of having a safe way to get around. You know I've always said that if people feel safe they'll ride. People will go out, they'll adventure. But if we don't feel safe

[112:00] it's never gonna happen. So so thank you, I mean, the the poll says, right? 95% of people right? A huge number. So thank you so much, Alex. And everybody that's been working on this. I really appreciate it. And you have my full support. Obviously. Great. Can we get the proposed language back up, please? tab! Do we have any further discussion on whether we would like to support the bikeway and for the department to continue collaborating with Boulder County. No, I don't see any further discussion. Does anyone have any motion language to propose. Oh, you're all new with this. This is so cute. Okay. I'm a we. Just use what's on the screen. Indeed, indeed, that's how it happens. A lot.

[113:03] Let me read it first.st Okay. Yeah. Okay, I will move. Excellent, Mike, you would like him like to make a motion. Let's hear it, Meredith is all ears. I make a motion to support the north foothills Us. 36 bikeway connecting boulder to lions, and for the Department to continue collaborating with Boulder County on the next phase of the project. which will include further analysis and design and the selection of a preferred design alternative. ie. Specific trail alignment with consideration for linkages to the city builders existing byte network. Yes. when Darcy seconds it. Does anyone wish to make an alternate motion for consideration.

[114:01] I think it sounds great. I didn't think so. Let us open discussion on the motion now, now there's a motion before us. I I think it's terrific. I think it's maybe a little more detail than we need. But if county staff thinks that that would be helpful detail to include, I have absolutely no objection to any of it. I have no amendments, and you know suggestions for improvement on the motion language. any further. Does anyone else have any comments on on the motion language in particular. Nope. okay. Well, then, I think that we will move to a vote on the motion before us all in favor. Aye. It's unanimous terrific. Thank you so much. Thank you. Really appreciate your work on this, Alex.

[115:01] And I appreciate all the feedback and going to tab is very helpful. Great can you remind me again for the record? When's the when's the meeting before the County Commissioners on this. August 13, th one to 4. So the daytime meeting. August 13.th Okay, Tab. as we discussed. Well, we'll we'll we'll do our little debrief of the of the Retreat. But that's an opportunity for us to do what we said we were gonna do. Thank you. Thank you. Good night, everybody! Good night. Okay. Now we move to matters. I understand we have some one thing from matters in the staff. Hi, Jean. Thank you. Thank you. Tila. So we'd like to welcome Gene Sanson from transportation and mobility tonight, as well as Carl Giler from our planning and development Services Department. We're so lucky to have Carl here. He is a fantastic partner to our department and all things. You know, connecting transportation and land use. He's an expert in his field. He's awesome to work with. And we're really appreciative of them sticking it out tonight to the 8 o'clock hour. To be here, so I'm gonna hand it over to Jean.

[116:16] Hi, members of Tab, Gene, Sanson, Transportation Mobility Department, our principal transportation planner, and much of the work that I do focuses on policy and regional long range transportation projects, much of which we've been discussing this evening. And I just wanna echo what Valerie said. Thank you, Carl. Carl, is our senior policy advisor with our planning and development services, and is quite knowledgeable on many of the bills that we're going to be sharing with you this evening, so I would ask if Veronica Veronica could please share slides. She's going to be advancing. Those for us. Yes, hold on! Let me pull that up. Well, she's getting that pulled up. I'll just share that. What we're gonna do this evening is just provide you all very high level summary of the transportation and land use related bills that we think would be of interest to the board.

[117:12] It was a very busy season for the legislature. Oh, there we go! Thank you, Veronica. Can we go to presentation mode. Oh, man! As a technical host, I've actually never shared Powerpoint myself. So there you go. Show. There you go! Oh, look at that! Thank you. Okay, so what I was saying is that it was a really busy year for the Legislature. So this year there are about just under a hundred more bills than we're introduced in the State Legislature last year. So there was a lot to track and I would also preface this presentation with, the idea that each of these bills that we're going to be covering are pretty complex. And we are working with the city's chief policy, Advisor Carl Castillo.

[118:01] to understand the details of each as they apply to the city, whether they impact the city city or benefit the city. But knowing that there are many details of these bills to work out, we are going to be coordinating closely with relevant departments and the State over the coming weeks and months via rule, making, knowing that the details of many of these are to be determined. So let's go ahead and jump in, Veronica, if you wouldn't mind advancing to the next slide. Okay, senate Bill 2465. First, st I would just like to acknowledge Trinny for being such a strong advocate for this bill and for lending your face and your story to the importance of passing the mobile electronic devices and motor vehicle driving bill. So what does this bill do? It makes it a primary offense to hold a cell phone in an unsafe manner while driving and that's going to be at the discretion of law enforcement. And there are certain exemptions

[119:03] for what unsafe beings. So those exemptions include things like handheld radios. If you need to contact a public safety entity emergencies and certain job requirements. As most of you know, because I think you've all been tra tracking this pretty closely. This bill's been in the works for a long time and well overdue. But it's continually run into equity concerns over the fact that it might increase contact between law enforcement and people of color. So specifically a major concern with this bill has been that, leaving enforcement at the discretion of officers could lead to increased racial profiling and disparities. So some of the information that we've learned since the signing of the bill by the Colorado State Patrol is that as it's signed, the determining factor, and whether a driver would be pulled over is whether or not they're driving behavior or lack of attention to driving results in a disregard for the rules of the road, of their surre or of their surroundings. So, in other words, it's illegal to use the cell phone while driving, but it requires a higher level of criteria for the individual to actually be pulled over and issued a citation for it.

[120:13] So for context. Under the current law, an officer has a wide range of discretion to find that driving occurred in a quote, unsafe manner, that it would only take a swerve or a wide turn, or driving above the speed limit, or if you're driving too close to a bicyclist to find that a crime occurred. So essentially. In other words, driver should assume that an officer can and often will, find unsafe driving if they have a phone in their hands. And some of that language did get worked out in the 11th hour of drafting this bill before signature, and I I would just want to pause here and ask you all as a board, and perhaps, Trini, specifically, since you've been so closely involved with this, what you think of the bill as it's passed, and if there's anything in there that that's really left undone to be worked on.

[121:02] not to put you on the spot. But I'm going. No, Jean. I I can tell you that this has been the hardest effort that I've ever been involved with. As far as legislative work. I mean it. It was almost killed the the night before the session closed. It was just a magn enormous effort from so many people, and I am so proud that Colorado is the 31st State to have this law in place. I think that it that there's a lot of things to work into, and as we move forward it could. You know, we can improve. There's a lot of room for improvement, but it's a huge accomplishment, and everybody that worked on this should be incredibly proud. So I'm very, very happy with with what we we were able to achieve. Yeah, great. For that context, Trinny, and then, as this last bill, you know, I don't need to read this for you, but obviously there will be a robust public awareness campaign. That will be coming forward as this. This bill moves gets enacted. So thank you again to tab into Trinity for all of your work on this. You know from the Dark Ages to maybe the lighter ages right.

[122:19] I mean, I just wanna jump in. So when you say it's gonna be a primary offense, that means that that offense alone is is potentially a reason for an an officer to pull somebody over, whereas and previous to this it would had you had to pull them over something else, and then say, Oh, I noticed you were using a phone. Is that right? That that is my understanding. But I would defer to to Trinny, or even Devin, for for that just I want to make sure that we've got clarity on that. I think you're right, Tila. It is a primary offense. and it's considered reckless to be holding your phone so instantly it becomes. Wow, that's great.

[123:00] Yeah, okay. What do we know the date? This goes into effect. It was signed last week on Wednesday, and I believe the next day. Was what I read somewhere, but officially, January 1st of next year. but I do believe that once the governor signs it, it becomes the law. So it should be effective. And that's why there's so much the the prevalence of educate, educating the problem. The public about this is so. Quite, quite often the law is drafted with an effective date of like enforcement. So yeah, so yes, it's the law. But it doesn't become effective until Xyz. January 1st of. Yeah. So I think it's January first.st Typically. Yeah, I know. In New Zealand. If you're looking at Google Maps on your phone or touching it, you'll get pulled over so hopefully that

[124:00] you know, people aren't gonna be used to that here. But needs to happen. Yeah. Well, 30 other States are in the same boat. So I think there's a lot of education that will happen simultaneously. So hopefully, that'll become the norm. and other States will fall into place. Hey, Gene, what else do you have. Oh, I got more. Okay, my birdie. It was. It was the year of transportation folks. and a bill 195 protected protect vulnerable road users. So some of you might remember earlier this year, in the legislative season, there was an earlier version of this bill that proposed a new registration fee based on the weight of the vehicle. To generate more revenue for vision. 0 project so given that heavy, Ver heavier vehicles are more likely to cause serious and fatal injuries, particularly for for vulnerable road users.

[125:00] But that got stripped from the bill. There were some contentious conversations around around new fees. I don't think it precludes counties from actually enacting those types of registration fees themselves, but it will not be state mandated. So what this bill does do instead is, it doesn't generate new dollars, but it does direct a portion of statewide transportation dollars to be used for vision. 0 projects. So it's a current. It's current revenue, and it will now be directed towards those projects that benefit vulnerable road users. As I mentioned these, these are complex. So another very important component of this vulnerable road Users Bill is the expansion of State authority to use automated vehicle identification systems otherwise known as Avis to detect traffic violations on State highways. So those would be our red light cameras, our our speed enforcement cameras and what's what's pretty

[126:01] is that as a city, we've been ahead of this curve on this, and we've already started to use automated enforcement on State highways. So what this bill does is it further directs local government. C. Dot and our car department transportation and State patrol to coordinate unified guidance for the use of Avis on State highways. So that, for example, if you're on a long regional highway, you are not getting ticketed. You know, within each jurisdiction as you as you pass through. So we're going to be working closely with the State. We're in regular communication on this topic, and we hope to expand Avis to more locations. any questions related. Okay, let's move forward. We can get back to that, too. Alright, thank you. Veronica. rolling forward to the next slide. Okay. Sorry. Little slow.

[127:00] So thank you. We've got a lot to cover. Senate Bill. 32 methods to increase the use of transit. So this bill aims to build on the success of 2 prior fare free programs. I think you're all familiar with Rtd's free Fare for Youth Pilot, which is expiring this summer and the free fare during the ozone season program. At 1 point we were the State was looking to use general funds. To continue both of these programs, but through various iterations of this bill. What ended up happening is the State is now Deris going to be directing 10 million annually from the State's existing Multimodal Options fund for these programs. So given a limited amount of dollars, it's likely gonna mean that each recipient or transit agency or organization will probably choose either Fairfree or youth fare, but likely not both depending on the cost. We we have been told that Rtd. Will likely be using these dollars to continue the Fairfax for Youth Program, which has been widely successful as has the ozone program.

[128:09] But it's it's simply a matter of budgeting and then another piece of this bill, which is kind of neat, is that it? Requires that a committee be set up to study the creation of a statewide transit Pass program. So there's certain year milestones by which the the committee has to be formed, and when their recommendations come out with the idea that over the next 5 years a recommendation would move forward to to implement at least at a pilot level. Harry. See? next slide, please. Thank you. Okay. Senate Bill 184. Support surface transportation infrastructure development. I like to just call this the rail bill. So essentially, this legislation enacts a congestion impact fee on rental cars up to $3 a day to mitigate traffic congestion and pollution.

[129:05] so that fee will go into effect in 2,025, and it's estimated to bring in approximately 50 million dollars a year to the State. mainly for the continued planning and implementation of rail projects. With the idea that. And it's not necessarily in the bill. But the idea behind this is that it's going to generate State funds, and again a limited amount, 50 million dollars a year. But those can be used as we've been talking earlier to leverage Federal funds to advance rail projects. So you know, specifically, it talks about the Front range passenger rail. You know, one key aspect is that the bill authorizes what is the Colorado Transportation Investment Office? Essentially, that used to be the high performance transportation enterprise. It's a lot of fancy words. But it's basically the the entity that was that's responsible for managing the toll roads in the State, and it directs them Rtd front Range Passenger rail and the Color Department of Transportation

[130:06] to enter into an intergovernment agreement, or even a separate legal entity to construct and operate. And this is interesting what they're now calling the Northwest fixed Guideway corridor. So think Northwest Rail. That would include an extension of Northwest Rail to Fort Collins as a 1st phase of the Front Range passenger rail service. And there are dates associated with this. So the State is requiring an implement implementation plan later this year. and by March of next year a plan to begin providing Front Range passenger rail service by January 1, st 2029. So those are pretty specific and ambitious goals. But we also know that the clock might be ticking on some of the Federal funds that would be available to actually advance passenger rail, not just front range passenger rail, but passenger rail throughout the State, including mountain rail service. Between, you know, Winter park, steamboat, Hayden, etc.

[131:07] Jean, what's the 50 million dollar a year? Is that the expected revenue, or is it capped or. That is the expected revenue. Okay, thank, you, yeah. And the rental car fee, yeah, we've also heard that this new fee might be challenged in the courts so stay tuned, and we'll continue to keep you updated alright, moving on. this is really a big one, Senate Bill, 2, 30 oil and gas production fees. So this bill has gotten a lot of press and it was a long and complex negotiation between the state, the oil and gas industry and leading environmental organizations. This new oil and gas production fee is estimated to generate approximately a hundred 38 million dollars a year. So it's a sizable amount of dollars with about 80% of that revenue being used to offset impacts on climate and air quality by

[132:07] funding transit. So the State is going to be meaningfully funding transit to these levels. Beginning this year with the goal being to increase, transit ridership and best frequency to improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The State's clean transit enterprise will oversee the program. And this. And I'm just gonna just walk through real quickly. The splits of those dollars. So 70% of it will be used for local transit operations. So these funds will be dispersed to transit providers through a formula based on population, size, disproportionately impacted communities existing transit service and other criteria that has yet to be developed, that we will have an active voice in helping to shape as the clean transit enterprise takes on this conversation the coming months. Their 1st meeting on this topic will be later the summer at the end of July.

[133:02] The funding must be used for transit operations to increase service. So this is key. This is about transit operations as opposed to large scale funding of capital projects. Now, there is a smaller amount that is is available to local governments for capital projects or transit operations. And that's 10% in what they're calling a local transit Grant program. That's gonna be a competitive grant program. So, for example, the city of Boulder could be eligible for those dollars through a competitive program, and then 20 would be available for rail funding. Again, another sort of as we stack the dollars for these ambitious rail projects. This is another stack of dollars that could be used to do things like leverage Federal dollars to ensure that the Northwest Rail Front range, passenger rail and mountain rail projects. Actually come to fruition. I suspect there might be some questions or thoughts around this bill, so I'm gonna pause.

[134:09] I'll just wait and say, Gene, you're absolutely right. That this is huge and has big implications for the you know, potential for better transit service. All over the State. And it's it's really, really exciting. I've been following these bills closely, and this is the the biggest, most exciting one I think. Thank you, Darcy. Okay, so now I am going to hand over the presentation to my colleague, our own planning and development services. Who's going to switch gears and share information related to land use bills? But there is no land use without transportation, and vice versa. So with that Carl, I'll let you continue. Alright. Thank you, Jean, and thank you, Valerie, for the introduction as a as they noted Carl with planning and development services. My primary role with the city is to make updates to our land use code.

[135:12] So this is kind of new territory for us, with the State getting involved in land use and zoning to the level that they have this year particularly these 2 bills that I'm gonna cover tonight that are zoning and transportation related the 1st one that we're gonna talk about is what we call the transit Oriented Communities Bill. That's actually not the title of the bill. It's something like State land use criteria for strategic growth. At the transit. Oriented communities is is a piece of that, or what we call the Toc Bill. We've been working with the State for several months on the intricacies of this bill. So you can see it's quite complicated. But basically the intent is to require jurisdictions to remove barriers to housing units along well used transit routes, so that we can optimize on the number of housing in the in the community to address the the housing crisis, but also to optimize on transit use in those areas.

[136:16] So we've done some mapping. We're gonna have to dig into this a little bit further as we move forward. But basically it requires that you to take a quarter mile of a transit corridor that has bus service per the Rtd system optimization plan. That's every 15 min for at least an 8 h period on weekdays. So that's what's mapped here. So you can see the the black lines do demarcate those areas that are a quarter mile from those routes that are eligible. So you basically do an area calculation of all the areas that are within that transit corridor area. And the State bill basically requires that there be an average density of 40 dwelling units per acre in that area. So that's pretty high for boulder. Some of our, you know what we used to consider high density in boulder is really like 20 dwelling units per acre, or some zones were capped at 27 dwelling units per acre. We do have some recent projects that have been built that are, you know, upwards of 50 dwelling units per acre. So

[137:16] it does put some strain on our zoning to to figure out whether this can be met or not. So what it does is by calculating that 40 dwelling, it's per acre. It develops basically what's called a housing opportunity goal, or what people have been calling the hog. And that spits out a number basically is how many dwelling units are possible per the zoning in this area. It doesn't mean that you actually have to build them. or it doesn't mandate that develop developers have a minimum density. What the bill requires is that you look at your zoning and potentially have to update your zoning so that it doesn't stand in the way of the potential of that number of units being developed. So

[138:03] in our analysis of this bill, initially, the housing opportunity goal for Boulder was upwards of almost a hundred 70,000 dwelling units. So again, it's an aspirational goal. To put that in perspective. The city of Boulder only right now has about 47,000 dwelling units. But so it sets a very high goal, so that your zoning is is moving in the direction of getting more housing units. As we've been working with the State on the the particulars of the bill. That housing opportunity goal has gone down. So I think right now it's closer to 140,000 dwelling units. So basically, what the bill says is, you have to designate transit centers within that transit corridor area. And that's what those like colored areas are on the map. Those are our zoning districts that potentially could allow for at least 15 dwelling units per acre. That's what the Bill says, in order to designate a transit center, it has to be at least 15 dwelling units per acre. But the

[139:07] the basically using all those zones you have to calculate what is possible in those zones per the zoning. And you have to at least meet that housing opportunity goal. So obviously, this is very complex. We're probably a pretty ahead of the game with the mapping. There's a lot of other communities that have to like work this out as well, what we found is that we passed some ordinances last year that changed our residential density calculations. The dwelling units per acre that are allowed in many of these zones, particularly the industrial zones and the business zones. Basically removing some density caps. So it it's starting to look based on our analysis like that. We're in pretty good footing to meet this bill. So we're not in panic mode at the moment. There are some changes that we're expecting to make to zoning and coming years to meet the East Boulder subcommittee plan. So we're feeling pretty good about meeting this, but we do have to dig into it. Just to make sure.

[140:07] That that all our calculations are correct. Another piece of the bill is that it actually requires that any discretionary review for residential projects on properties that are less than 5 acres inside. Ha! They have to be non-discretionary. What they did do in the in the code is because we have site review which leverages affordable housing, for you know, if you add additional floor area, the State Bill does permit that so, but it has to basically be something that the applicant elects to do if they don't meet our setback or height limits. So again, we're looking pretty good. In meeting this, there are some new Grant programs that are in the bill. It's a very lengthy bill. It's basically meant to to leverage money towards affordable housing and infrastructure around transit as well as looking at neighborhood centers, which basically in the bill, may means areas that are outside of the transit corridor area. That may be a a future transit area. So you're basically diverting some infrastructure to those areas that might have transit service in the future. So it's a very complex bill and and we can stop here if if there are any questions before we move forward.

[141:16] Hi, Carl Tila here. I'm trying to understand the difference between a transit center with the minimum of 15 volume units per acre. I and you've I identified you know what a transit corridor area is, and that's a pretty busy corridor. But what makes a transit center. Yeah, a a transit corridor area is basically the sum total of all those areas that are mapped. That you're seeing on the screen that are within the black lines that are a quarter mile from those qualifying corridors. So there was a total acreage for that whole area. And that's how you get the housing opportunity goal transit centers are those areas where you're counting those areas in in in the zoning to meet the housing opportunity goal. So because there's a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre. The vast majority of of the transit corridor area does not qualify. So a lot of those areas that are in the green, or I'm sorry the Gray are single family neighborhoods. Those.

[142:15] Right. Qualify. You can't count those dwelling units. You can't count that zoning. So it really forces us to look at those neighborhood centers like table mesa or areas around the University, the Boulder Valley Regional Center downtown 29th Street corridor. All those zones have zoning that potentially could get us to meeting that housing opportunity goals. So we will have to move forward with designating specific transit centers in the future. And it's probably gonna be these areas that are shown in the color other than gray. Does that make sense. I didn't follow that. Yeah, it's just it does. There's another graphic that we don't have in this presentation. But it's the the State understands that not all areas are going to

[143:06] have zoning that that meets the requirements. So you have to like this. Doesn't this require cities to change their zoning. It does. And we. We may have to change our zoning so. But ultimately we have to submit a report to the state, and we have to map out those transit centers and show them the zones and show them the calculations about how the the calculation in those zones will meet the housing opportunity goal. and then, and the State has to either approve it or deny it. Okay, what? What makes a transit center, a transit center. It has to. It's just in. It's basically there's actually, could you advance the slides? There's some. There's some background slides towards the end that might help answer that past the the final slides. Yeah, if you look at this slide, it says, transit center criteria

[144:02] so applies to parcels that are a quarter area a quarter mile from a transit corridor. The total area in those transit centers alone has to meet that 40 dwelling units per acre. Average. I got. So, so. Has it currently be no less than 15. Right, and it has to average 40 dwelling notes per acre, so there might be some. Laugh. That are that are like $20 units per acre, and there might be others that have to be higher than that to to average out. I gotcha. Thank you. That helped. I'm with you now. Okay. If we could go back to the the regular slide. Jen, I see your hand up. Yeah, I mean, I think transit oriented communication is great. like I am concerned about. I did not. Being able to offer non public transportation objects.

[145:04] I mean, it's great, for if you do single use vehicle. But, for example, I live in dirty pearl. and I see so many buildings being built and no bus stations. And that really kind of conjures. Because I feel like, you know, we're all rushing, focusing on. We need more housing. But we're forgetting the other piece. So I did. My question would be, is there any consideration to this whole bill like other than personal cars? Yeah, it was certainly a consideration when we were working with the State on this. Obviously, the what we map out as routes that are eligible are only per the Rtd system optimization plan. It doesn't actually mean that these are routes right now that are functioning every 15 min. A lot of them aren't.

[146:09] But it's because the State bill is based on that optimization plan. It's looking into the future. So we did have some concerns about that. And we. We did present this to the Council Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, and they raised that as as an issue as well, and they they wanted the state to put in some criteria that says that if it's not actually operating at that level it shouldn't be eligible. But that's something that actually didn't stick in the bill, so it certainly was a concern that we had when we were working with the State on this. Alright. Thank you. Dirty. Yeah, along with that I wanted to ask. So in conjunction with set on Bill 2 30, you know. So there's all of this potential, wonderful new funding for transit and as Jen just said, you know, there's no these the the housing and transit oriented communities.

[147:08] Bill doesn't mandate, you know, funding for transit on these corridors. And so I'm just curious, Carl, about what conversations I mean, like you just said the system optimization plan from Rtd. Says certain things, and their current service is a certain level. But how do you think the city of Boulder can work more closely with, or compel Rtd to actually service these routes in the way that they are envisioned to be served. Yeah, I I think it's a it's a little bit of a chicken in the egg thing, you know. I think the State approach was, you know, get the housing there so that the demand goes up. So it almost kind of forces. Rtd, to be like, okay, there's a lot of people here now that can use this transit. So I think that's the approach they took rather than you know, using transit 1st and then build the the housing later. But maybe I'll pass that to Gene. On the question about what work we can do with Rtd. To get them to kick up service.

[148:12] Yeah, thank you. And and just as a little bit more context, I you know to your point, Darcy, there's a lot of mistrust at the State level. About Rtd's ability to even provide on the system optimization plan. So for board members who might be new to the system optimization plan. That's Rtd's plan to return service to communities by 2027. So, for instance. for instance, you, Jen, you mentioned that you're at 30th and Pearl, and you do not have service at Boulder Junction. Boulder Junction is closed. And so. But Boulder Junction and Service, the Flat Iron Flyer, for in the AV. 2 are planned within Rtd. System. Optimization plan to resume operation by 2027. There is no guarantee about when between now June 24 and 27, that will occur.

[149:02] but it is in the book. And so with this distrust, there was a period of time where there was a bill that had been introduced at the Legislature this past season to reform the Rtd Board itself. There was that much mistrust. That that bill was pulled, and you know, essentially the governor, you know. initially, you know, and I can't speak for the Governor. But let me editorialize a little bit right like I don't trust Rtd. I will not give them our money until we reform the Board through, you know, negotiations and conversations that Bill died the Rtd. Reform Bill, because there's some other budgetary and financial issues ahead of Rtd, that maybe take priority. And the Governor did sign the bill to provide more dollars for the operation of transit service. So we're pretty confident that Rtd is going to be able to restore the service that's indicated in the system optimization plan. The city of boulder will be at the table as the clean trans transit enterprise is working through. What those criteria, what that formula will be for providing additional funds to transit agencies to restore and even expand service.

[150:15] And just one more point of contact that I'd like to share with you all is that Boulder County through a tip. Grant funded project is going to be initiating a Boulder County Strategic Transit Service Plan in the coming year, which the city of Boulder will very much be a part of, and that's the idea that we know that Rtd. Will probably be able to provide only a certain amount of service. And if they focus on the regional service, and we have much larger plans for transit service beyond what they can provide. What does that Gap look like? How can we, as Boulder County communities, partner with Rtd to provide more transit service? And and one of the one of the bills that I covered earlier this evening. They're actually incentives for regions or areas to establish what we call regional transportation

[151:05] authorities, new funding new, you know, new districts that actually could create funding from taxes very long winded answer. Just to say that we attack this at so many different angles. There is not one silver bullet, but we're also open to any suggestions and recommendations that you might offer to us as staff. That's excellent, Gene. Thank you very much. Yeah, thank you so much. Alright. Jen. What I kind of feel is my duty as a resident here to mention that several of my neighbors moved there specifically for Dot Junction Border Junction station, and we're where all of us low income. That's kind of a big deal. I thought, if it's an Rtg like oh, we're not doing it.

[152:00] And every time I talk to Rtd. Their firm with we are not gonna open. No border junction station, and I'm like it just doesn't make sense to me that they wouldn't even consider it. Thank you. George. I know you can affect her, but I just wanna make it known. Yeah, that hasn't stopped me from having a little rant on the record. Every other meeting or so. And right. No, I appreciate that. And you know, from one thorn in people's side to another, keep it up. Well, I did, I know, really really makes me angry, and I'm not alone. Yeah. well, you're helping elevate the other voices. So I appreciate that. Okay, Carl was there one more. There is a before we jump to that one. I just wanted to add that we have until the end of 2027 to be fully in compliance

[153:07] with this bill. So we actually have to send a report to the State. Now, they've moved it to June 2025, where we basically have to report to them like what we think we need to do to meet this bill. But then we'd actually have to make the zoning changes by that deadline. So I think we're ready to to jump to the the next slide. So another bill that we've been following is House Bill 2413, 4. This one was kind of surprising to us that we were. We didn't know whether or not this would pass or not. But it it did pass. And basically the state is requiring cities. That anywhere within a a transit service area which to make things like extraordinarily confusing. The transit service area is not equivalent to the transit corridor area in the Toc bill, the criteria is a little bit different. So it's basically like anywhere that has

[154:16] bus service every 30 min for a 4 h period. So it's a lesser frequency. The Si cities or jurisdictions cannot have parking requirements for any multifamily residential projects. So you can see, based on this mapping that we've done. It applies to a vast majority of the city. So again, we're talking about residential projects. They haven't really defined what multi family residential is. So we'll have to dig into this a little bit further it even says that if there's any conversions of commercial buildings to mixed use where it's the building is more than 50% residential, there can't be parking requirements for those either.

[155:02] A caveat to this this requirement is that cities would be able to require up to one parking space per unit. If there are studies that are done by, you know, engineers or some sort of parking demand study that indicates that there would be a substantial negative impact to a particular area in terms of parking. So that we're still having to look at that and see what that means. But it basically requires a report to be filed with the, with the State to review any project that has that kind of report applied to it. So this is something that we have to look at in coming months. We do have until june 30, th 2025 to determine. You know how we're gonna comply with this. We're already embarking on a parking code update. Anyway, we had planned on that before this bill passed. So the timing is actually very a aligned with the with the timing and in the State bill.

[156:05] So we're gonna be going to city council. I believe it's in September with a study session where we're gonna get guidance from them on what kind of updates should be made to our minimum parking requirements in our land use code. What? What this bill also says is that you. You can have maximum parking requirements. You can still have. Ada parking requirements. You can still have bike parking requirements. There's nothing in the bill that says that overrules any kind of parking that's required for housing projects relative to their funding or any agreements, you can still have unbundling requirements. You can still have Tdm requirements. But again, the big thing with this one is is no residential minimum parking requirements for multifamily residential projects. So we'll be digging into this further in coming months to to figure out exactly how we'll be complying with this

[157:03] next year. So any any questions on this one. Yeah. can you explain again what? what the map is here with with relevance to this is that that's encompassing the the areas where minimal parking requirements would be prohibited. Yeah, so it's it. This, this map is looking at bus routes that have a frequency of every, at least every 30 min and for at least a period of 4 h in the day the the Toc bill was different. It was every 15 min for an 8 h period. So it's it's in basically pulling in most of the bus routes that operate in in Boulder. So you can see that most of the city is gonna be impacted that by that, in terms of multifamily residential projects. So these, these letters and numbers those are the.

[158:00] Those are zone districts. That's sony designation. It's really just. The pro. Colour we're looking. Yeah, yeah, the call, that's all the colors of the different zoning districts. So that what we're really trying to show is just the black lines, the bubbles. Basically, those are all the distance requirements. From those corridors. And and like I said you, you can see that there's little. Inside. If it's inside the black lines, then. Correct, yeah, we. Okay. This was a very quick and dirty kind of map that. Yeah. Together after the the bill passed us, so we'll probably have to clarify that more as well. I really appreciate your and Jean's responsiveness, because I'm the one that asked. But you can see there's a lot of interest, you know in in the board. And so I'm I'm really. I'm flat. I'm pleased that you came to us tonight. I I wanna just express my appreciation for that. You're welcome! Carl. Just a clarification on on Tila and Mike's question. So, for instance, even though it's within the black bubble, maybe an Rl. One zone

[159:04] would not necessarily be a place where you'd find a lot of multi family residential. And so it's not necessarily the full area within these black lines to which this would apply. It's just the zones that have that type of allowable use. Is that right? That's correct. Yeah, we're we're gonna be looking more at, you know, the zones like the red and the anything that says Rh or BC, these are our commercial, our high density zones our industrial zones also allow for multi family residential. So it's really those areas that that you see like apartment buildings or things like that, where this would apply. Well, there, there's been a lot of lot written about how governments mandating people. you know, giving parking away for free is doesn't make any sense. And so I really hope the City Council just abolishes all minimum parking requirements in the city, so we don't have to

[160:04] deal with maps like this. Yeah, I think, given the extent of this map, I think it does speak to, you know, probably a city wide application of this. But again we have to talk to council and get the direction from them. Okay, thank you so much. You're welcome. Any further questions. Tab looks like we're all happy. So happy. Okay, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Have a good night. You, too, have a good night. Is that all for Madison Staff? That is. Thank you, Tila. Okay, thank you so much. We are now on matters from the board, little behind schedule. Luckily I have nothing to say on the debrief. I will say nothing. but it's time for us to debrief if we have any comments. I I was very

[161:01] pleased with how the retreat went. I thought it was a useful exercise for once. Not to 10 degree prior things, but I'm just grumpy about retreats. And my, my one take home was that we really it's like it felt more more simple and more attainable for us to just circle around the idea that as tab members and as as I had noted earlier, an unusually advocate, heavy sort of tab that we have right now that this might be a great time for us to use our various advocacy skills and networks to advance things that we want to have influence in going forward in the next year, and I think that's kind of where we landed at the Retreat.

[162:02] that we were in general support of the direction the staff was taking on on its sort of focus areas, and where it's emphasizing things we still wanted, as as in the last 2 years, to support staff, continuing efforts on can in particular and then, as these projects, you know, move from sort of conceptual to actually getting on the ground to use our various abilities of influence, and kind of probing into pockets of the community that cities in general and boulder in particular, might have had trouble reaching in the past, to try to to to get new voices and and new awareness of what the city staff is trying to do in transportation efforts. That's what I got out of the the retreat. And I thought it was pretty gratifying. Does anyone else have any any more to like? Kind of

[163:00] add to that to trainee. Just really quickly, I mean, I really enjoyed seeing everybody in person. Oh, so nice in person, wasn't it? Yeah, I love being able to get rid of the hug. I mean, it was just totally different thing. So just wonder. Anyone else. Great retreat, everyone. Thank you. Yeah. Nice one for me to end on. I have to say I I see a placeholder here for Iris Avenue and Meredith. I'll be honest, I do not recall what we were gonna do. I I was expecting that we would probably have some discussion. I think that's kind of all. That that placeholder was about and I do want to acknowledge earlier. They seem to have dropped off, but we did have a number of people from the public kind of watching whose names are familiar. We've, of course, received a lot of emails.

[164:03] and I'm sure that there will be more to come. But in particular I was hoping, given that you know, sort of direction that we had agreed on as tab members at the retreat. To be able to think about and talk about at this moment, perhaps. How we could be more useful, accessible, available to the public and try to take some of the Wait office staff shoulders about hearing and responding to Iris Avenue feedback. My understanding is, Valerie. Can you correct me if I'm wrong. But there was going to be an update like a study session or an update to council on the 27.th And now that's not happening. This council will not be meeting that evening. It is now happening. So

[165:01] It is okay. They just last week? We're kind of trying to figure out when they would really establish their recess. You know that kind of summer break that they always take, and I think they were looking at how to maybe extend it a week or 2, and and they finally landed on a a strategy for that, and the outcome was that we will still have the Iris Avenue study session on June 27, th so that is still in place. And if if I could just take this opportunity, I think, Tila, you know what you know. I think perhaps you and and Natalie had spoken about was just that. That is a study session where we'll be bringing a ton of information to council. And so I think you know, just an opportunity here at this meeting. Since we won't have a tab meeting in in July. You know an opportunity for you all to just share your thoughts about that leading up to that appearance at council in June. So of course, everyone here is encouraged to, you know. Attend that study session. And you know you may all you know, wish to

[166:11] express your views on the the project so far. In advance of that that calendar. I was gonna say, yeah, we we would have to express our views at the at the moment here. Correct, because at a study session. There's no, there's no input by the public or by boards in general. And then, just to follow up a little further, Valerie. At the study session staff will still not have arrived at a preferred OP option. but step intends to identify a preferred option. Shortly thereafter. Yeah, so a little bit of a forecast. We won't be bringing you know. A staff recommended alternative. For that. That area in between the bookends of the corridor where the 4 design options are that we presented at the open house. Back at the end of April. We are just going to be giving a lot of contextual information to council in June at that study session that will help them prepare for consideration and and deliberation on an approval decision on on that. In the fall.

[167:16] when we bring the full community environmental assessment process, and the seep to to you all, and then to counsel in the fall. So in between. So trying to paint this kind of timeline for you verbally here. So in between our visit to council at the study session in June and that decision that happens in the fall. we will be hosting an open house with the public. Right now. It's tentatively slated for late July, and at that open house we will be bringing our staff recommended alternative along with more contextual information from the seep, or that full evaluation of the effort and that will be a moment where we can get feedback from the community before we go to you all at Tab, and then council for the decision.

[168:06] Okay. thank you for that context. That's helpful. I think at the At. As I interpreted this, we we've been invited at the moment to sort of weigh in. If you have, as members of tab a leaning and inclination, any insight on your both your, you know. preferred alternatives, or what's important to you in weighing those alternatives and also any perspective that you have given. You know our individual communications with members of the public and how that might have affected your views of the various alternatives. I would be very interested to hear them at the moment. And I would trust Valerie to sort of convey where city staff to convey the the gist of the conversation. To counsel other. June 27. Study session, Darcy, your hand is up.

[169:03] Yeah. So just based on the letters that we've received and that I've received, and other information that's been kind of forwarded to me. I I'm curious about whether the city is open to anything beyond the 4 alternatives that have been put forth so far because we're hearing a lot about, you know the other other options that might make sense in this context. So I'm just, I'm curious about how flexible the city is with opportunities to add onto the alternatives that have already been proposed. Darcy, what do you mean by other like like alternative, like what. Do you want me. Yeah, what other options are you thinking might be possible? See, we both have dancing boys.

[170:01] stancing boy. Time. Yeah, it's I know it's getting late. It's like time to go. And parent alright. If you want to make that. Okay, I'm just gonna try to. I'm gonna try to express my view here. Okay, right? So just based on feedback from residents. the. So there's ABC, indeed, right? And people seem to be interested in an E alternative that that doesn't involve that that basically involves focusing on options that would redirect bicyclists and pedestrians away from Iris instead of accommodating them on Iris because of the volume of traffic, and because of the importance of Iris as a quarter between Highway 1, 19 and downtown boulder. So this is I mean this, you know. I know that you all have heard this

[171:11] idea, and I just wanted to kind of do the due diligence of of putting these voices forward and just asking if there's any opportunity for that. Is that question directed to your fellow board members or to city staff. To city staff. Okay? Well, I I think you know what I can share tonight is that we'll be bringing a lot of information to this Council study session that I think will help offer. You know context for your question. You know, I think, in short, what you know the the impetus of this project. Was to take a look at our, you know, arterials where we have you know our high risk network, our intersection of of the can with our vision 0 high risk network. Take a look at the types of design elements that could address the most common types of crashes. And so we then look to our city plans and policies.

[172:18] That are already on the books to help us shape a range of possible alternatives to look at. We did look at a full range of of ideas and possibilities, and you know, eventually narrowed it down. For the sake of feasibility and implementability to the 4 that were presented the last open house. And So that's what I think we will be offering a lot more information about at the study session to help answer your question, Darcy. But those are some of the things that we consider as we started the project development process for this corridor. Right? That's great. And I think maybe there's it's important. Now, as you're you know,

[173:03] going forward with more information to the public to really contextualize all that and make sure that everyone understands fully why these 4 alternatives were developed and what the advantages are. I mean, I know that you've you've done that right, and you you've done a great job. And there's just a lot of concern for residents around Iris, as I'm sure you're aware. So thank you. I would I would add that to me the the 4 options make a lot of sense, because any road, as I've said, that is not a limited access highway should be safe for people to bike on and people to walk on. And there's there's been concern about this reducing traffic throughput. If if you go from 4 lanes to 3 with us Center Turn Lane, it's not clear to me that that's gonna be a big problem, because most of the current congestion is caused by people trying to turn in the fast lane and go fast in the turn lane

[174:05] and and you know, asking cyclists to take other streets. Kalmia Hawthorn is th. Those are not adequate routes to replace Iris. I don't think so, but I do I do understand. Neighbors having concerns about cut through traffic, particularly on on the West side. That seems to be happening, and I would hope the the city might be able to address Speed. Mitigation on Kalmia, for example, are perhaps trying to prevent cars from cutting through by making it impossible, somehow or something. I'm gonna give other Cab members an opportunity

[175:00] to speak. Jen. I have a question. I'm not very well versed in the Irish situation. but I know I keep getting those emails from Judy Rock. And I thought. who is responding to her, whether we spoke to say, I don't want it to ignore her. Yes. But I understand she kind of is like repeating. No, it's a it's a it's a fine question. It is something that comes up because we don't really have, you know, a very regimented system for responding to public comment. I did respond to her today. She emailed me this morning. I think she probably emailed us individually is what it looks like. And so I responded to her and thanked her. But yeah, you know, it's it's a hard thing to know how to do. And

[176:05] and if there's absolutely nothing around Jen, and just sort of acknowledging their email, even if you have nothing in particular to say in response, just to say, I hear you. I've read you and I know that that can go a long way. Occasionally someone will raise something, or or maybe we'll have 4 or 5 emails sent to staff that all kind of, you know, resonate in the same way, and often there will be a very sort of thorough response from member of staff that you know we're just not that regimented. And so I've always encouraged tab members feel free to respond individually, and typically, we say, you know, I'm I'm you know. Your your email struck a quarter of me. I just wanted to get back to you. You might hear back from somebody else. I'm not speaking on behalf of Tab. But I just wanna say I saw your email

[177:02] and I do want to. I mean, I don't see any members of the public. They there were several here earlier this evening. And and we do see them. We do read them. We do you know? Think about them and register them? And so in in particular, I I think you're hitting on something, Jen, where? Where? Remember? The public feels like they need to repeatedly bug us and so it's worth, you know. Sort of saying, I I got you. I room. I recognize your name, you know Howard Fisher, who was on tonight and stayed on for quite a while. I I know you, i i i got you, and I'm not ignoring you. But it's not a it's not anything that we have a a hard protocol on, and mostly i i i appreciate that because I don't want it to feel mechanical, or, you know. form lettery. So And just just to reiterate when we're

[178:00] we report, we can reply to individual members with it. But because open records law, we're not supposed to copy. Other people. Yeah, other. Other members of this board. Yeah. Break. I think we can copy them. We just can't have any back and forth about it. Ca, yeah, exactly. So I it's it's fine to BCC them, for instance. Just so. Other people know that you've done it. And I didn't BCC, the rest of you today in my response, because I wasn't aware she had reached out to both of you. So you know, all of you, because it looked like it just came to me so. Yes. Well, I just wanted to say that I'm highly supportive of the project of, and I think that there's a lot of confusion as to what the consequences might be, and I think that there's a need for education regarding what the consequences may be, or the apparent, you know consequences. I don't think that one of the things that I've heard the most we talked about is how that's 1 of the roads that is used to get out.

[179:10] Evacuation. Yes. And that should not be a concern. Quite frankly. I mean, I think that it's just the anxiety is being placed in the wrong place, so. Yeah. And and I guess that's my. That's my 1st reaction to what you said at the beginning, like there should be more education in my dealings with, you know, with members of the public on a variety of road changes hard. People, don't, you know. have very good confidence. The change is gonna be a positive thing. And honestly, in many of the situations, facts don't really. They're not as as powerful as you would think. I think some contextualizing is helpful. And so, for instance, if you live near, I don't know, call me on 16th you have, let's say, 15 different options to get further east.

[180:06] and most of those are small roads. And if Iris Iris Iris is sort of the default now, because it is the biggest. but that doesn't mean the other ones are inadequate, I guess. and it's it's a it's always a difficult exercise to overcome people's sort of gut reaction and sort of common sense of response to changes. And I came across this a whole lot working on protected bike lanes in New York City because it just made perfect intuitive sense. And if you take away a motor vehicle Lane. everything's going to go terribly. And now that we've got, you know, 1012, 15 years of data under our belts. Actually, traffic is flowing more smoothly there, it's more predictable. There's less stop and start. I think Iris would probably have some of that similar thing. And and just to say, like, I, I think there should be more education.

[181:05] if anything. If city staff is guilty of anything. It's putting too much information out there. The the website on this project is it's great for people like me who really like to dig into the data and really wanna know everything about all of it. But there, I think that that and that might be a role that we play is sort of simplifying it and sort of, and I and I and I know there's another round of of information. This is gonna put out. That kind of is is issue by issue. Sort of that will clarify some of these things. Now that we've heard and and are able to distill some big ideas and big areas of concern for members of the public. There are more targeted responses and analysis and just sort of reassurances about what what we expect to have happen. And again, as members of Tab, I would really try to like help advance that messaging because many people who are concerned about any of these options. It boils down to 3 or 4, you know.

[182:12] What if scenarios and the scenarios are they not make believe but they are modelable, and they are analogizable generally to other areas of the city and other places with similar volumes. Similar demand, similar peak hour things, and I think that we will be able to reassure them that the sky will not fall. and I yes, Mike. I, I would add, you know, I've also had interactions with neighbors who are very much in support of in particular option. A one woman, Natalie Orphan, who lives. Is it. And she's. She lives on Iris. She's 1 of the few that is on Iris. She's written letters, and I chatted with her online and

[183:04] she has a lot of concerns even about, you know. option B, with the 2 way. Pickling causing safety issues and and she bikes in the an iris and all sorts of weather, and so I've talked with her a lot, and I I tend to agree with her that that option a seems like the best one. but. Certainly for me. Option B is is a second choice. yeah, I haven't talked to Natalie, recently about about these options, I haven't talked to her at all about these options, since they've been unveiled. But what I understood from reading her email. I lived near Folsom. I was near living on Folsom and Mapleton when

[184:01] Bolson Avenue changed from 4 lanes to 3, and the ease of crossing that as a cyclist was tenfold be, even though, you know, instead of having to deal with only moving lanes and keeping track of 2 sets this way and 2 sets this way to have that HALV. E have that crossing like exposure was enormous, and then to have the availability of the center turning lane in case I messed up and misjudge something, as you know, a quasi safe haven. I mean, you're still exposed. You're in the middle of the road, but you're not in a lane of like actively moving traffic. Just having those 2 changes as a cyclist trying to cross from one side to the other made things far, easier, far, far easier. And it's today, you know it's it's now it's physically protected. It's it's performing. Well, there were growing pains. And I'm not gonna say there aren't gonna be growing pains on Iris. To my mind.

[185:13] as prior city councils and this city council have continued to identify our arterials. specifically, Iris as trouble spots that need real attention and immediate attention. And by immediate, I mean. we identified it during the living labs, which is something Darcy described earlier the living labs period, and what? 2015, 2016 as something that needed remediation. And here we are 8 years later. And it's it's still operating the same way. And it is still not serving all users. And to me that's what this comes down to. We, as a community, have repeatedly doubled down on the idea that all of our streets unless they're limited access highways, unless it's foothills or us 36.

[186:12] All of our streets need to accommodate and facilitate users of all ages and abilities in all modes. It does not matter to me that there are better, more comfortable cycling routes off of Iris. That is absolutely true. What matters to me is that there is no comfortable cycling route on Iris. There is nowhere that a same parent would put an 8 year old on Iris Avenue. and we have as a city. I'm not saying as tap, I'm saying, as a community in 2 different transportation master plans in all kinds of like sort of temperature, taking efforts, including this massive. to my mind, unnecessary massive effort around Iris in particular, right now

[187:04] about what people want to see, and how people expect Iris to operate. The vast majority of the city says, yes, we want this to be a usable street, and not a highway separating the neighborhood to the north and the neighborhood to the south. Life would be better if this street didn't operate that way. and if we don't adopt options A or B, we are kicking the can about 20 years down the road, and about 35 million extra dollars. And you just heard tonight our cip plan is shrinking. This is gonna be a CIP. Project. It's unconscionable to let this go on any further the way it has when we have as a city and as a community repeatedly said, we need to address Iris, and so I I prefer option A, I will accept option. BI think option C. And D will be a massive mistake

[188:04] and a dereliction of ours. Responsibility as city Planner, City staff, City Council to the scores of people who have been told to TOLE. D, who have asked for their opinion and their input, and have told us repeatedly, TO. Ld. Repeatedly. They want something different and better. That accommodates everyone on Iris Trainee. I just wanna add to that that Iris is part of can and can approved so. Guests. That should be the end of it. That's I agree. I agree. Trina, do you have a preference? Abcd. I'm like you A and B. Can be between those 2. Okay. yeah.

[189:00] Darcy. I would also vote for a. Yeah. Bcd. any any input on B or C or D. Darcy, you're you're in for A, and nothing. I mean, you know, it was interesting. Get the April open house, talking with Staff about the various alternatives and what they, what merits they saw to them. And I think. I I'm sorry I can't form a coherent thought about it at the moment. I need to review them more closely. But but I mean d kind of came up a little bit in in terms of, you know, preserving the most roadway space. But but I I personally, I think I think a is the best option, but this is, that's my personal opinion. Yeah. Jen, do you have a an an any input on this? Now, okay.

[190:00] Valerie, is that helpful. Yes, thank you for having this conversation, and just A point of clarification is, you know, in in June, when we go to council. We're not looking for a decision on the preferred alternative. It's really to explore. You know all of the information that that we've been analyzing to date. Whether it's technical or the input from community engagement and explore that with council. So they then have time to think about that. All of that before the decision is brought to them in the fall. And so on that journey. Of course you all will be invited to attend the open house in July. and that will be an opportunity to learn a lot more. As well as we continue our analysis. We continue our project development process, which means the design process. You know both both the technical and integrating our community engagement feedback. So I would just say that. You know there's there's a lot more to come in this process, and we go through this process in order to make sure there's no stone uncovered. And so I think you know I'm excited that we will be able to bring a lot more information to you. Tentatively in September to this board where you will be asked to make a recommendation to council.

[191:22] And you know that, I think will be a time where you can explore in more detail. You know some of the considerations the trade offs, the benefits around the different options. So you know, not to discourage you from starting to think ahead on these things. But just wanting to explain that there is a process we're going through, and there will be a lot more contextual information for you all to consider in the months ahead. I think that's. That's great. That's really helpful, Valerie. Do you know when exactly the open house will be in July yet? It's slated tentatively for late July. And we will, you know, be publishing that soon. If it's not already on our website. I think we're, you know. It takes takes some time and effort to secure those venues.

[192:08] Gotcha. Okay? Great. Well, thank you very much. Valerie for what it's worth. When I've been kind of doing some man on the street talking to people about Iris. One of the most useful ways to distill. It has been basically saying, Iris Avenue is going to change. And there's 4 options. Staff is identified. and all of them have a protected bike lane. And so really, the difference between ABC and D is like, it's like A, it's a what do you do? Genetic? What what is it? I should know what this is. The box big, a big, a big B little B, you know, and and big A is should the bike lanes be on either side of the road?

[193:00] Little A should be. They be collapsed on, you know, as a as a 2 way cycle track on the north side of the street. A big B is, should it happen really soon? And little B is, should it effectively turn into a road widening project which is, gonna be 20 years. And then actually 35 million dollars ish in, then dollars, maybe and so those are kind of those are like the 2 variables. And when I put it that way, people like, Oh, yeah, no, we should do one of the soon ones we like A and B just absolutely come to the top when I when I put it that way. And there, there's a difference of opinion. In fact in this household. Whether A is B or or A is better, or B is better option A or option B is better. But just factoring in sort of the extra time and expense of C and D, and realizing that it means a widening of the roadway.

[194:01] is where the conversation ends. And so I would just kind of offer that, because I think I think the city's messaging about what C. And D entail has not been very clear about that. And I think when people realize we're like talking about expanding a highway in this neighborhood. that is a real point of clarification. And and calcifires. People's thinking about it. That's a really good point, Tila. Yeah, and that's great feedback. I appreciate that. You know, staff are hard at work finalizing some information materials that will be released soon. And you know, Tila, I think you mentioned that earlier, but it is you know, something that that our staff have been working really hard on. It's not in the form of in the Jeanette Recessive genes and dominant genes, I think, is what you were talking about earlier, but I think it will distill the info. The mission information we're putting out will distill some of these key considerations and offer a bit more context than what we were

[195:13] really able to offer the last open house? So I just I just wanna plug that and also thank Staff for all of their work to take what is really a very complex technical project and continue diligently on our analysis, the technical stuff that's going on on the back end, and also really continue to have robust community conversations. You know, meeting folks in the neighborhood hearing their perspectives. That is really important for the integrity of our process and for the ultimate design outcome that we have. That we bring that fidelity from those conversations into our technical process as well, so. I think you will all be very pleased with some of the information. That will be very soon available. But this is great confirmation from you all as our board.

[196:04] That that would be helpful. And so we look forward to you know, sharing that with you all, and of course, hearing any feedback that you have as we prepare for our visit to council. Great. Thank you. It's called a Punnett Square, Punnett Square. Hmm. Okay. Terrific. Thank you. Next, Madison, the board. I I did not, Meredith, because I had said I was intending to do. I've been Brazil. I did not go back and listen to confirm our tab representation on the vision. 0 community partnership trainee. Are you still on here? Yes, I. Yes. So will be me. So so you're you're the primary for vision, 0 community partnership. And then Meredith had me as alternate. But I have a feeling it wasn't me as alternate, was it, Darcy, as alternate? I'm happy to be alternate. But I I have a feeling like I got relieved of duty on that one.

[197:03] Darcy, do you recall. I think it was Darcy. I think it was. Dirty to. Yeah, I, yeah, I remember that. Okay, so let's confirm that Meredith. Willerton primary Darcy alternate. Sorry kitchen alternate. And it's a good thing this is on there. Yeah. Alright. Great! Thank you. Open board comment. Does anyone have anything else to rant about tonight? Jen, you. Hi, you have. So I feel like I'm not getting. Oh, our emails like, I don't have agendas. Don't get slide. So I'm like, what's going on. That's a fine question. you should be getting an email with the slide presentations. The packets are no longer getting emailed directly to us. And so you have to go to the city website. Link and Meredith has been sending a link to the to the spot on the website that's like the tab meeting, and you have to scroll down and load the the meeting materials.

[198:14] And then it sends you to like the city's filing system. And for reasons unknown to me, it's oldest to youngest. Yeah. So most recent stuff is at the bottom. And I have many thoughts about that. Tiffany. Roll down to the bottom. It! It's it's a process. So I noticed some important emails are in my junk folder on my. Oh, yes, okay. that does happen sometimes. Hmm. yeah, we also wondering. First.st On the actual border county website for boards and commissions. How big nowadays? Sugar.

[199:00] Now I'm like, why is Tab the only one not listed. Jim. I'll set up an appointment with you, and we can screen, share, and walk through. Okay. Thank you. Than that before. Thank you, Meredith. That's delightful. Thank you for doing that. Anything else looking for a comment. Great future agenda topics. I don't have any burning ideas. You've heard tonight about a couple of items that will be coming to us later this summer. Thank you again to staff for for giving us the 1st bit of what? You know what happened at the State level cause. It was just a flurry of activity, and I'm I'm very appreciative that you were able to give us that just kind of breakdown. What happened, even if we don't really know yet what that what that means for the city council, but

[200:10] any other requests or or thoughts about what we should be looking at into the future. For agenda setting. It might not happen this next meeting. But if you do, I believe my agenda setting meeting is gosh! I'm bad at this Tuesday next Tuesday. You know we since we'll be not having a meeting in July. Your summer break. Yay! We may just kind of push out that agenda setting meeting for the August meeting. Okay, so there's no meeting on July 8.th There's no meeting in July, no. And having known that, can I just extend an invitation to everybody here. For the August ride. Well. So, August 11, th we are host. Well, we're co-organizing the right for your life, right for Magnus.

[201:07] It's a ride that's completely free. It's an advocacy ride we have confirmed. Why, I can't really say, but we have several people confirmed as speakers, and it will be a phenomenal event. We're we're looking to have 4,000 writers. So we would love. And it's also gonna be a a walk and a run. So we're we're just, you know. It's a very sad thing, but it's also, I think it'll help the community in many ways, and and we're just very grateful for all the support that I've had so far from the city and from the county and from C, dot and everybody, and yeah, so hopefully, you guys can make it it will start at 9, 30, and the ceremony will be at 1230, and it starts from the 360 parking lot, which is where the buff classic leaves from. If we will ride to Magnus's bike and then come back, and it'll end at fair and field.

[202:10] so. Thank you. Send us a email. Yeah, I was just gonna say, yeah. Thinking. You said so. There's no meeting in July at all. Okay. Unless you want to call one. I didn't mean to express shock. But yeah. Also, Mike. I'll cancel. I'll cancel that meeting as well. It's cancelled on the website. But I. Oh, okay. Resend it on your calendars, Michael. Thank you. Aaron. Alright. Well, if there's nothing else, I will happily entertain a motion to adjourn. I second. I move.

[203:00] I'm Yeah. Treaty! We'll get it. So. Day. Alright. We are adjourned until August. Thanks. Everyone great meeting. Thank you so much. Good night. Good night.