January 22, 2025 — Transportation Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:01] Okay, we're recording. Excellent. Thank you. It is 6 o'clock on January 20, second, 2025. I'm calling to order the 1st tab meeting of the year for the city of Boulder. Why don't we start with our technical host and rules? Assuming everybody who's in the waiting room has been let in. Yes. Okay. Thank you for attending the Transportation Advisory Board meeting to strike a balance between meaningful, transparent engagement and online security. The following rules will be applied for this meeting. This meeting has been called to conduct the business of the city of Boulder. Activities that disrupt delay or otherwise interfere with the meeting are prohibited. The time for speaking or asking questions will be limited to 3 min. And if you're joining by phone, use Star 9 to raise your hand and star 6. To unmute. Each person shall register to speak at the meeting, using that person's real name. Any person believed to be using a name other than the one they are commonly known by.

[1:10] will not be permitted to speak at the meeting. No video will be permitted except for city officials, employees, and invited speakers. All others will participate by voice. Only. The person presiding at the meeting shall enforce these rules by muting anyone who violates any rule. The Q. And a function is enabled, and it will be used for individuals to communicate with the host. It should only be used for technical platform related questions. Only the host and individuals designated by the host will be permitted to share their screen. During this time. Thanks very much, Sydney. So we have not met since. Just before the Thanksgiving break And, as is unfortunately typical every time that there is a fatality on our transportation network. It is our custom

[2:09] to open up the Tab meeting, following that with a recognition of another failure of the system. A 73 year old man who was running his name is Richard Poley. Had a collision with a cyclist on one of our multi use pads. This is, of course, one of the more rare instances of traffic fatalities that we see in boulder. But it's on our transportation network. It is a reminder that we would like to take care everywhere, and every time we're traveling in the city of Boulder, and I don't want it to go unremarked. but I am informed investigation is still ongoing as to the cause of the crash. There has been a determination not to charge anyone, I believe, and Boulder police Department had made a statement that excessive speed was not considered

[3:09] a factor in the crash. So We, of course, strive for 0 deaths on our transportation network, and we will continue to do so. I don't know if anyone, Valerie, if you have anything to add, or any new information since we last discussed this. Good evening. My name is Garrett Slater, and I am acting as the director for this evening's tab. Valerie is out of town, and. Thank you. I didn't realize that. Sorry. Yes, Valerie did indicate. This might be a question, and I just I did check in with her, and she said, we have no new information about this matter to update at this time. Okay, would any other member of cab like to weigh in?

[4:00] Yeah, it's sad. And it's particularly sad for me, because I would like to encourage more active transportation. And sometimes these things happen. So it is, of course, a consideration. As we've been talking to Boulder County about the new bikeway, the highway, 119 bikeway. I recall some conversations specifically with Boulder County staff about sightlines at particular locations where cyclists will be entering or exiting the the bikeway, and in particular conflicts between slower users was, those comments were well taken, and I think they inform the design. So at this particular crash location. I can't believe I can't imagine that we could make the sight lines any better. But work continues to keep everyone safe, and I would appreciate and do appreciate our ongoing partnership with staff and county city staff and county staff in doing so.

[5:03] Thank you. Okay, I haven't pulled up the agenda. That's what I'm looking for badly here, little scattered this evening my apologies. but I believe we are ready to move on to the next item of the agenda which I am expecting will be an approval of last meeting's minutes. Is that correct? Can someone help me out here? That's correct. November 18th minutes. That's right. Good. Does any tab member have any additions, corrections, clarifications. seeing none, I will entertain a motion to approve the draft minutes of the November Tab meeting. I move we approve the draft minutes of the November 18th Tab meeting. Well, said, sir.

[6:00] I second. Thank you, madam. Any discussion? Well, no, because we already asked for that. All in favor. Thanks very much. The minutes are approved. Thank you, Meredith, again for another excellent job. Okay, we will turn it over now to public comment and open this up to members of the public who would like to speak. If you are on the zoom call, please raise your hand. I'm going to hand this over back to Sydney to handle the the logistics and the calling, and the unmuting, and all that appreciate your help. Thank you. The fun stuff so just reminder you'll have 3 min to speak, and that timer will actually show up in my window. It's kind of small, but it'll be in. Yeah. My, my video. Lynn, it looks like you are up first, st going to give you access to speak, and there you should be able to unmute yourself.

[7:06] Hi, Just a second here, I just came in. I was walking today. I don't know how to walk anymore, really, because I'm always riding my bike, but just to slowed down too much, you know. Really. But you know, with these, without, like the big snowy part where you're just digging like there'd be too many times. I just have to get off my bike but I missed that address of where this crash was, and I really would like to know more information. It's not because I'm nosy. It's because I want to. I'm an empath, and I feel like anyone that could get in a crash for whatever reason. I want to know about it, so that I can at least try to avoid doing the same thing. And so for me, it's real

[8:09] kind of critical that the police haven't added anything more to this. That seems like it happened a while ago, and that there's just not. It's just like closed up, and that how many people have been hurt by a similar situation because they didn't know But I don't think that's helpful. So what can we do to get more information put forth? You know, if people are saying, Oh, it's for the security of the person or the situation. Well, what about the security of all the other bike riders that want to deal with this and as far as oh, 1st of all I wanted to say free Palestine, and that's very important, because and and the reason I bring up Palestine with this group is that all of these transportation projects, and all of this work that all of you are doing are all for naught. If we're blown up in World War 3

[9:15] on an issue with Palestine, and I'm confident that it will come to that. And so that's why I bring it up. Now. It's just like a major genocide. I mean, the whole world is upset about this. And it's just not okay. And it's just a bad precedent to set for justice and law. And all of these things that we deal with in the community all the time, and I wanted to bring up just how critical it is which you know, I always say this, that you know family, friendly neighborhoods. I you know I'm a family, too. I might be only one person, but I'm a family, and I live in this house, and sometimes other people live here too. And why am I singled out as like, you know? And why is the density set up based on this. And

[10:16] oh. Thank you, Lynn. I don't have anyone else for public comment. Looks like you're muted, Tila. Yeah. Playing with 2 devices. It's a bad idea tonight. I don't see anyone else, either. So last chance for members of the public to raise hands or chime in going going. Thank you very much. We will now close public comment and move on.

[11:06] We're actually going to move directly to matters and matters from staff for the access management and parking update. Alright. Good evening, tab members. Let me get my screen up. Sorry one second. Alright. Okay. Alright. Good evening. Oh, gosh! It's doing crazy things. Good evening, Tap members. My name is Lisa Hood. I'm a planner with planning and development services, and I'm joined by my teammates on this project. Chris Haglund from transportation and mobility, and Samantha Bromberg from community vitality. We're really excited to bring an Update on the access management and parking strategy or Amps project

[12:01] specifically the code and policy enhancements that we've been working on. We last talked to you back in October. So we've been hard at work. We've been doing lots of best practices research further developing our options and recommendations. And that's what we'll be showing to you tonight and hoping for your feedback. We have a pretty short presentation about 10 min. So we're going to get through all 3 topics. There's lots more detail, if you need it, on each of those topics. But we wanted to give you just a brief overview, and then we can take questions at the end. And again, yeah, we're hoping for feedback as we move forward on this project. Just a reminder that amps is really a 3 part project. So we're represented by the 3 different departments. And these 3 different focus areas. So our off street parking requirements, what we require on private property, our transportation demand management or Tdm requirements, and how we manage our on street parking, since all 3 of those topics relate to parking in some way. That's why we wanted to look at those holistically, and as we shift and change each one of these. They affect the other. So that's why we've been doing

[13:08] this is kind of a 3 part project. just a reminder on the project, scope and Applicability. This project was put into the work plan to implement the final outstanding recommendations from the Amps report that City Council adopted back in 2017, the 2 remaining items that we haven't yet completed from that report. We're updating the off street parking standards and developing a Tdm plan ordinance for new developments. The project was paused as we talked about last time we saw you. It was paused for a few years during Covid, but as we reinitiated it. Last year we had a new factor to bring in, which is the State bill that was passed that prohibits local governments from having minimum parking requirements for multifamily residential uses within a certain distance of transit, and so that added a new dimension to the project to incorporate compliance with that State bill, and then we also wanted to, as we thought, about pushing the envelope a little bit farther than the original Amps report had envisioned. That was really just going to be reduction of parking standards, but taking the step towards eliminating parking requirements, minimum parking requirements.

[14:16] We wanted to make sure we're incorporating those on street parking management strategies. So we're we're doing that holistic review of everything that's related to parking in the city in terms of applicability. I do want to be clear. This, the changes, like any code change, would apply to new developments and redevelopment. And so it wouldn't actually apply retroactively. So it would only come into effect, as properties are seeking permits or land use approvals, then they would be required to come into compliance with new standards. But it's not like we would be taking a property. That's just kind of sitting there, not requesting anything from the city and then applying these new regulations. That's just not how code changes typically work. So again, it focuses on new development and redevelopment.

[15:04] I'm gonna talk really, briefly about the off street parking standards. And then I'll pass it over to Chris and Sam. as you would have seen in the memo which linked to the City Council memo for tomorrow. The recommendations related to Off street parking staff is continuing to recommend eliminating minimum parking requirements citywide for all land uses. That's something we heard Tab express support for last time. We talked to you all. We've done a lot more best practice research on this and studying how parking is utilized in the city, and we continue to recommend that moving forward into community engagement. We also looked at maximum parking requirements. A lot of cities that eliminate their minimum parking requirements will add maximum parking requirements. And we in looking at the data, it just didn't seem that adding maximum parking requirements. Citywide has much of an impact on travel behavior or the amount of parking that's provided in a way that would be kind of worth the cost benefit of the administration of a maximum parking requirement.

[16:06] There's definitely utility for maximum parking requirements in specific areas like we have in the Boulder junction area. So we'd want to have the opportunity for that kind of more location. Specific maximums, but not necessarily at a citywide scale. We've heard a lot of comments about bicycle parking design standards and looking at our bicycle parking requirements. That is part of the same chapter of the code that we're looking at. We did look at over 30 peer communities on their number of bike parking stalls that are required, and Boulder is one of the highest in of those communities that we looked at. So we already have fairly high numerical requirements. But I think there's opportunity for us to relook at our design standards and see how we can accommodate the type of bikes that are more common these days, and also make sure that we're ensuring that there's secure parking throughout the community. For those who are biking.

[17:01] There are some other topics related to shared parking and ev charging that we also looked further into and just are going to continue studying how we can support, shared parking, and then for ev charging our requirements are actually in our energy conservation code. And when we look at other communities, they're pretty in line with what other communities are doing. And there wouldn't be much utility to adding that to the zoning code as well, since it's already in our energy conservation code. So that's a very fast overview of the recommendations related to off-street parking. I will pass it over to Chris, who will talk about Tdm. Thank you. Lisa Chris Hageland, principal project manager of transportation and mobility here to talk to you about our work on our Tdm. Ordinance for new development. Next slide, please. Thank you. In the fall of 2024 boards and council supported a tiered approach to ensure that the focus of this new ordinance is on the largest and most impactful developments

[18:02] and to help manage additional staffing needs and resources required to manage a new ordinance program. Following that input staff conducted additional work on using a three-tiered approach. This is based on some best practices found in the city of Denver that we've been working closely with tier. One tier 0 would be the smallest projects. These projects would be exempt. Tier. One would be a middle level of development. They would have required Tdm. Plans and annual financial guarantees, which I'll discuss later, but would not have specific targets and monitoring tier. 2, however, would be the largest, most significant projects with the biggest impact on surrounding areas. These would have vehicle trip generation targets based on land use, location and size and both annual and remedial financial guarantees to fund those ongoing Tdm programs at the site and monitoring and a compliance cycle as well.

[19:04] Site review automatically triggers based on development size. So we would. This would ensure that all large developments would be subject to the ordinance. But besides the smallest projects, those that would fit in tier 0 staff is also recommending exemptions for zoning that already have trip reduction ordinances. This includes Mu. 4 Rh. 6 and Rh. 7. This was for land uses 1st found in Boulder Junction, but now are appearing in community plans in other parts of our city, and then to advance our city affordable housing goals. We would also recommend either fully or partially exempting 100% affordable housing. And I think this is something we can discuss how that would be done next slide, please. So initial input from boards and council in that fall 2024 also included some input on the purpose of the ordinance. And what we heard loud and clear was the purpose of this new Tdm. Ordinance would not only be to mitigate the impacts and provide improved multimodal infrastructure and access, but to use this ordinance as a way to provide ongoing contributions to our city's transportation and climate goals.

[20:25] The new Tdm ordinance would solve issues with our current process and provide clarity and expectation for Tdm. Plans for city staff developers, tenants and the public. In developing a Tdm plan ordinance. There really are 2 key challenges that we need to address. The 1st is having a development requirement on a property owner. But knowing that Tdm plans and all the traditional and innovative Tdm program services and incentives are actually implemented by tenants. The second thing, knowing that Tdm programs, especially our most successful ones, like the ecopass or Vanpool subsidies, you know, these are things that have

[21:07] ongoing annual cost. Based on best practices and borrowing a lot from 2 municipalities in Virginia. The overarching approach centers on expanding the the use of the of the city, the city's current use of financial guarantees for those tier one and 2 tier projects. Annual financial guarantees would be put in place by 1st the developer and then the ongoing owner, and this would provide annual funding that is used by tenants or property managers to implement approved Tdm plans. Again, our most effective Tdm programs have annual costs. And so we need to have that mechanism in place to fund those over time. The remedial funding, which would just be for the highest tier tier 2. And this remedial guarantee is used to augment annual funds if the property is exceeding its vehicle trip generation target and is out of compliance. So

[22:10] those augment those annual funds and tries to get that property back into compliance, and then the annual funds would be raised, the requirement would be raised if we found a successful level of funding that worked initial financial guarantees rates, the rates of which we would charge the developers, and then property owners would be based on size, estimated employees, or residential units, and the estimated cost of required Tdm plan elements. This approach and expanded use of financial guarantees really provides the mechanism for property owners to pay the ongoing annual cost of Tdm programs. And of course, this does equate to a new ongoing cost to property owners of our largest developments. But we also have to remember that the removal of minimum parking requirements equates to a significant cost savings related to the construction and maintenance of parking spaces. And then that savings can be used for these types of Tdm programs. Next slide, please.

[23:19] So to summarize staff is recommending that the city continue to use its financial guarantee model, but expanded into an ongoing program, and then also to use that tiered approach not only to focus on the largest, most significant developments, but also to help manage those additional staff costs and resources. So you can imagine we can set those tier thresholds and triggers at a way to to manage both things, manage our focus on the most important projects and for city staff resources. We're also recommending exemptions as well for some types of development based on tabs. Input and then City Council's input at the study session tomorrow staff will continue to work on this policy and kind of work on the details of the other elements

[24:11] of a Tdm. Ordinance which includes the triggers and thresholds. The vehicle trip generation targets and methodologies, the financial guarantee rates which Tdm plan elements would be required in the process. And then also, what is the monitoring process and compliance requirements. and that is what I have. I will pass it on to Sam. Thanks, Chris. Sam Bromberg. From community vitality you might be able to hear. I'm a little under the weather today, so I apologize in advance. I'm going to do my best not to sneeze during this presentation. If you recall our 2 main focus areas for the on street parking management strategies are enhancing the effectiveness of the existing neighborhood parking program, also known as Npp and recommendations for new and redeveloped areas in response to the possibility of eliminating parking minimums.

[25:07] Next slide, please. The following are recommendations to enhance the effectiveness of the existing program, as well as you know, address the evolving needs of boulders. Residential and mixed use neighborhoods. They include evaluating and adapting policies for non residential parking and Npp zones, particularly near schools, commercial areas and other high demand zones which could include replacing the current 2 or 3 h time limits for non permit holders with paid parking to collaborate with the Boulder Valley School district to formalize park and walk zones around elementary schools. To consider reducing the number of guests and visitor permits available in overcrowded Npp zones. Currently residents can purchase up to 2 visitor permits with no annual usage limits in addition to multiple guest permits

[26:04] creating potential for misuse, so we could consolidate them into a simplified system and reduce the amount available while making sure that residents can still have access to that particular element of the program. Exploring, limiting Npp permits to one per eligible resident or driver to reduce access, vehicle, storage, and align parking permits with actual need. We could consider as well implementing an escalating rate structure for households requesting multiple permits To establish a Tdm wallet for Nbp residents by working with vendors to develop a program framework to encourage the use of alternative transportation options. and considering further limiting the availability of residential and visitor permits on mixed use blocks or for mixed use buildings to ensure that curbside access in those areas, balances residential needs with those of businesses, visitors and employees of the area

[27:07] next slide, please. The following are recommendations for new and redeveloped areas. And these are just to limit new Mpp programs to areas significantly to only areas significantly impacted by commercial activity schools or recreational facilities and to develop thresholds. For when a new Mpp. Is proposed for an area impacted by new or redevelopment based on utilization data and anticipated new trip generation. and that concludes my my section. All right. So that's all 3. We've joined all of the recommendations for the various topics onto this slide if it's helpful. And then I also repeated just the questions that we had in the Tab Memo. Essentially, there's a lot of words on here, but essentially, we're looking for your feedback on each of the recommendations for each of the 3 topics or for the recommendations, and whether you support the direction that staff is going in, or if you'd like to see us tweak certain things. We'd love to hear that. And I look forward to your questions and discussion.

[28:10] Thanks very much. Team. So typically, what we would like to do is open this up for clarifying questions if people have them and and then circle back to tab members who want to sort of give feedback. And I is it. Darcy? Have you been? You've been the staff you've been the staff liaison between tab and staff on this effort. Is that correct? So when it when it comes like, let's do our clarifying questions. But then I would really like to hear from you 1st in terms of the substance of of this, just to see what what went into it. If you could advise us on on the process there. So Darcy, Mike, and Trini, do you have any questions at this point to clarify Mike.

[29:00] Yeah. On the neighborhood parking program. You talked about limiting future implementation of that. Is it in the scope of what you're looking at to increase the prices for these programs. I understand. They can be pretty low about $50 a year, which is subsidizing private vehicles. And so that's my question. Great question. I think we will be looking at that. In the scope of this work we have been working on a financial analysis of the program which we're we're planning to share. A little bit later on, when we revisit our final recommendations for the guest and visitor permits, and all of the different kinds of permits and paid parking and the things that we can implement while we're making changes to this program. So absolutely, that's that's part of the work that we're that is already underway.

[30:07] Sam, can you remind me? I know that the the price of the annual permits went up recently from like $17 to $30 a year for for ramp or Npp residents. Is there another scheduled price hike. So the last price hike from the original revitalizing access in boulder work from 2019 was to get the price up to $50, which was last year. Okay. So for 2025, we did increase the price with, you know this, basically the Cpi, so it went up to 51 50, which is the cost per permit in 2025. Okay, thank you. And that's the last schedule currently anticipated. Price hike. Is that right? Like it's gonna stay there. Right. And and that's part of the work of this project that we're also. Sooner. Is is, you know, we're gonna be presenting that with additional materials towards the end of the project to kind of show where we're at in the cost recovery. That was, you know, originally

[31:11] in 2019. And then how can we like with reconfiguring some of these other permits as as we're making these changes. What's that gonna look like? We're we're doing some work to kind of evaluate what that, how that will impact our financials. Right and the cost of a commuter permit that stayed pretty stable, didn't it? It's around. I think it's about 39, 50 per month right now. Oh, can you buy it monthly now. You can buy it monthly. Now. Yeah, we recently made that change. Towards the end of last year. So it's a little bit more affordable for some folks, so they don't have to pay like big quarterly chunks. Yeah. Okay, but still buying it by the quarter at about 40 bucks

[32:02] per period. So that would be $120, so still more than double what the Resident would pay. That's correct. Okay? Other questions. Sorry. I didn't mean to hog it. There. No, I'm just listening. Okay, I have a couple of questions. So I would like to go to the let's let's go back to bike parking. I'm going to just kind of start back back at the top where you were. There's a there's a proposal to reevaluate sort of requirements for bike parking I'm assuming I'm assuming that includes at least like the number of bike parking slots and what kind of development that they would be for? Is there any consideration about, and and accommodating kind of larger bikes and cargo bikes and bikes with trailers and things. Is there any discussion about?

[33:03] Whether bike parking spaces should be preferentially placed. The way that certain ev charging spots are or handicap access parking spots are. Yeah, that's a great question. So as part of this we are looking, we did look at the number of bike parking spaces that we require. And that's what I was saying that when we looked at other communities we have pretty high numbers compared. And then the design we're also looking at. When we implemented the most recent bike parking requirements in 2014, we added location requirements like they have to be within a certain distance of the main door. So we'll look at those again. We're working with stakeholders like bike boulder and community cycles. Some of their ideas of how to improve those design requirements and accommodating the larger bikes as well as accommodating e-bike charging, and whether we can add some requirements, for, like a certain amount of chargers in. Within, yeah. Has there been any discussion for accommodating like sheltered bike parking locations, so that.

[34:05] Yeah, that'll be part of it. So we have different design standards for short term and long term biking so, or bike parking. So we'll look at both of those. That's great. Okay? And then here's a question, and I'm not really sure it's specific to the on street off street. But whoever would like to weigh in on this. I know that there is a Federal designation for a lightweight electric vehicle or low speed vehicle. And they're kind of capped at a certain speed. They're usually smaller. They have less stringent because they're not really highway rated. So some less stringent like road safety and crash survivability requirements. To my knowledge. No one's offering these for sale yet. But I'm just curious if if that comes online. So these would be like slightly more sturdy and roadworthy golf cart. Kind of things are we in a position right now to fold that kind of new vehicle into our existing

[35:12] regulatory and and code framework? Or would we have to come back and rethink that whole thing again? So I'm particularly interested, like, if that comes around, I would think that those vehicles ought to be parking for cheaper, or be able to park in an Npp. Without having a permit, or have some other preferential sort of parking access. because we would want to be encouraging people to use these smaller, lighter, lower impact vehicles for their everyday trips, especially to congested places. Do we have the flexibility in what we're planning to do right now to accommodate that kind of a vehicle. You know I haven't had that question come up, and I don't know much about that. I don't know if Chris and Sam maybe know more about those types of vehicles, but I'd have to look at how we define like vehicle and bicycle to see how flexible it could be. But if that were to come up we could. You know this is the the massive overhaul. If we have small tweaks that we need to make, that could be easier to do at a future date. And then part of the

[36:14] I don't know, Sam. Part of the question was related to on street parking. I don't know if, Sam, you have any response related to that. I mean historically, we haven't treated different vehicles differently in terms of permitting with the exception of. you know, camper vans, which are pretty much not allowed within the city of Boulder. So it's certainly something that we could investigate. I think we can always be flexible and iterate on the current program, you know, that's what we're doing right now. So if it did become prevalent, you know, we could certainly revisit that. I don't know if it's currently in the scope of work for what we're planning right now. But

[37:01] I'm certainly happy to take that feedback and and discuss with. Okay, thanks. Do the current Ev charging requirements. That are already covered in our environmental plan, whose name I don't remember at the moment. They have parameters about how close to it, how many chargers, how close to an entrance! So there is that kind of preferential placement for these ev spots. Is that right? Yeah, there's a lot of detail in there. That I don't know, because it's a lot about electrician like electrical stuff about the requirements that they need. But it's pretty detailed, and it looked pretty similar to what other communities have. So we'll look at that in more detail about like distance, but. As far as like a certain number that have to be ev ready versus ev capable versus there's it's it gets.

[38:00] Right. Held in the energy conservation code. Yeah. Right? Interesting. Okay, can we go to the Tdm stuff? I. It's very confusing to me to be calling this a 3 tiered system when there's a tier 0 that doesn't count for anybody. That's not a tier. Can you respond to that? Well, I I mean, that's to me. That's just kind of a naming thing. Before that we have some that are exempt and then 2 levels of that have different types of requirements. So I mean, if if the. There's, but there's no. We can name it differently, we can name it differently. Okay. But there's no requirement for tier 0. And it's tier 0. Like, does that include just like a single family home? Is that. yeah, would that be a tier negative one? Well, yeah, single family homes would not come under this ordinance. It would only be for multifamily residential. Okay. Yeah. It seems odd to me that you would have a rule on the books and say, if it's multifamily residential, these are the rules. But you don't need to comply with this particular rule. If you're below a particular size.

[39:07] Yeah, I mean, all. Virtually all ordinances across the country have size, exemption. So if you're below a certain size, you're exempted from the ordinance. Many of them call them tier 0. So we were just borrowing that. Okay, thank you, Darcy. I see your hand is up. Oh, I was just gonna just gonna say that that there, there it is, kind of a standard, and it does provide that threshold. So you can see, you know, where the the impacted tiers begin. So I think it's important to articulate, you know, below, which is not impacted, and especially because it is. You know, we're looking at commercial office industrial multifamily. We're not looking at, you know. single family residential. Okay. and I know that we've been talking for years about how to make these Tdm requirements sort of more mandatory and enforceable. And from the tail end of your comments, Chris, and from what I read in the memo, we still haven't figured out

[40:05] what that would look like. Do do I mean, do we have a framework for imposing deadlines? Accountability? You know. penalties. If you don't meet it within a certain timeframe would these carry on to subsequent developers and tenants. Yes, so to answer that question. Yes, it. It would be an ordinance that is tied to the property, so, no matter who owned it, managed it. The requirement remains. And so you know, what we're thinking is that for the largest developments they would have a vehicle trip generation target. That target would be determined by the size of the development, the location of development. and some other factors could go into that. But those are the primary ones. and then we would do annual monitoring to see if they were in compliance of that.

[41:04] if they were out of compliance. That's when the remedial funds are used to augment the annual funds that go to fund those Tdm programs. And you keep continually add to funding until you create a program and fund a program that works to meet that target. So that's how it's done. Generally you look at a lot of the best practices. Look at 3 year cycles. So if you're compliant 3 years in a row, then, other than you know, annual monitoring stops, but can continue at a periodic basis, or if or if based on request. So we have thought of all those details. A lot of those details, aren't, you know, in the memo, because of what we're bringing to council, is really looking at what the overall approach is in terms of the use of financial guarantees. We want to make sure that council is comfortable with that approach, and then the tiered system, and then we'll begin fleshing out those details. But we've done a lot of work on those details. They just weren't shared in the memo in the.

[42:07] Okay. Oh! At this time. Great. Thank you. okay. Now, I'm gonna turn to Npp questions, Sam. I noted in the memo that there were discussions and you'd looked at several other different kinds of residential parking permits and and mixing. especially in in zones where it's near high demand areas. I really like the use of that word. But I, some communities consider the availability of off street parking. And I didn't see that in the recommendations here. and that's come up multiple times, actually in current and PP, well past. But new npp applications. Can you comment on that? Yeah, so just to clarify some communities, and it's pretty rare. But there are a couple they

[43:08] essentially encourage folks in managed parking areas to use off street parking. If it's available, either by a pricing mechanism or by simply not allowing them to purchase permits. For on street parking, it's something that we definitely did consider for the city of Boulder. But to be honest with you, Tila, it's like really, really complicated actually implement, because it requires us, knowing who has off street parking, how much off street parking and maintaining that list and keeping it accurate and up to date, and just putting that together, to begin with, was gonna be such a monumental task. It it didn't. It felt like the juice wasn't really worth to squeeze in terms of the city resources needed to make it happen. So that was really why we didn't make it a recommendation. Not that we didn't fully consider it, and you know, I think it's a really cool idea. It's just one of those things that would be really, really hard to actually implement. In reality.

[44:07] Okay, I'll save the rest of that thought for comment. you talked about high demand areas which I think is great. That would that also include like hiking and recreation areas. So like, I live near sanitas, we have camp. That's seasonal. So was there any thinking about regulating these things by time of year by peak, demand seasons, and and would like the the proximity of hiking trail access, count as one of these generators that would justify using an Npp. Right well, as you know, the trail access management is sort of a separate conversation at this point, but I would say, in terms of, you know, pricing we we could. We haven't considered aside from Chautauqua doing seasonal pricing because the reality is most of our commercial areas, and even the school areas most of the year are gonna be

[45:15] pretty well utilized. And so it's generally our perspective that it's it's easier for for Parkers to understand. If the regulations don't change season to season like it's it's something that's really hard to put on a sign. And that's 1 of the things that was challenging for us with camp. Is that you know? How? How do you put on a sign you have to pay to park, but only on the weekends and holidays between this holiday and that holiday, but not not everyone knows what the holidays are. And so I think you know, while we certainly can consider that. And the trail access management conversation continues. It. It might make more sense for some of these areas that are impacted for almost all of the year to do something that's consistent throughout the year, so that there's there no one's questioning, you know. When do I need to pay? And when do I not need to pay we wanna make sure that it's it's easy for the the user to understand.

[46:19] Okay, I think the rest of my stuff falls into comments afterwards. So does anyone else have any clarifying questions. Yeah. Have you looked into the concept of a parking benefits district where prices would be set that market rates and revenues would benefit the neighborhoods and blocks where they're collected. I think this is a question for me. I think we're we're considering something along those lines. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a parking benefit district. But one of the things that we're what we're considering is, for example, to fund the Tdm. Wallet, you know. Could we have neighborhoods opt into having paid parking, and that paid parking would fund that Tdm wallet for those neighborhoods.

[47:19] So that's that's something that we're considering as well, and that we're going to be factoring into our our analysis that we're doing to understand, you know, what can we actually pay for? What can we not pay for in terms of, you know, those additional benefits? So that's something that hopefully, you'll see more of when we come to you next. Okay. Darcy. I just wanna clarify. So the Tdm wallet that is listed here, Sam is is an expansion of the communify program that is currently in Boulder Junction. Is that right? Or what is the you'd say more about the design of that Tdm wallet.

[48:07] And I think. Be able to speak to that a little better, Sam. So I would say, it's it's using a similar platform and technology, but kind of in a different environment. So the Communify project is essentially, you know, we're using a a parking cash out mechanism for businesses. This would be more at the neighborhood level, where Sam, you know, was explaining that if a neighborhood had paid parking, that revenue would be collected, and then that revenue would be reinvested back into the neighborhood and could be used to provide things like a neighborhood ecopass or B cycle memberships. And so that's the idea of the transportation wallet. But likely it would use a similar like a sophomore plat software platform and stuff like that that is used in our community project.

[49:00] Okay, yeah, thank you. I think that's a really important detail. Okay, time for feedback. And Darcy, if you wouldn't mind giving us a little of your insight from being personally involved in this. Yeah, sure. Well, 1st of all, Tila, I want to thank you for your insightful questions. And everybody, because I think you know, really kind of digging into the content of all 3 of these approaches. with regard to amps is really important, and to make sure that we understand all the details of everything. But, as Chris said, you know, there's a lot more detail that will come out and will be revealed as this project continues, and also, just to be clear, I've worked most closely with Chris, and to understand the Tdm component, and haven't dug as deeply into the on street off street. But I am really excited to see the On street parking innovations here, the Tdm. Wallet, and especially the Park, and walk near schools. I would really love to see

[50:09] school school oriented mobility hubs where parents can reliably drop off their kids in a safe place a quarter mile or less from their schools in my neighborhood. This is a huge problem, because there are several schools concentrated in South Boulder, and the traffic is crazy. And so I know that a lot of neighbors. We've received email about this that neighbors in in my area are really concerned about the concentration of parking during school drop off and pickup times. And there's so many wonderful options for better drop off and pick up areas that could really be used as successful mobility hubs for those schools. So I would really love to see that develop. And I'd love to be involved in that. With regard to the Tdm. Work, I think Chris has done an incredible job at really digging into this the tiers and giving Tdm. More policies

[51:06] and the Tdm ordinance some teeth. So this is an issue that we've dealt with where you know, large properties haven't had that requirement to pay into a Tdm program. Necessarily. Some have, of course, but you know, Updating those and having a way to continually kind of revisit and make sure that those remain appropriate as tenants take over those properties after they've been developed. That's really important as properties are redeveloped. So I think that we're going to see that really contribute to success of our Tdm efforts. And I guess I'm very curious and sort of as a transportation professional. I'm very interested in how all of these strategies can work together to gradually, you know, as we, as we move closer to our mode. Share targets. You know, and we're kind of repurposing areas that would have been used for parking, or were, you know, helping developers and property owners, you know, make different uses of those of those areas. I think we're going to

[52:21] really see some wonderful kind of knock on effects here, and I'm hoping that they this this 3 part strategy, really moves us closer to those overall goals. So I think it's a great start. I'm excited to see. I'm really hoping that Council moves it forward so we can get all those details out there and just revisit this as the ordinance is developed, and each of these pieces of the amps program comes together. So that's just my my kind of quick. Thanks very much. Mike. I know you had some comments and feedback so if you don't mind, we can turn to you now.

[53:05] Yeah, I had 2 slides I sent. You might be able to share your screen. Oh, okay, Let me. I should have given you some warning. I was gonna call on you next. Sorry. Alright since I sent them in. Now let's see. Can just chime in. Great. I think. Maybe. Yeah, thanks that I'm really excited about all the all the possibilities. And like Darcy said, I mean just allowing this to create safe zones for drop offs. I think that's such a fantastic opportunity for the city and for parents. And you know I'm in South Boulder a lot, too. So I'm very familiar with what Darcy. Talk. About, and I think it's a really fantastic opportunity. And so kudos to the city and kudos to Chris for all this great work and everybody else.

[54:08] I guess I'm I guess I'm not quite clear on how those zones would work. like, I appreciate that. There's discussion of allowing multiple short visits a day to to an Npp zone. I think that was probably in response to one of my earlier comments about how parents trying to drop off at school. They're just there for 20 min, but they need to do it twice a day, and I know that as part of the it's not active transportation, but the the there's like a competition between schools. In in Bvsd to have you know, the most active Walks and bikes to school, and parking a quarter mile away, or a 10th of a mile away, and then walking the rest of the way counts for the students. Sorry I haven't been in Pvsd for a couple of years.

[55:02] So that's already, you know. Bbsd has already tried to incentivize this, and so how would this zone or area look different, or operate differently? Well, I mean. I can tell you that we're not coming right now with the finished product to you to show you exactly how it's going to be, it does. It's going to require some work on our part. But it would be identifying blocks that are, you know, with a certain within a certain range of those elementary schools where parents need to drop off their kids and then walk in and make sure that we're advertising them, and that the rules and regulations reflect the ability for parents to. you know. Maybe park a little bit further away, a couple of blocks away, and then walk their child from there, so that they can take advantage of more opportunity. That's not just the opportunities. That's right. In front of the school. Yeah, that's terrific. Thank you. Well, and I mean, it's not not just elementary schools. They're.

[56:01] Middle schools. Environment constrained school, any school that's located in a neighborhood where access is severely limited. Southern hills. Middle School is a great example of that so is centennial up in North Boulder and high peaks. I mean, there are lots of schools that are in a very transportation traffic, constrained environment, and those are the ones I think we should really start with. Whether they're, you know, whatever level they are. But it's really important to actually, you know, provide an environment that helps parents make that choice to drop off their kids and not drive them up to the front door. So this is, I mean, I know that that's a there are lots of levels of and would that have to be part of that conversation? But specifically, looking at those kind of environmentally constrained environments or schools would be really important. Great. Thank you, Darcy. Okay, Mike. I can see your Oh, good!

[57:00] Your your slide. Oh, good! I wanted to talk about. Bicycle racks and the fact that we have really good standards for new developments. But they're pretty new, and we don't have enough new developments and a lot of our existing developments, our in some ways unusable like this. This rack here at home depot being just inches from this solid wall. I could have shown the same situation if I had a picture at full cycle, a bicycle stop, and I've talked to them about that. And I mean, it might be an issue where they're dealing with parking minimum. So when we get rid of that, maybe they'll have a space to put real bike rack. So but here we also see at the dairy center, some bikes locked railing. And here's 1 of these hanging bike racks, which is really outdated. Near some

[58:05] some section 8 housing and then, if I can go to the next one oh. just another one of those hanging racks that got railed by a car on Broadway near my dentist, and then this whole Strip Mall area on the south side of Arapahoe across from the peloton. I don't think it has any bike racks. And all the way from Conoco to Sturtz and Copeland so people just have to like. I've found this railing was the only place I could lock my bike. So I know it's it's daunting to think about retroactively applying these standards to all of our existing developments. But Council Member Shuhart has some ideas about taking an incremental approach of

[59:05] looking at categories like large supermarkets and hospitals to begin with, and then advancing from there. So I know that's outside the scope of amps. But I hope that city council can start us down that road. Thanks. Thank you, Mike. I completely second, I've experienced all of those frustrations that you have pictures of. And it it was sort of top of mind this afternoon, as I was getting ready for this meeting, like, I know. retroactive enforcement is a difficult thing, a retroactive, just sort of remodeling still, not on the right verb there. But this is not on the scale of saying, like your roof on your house needs to be more fireproof than it is. you're running a risk by having a fiery roof. You are maybe missing out on customers by not having adequate bike parking.

[60:08] But the fix is just not the same. We are not talking about, you know, a 50,000 or a hundred $1,000 improvement. Here we are talking about meeting certain engineering standards that we're enforcing in some parts of the city, and some parts of the city got overlooked. I would really love to hear from staff about. Why, why, this particular kind of requirement can't be the subject of the kind of spot enforcement that we do for shoveling sidewalks after a snow right? There's no, it's on the books. There's no concerted effort, really, by city Enforcement staff to nail people who aren't in compliance. But if you submit an inquire boulder ticket. Someone's going to look into it, and maybe then that property owner has 6 months to install a compliant

[61:01] bike rack. Why why can't we make that kind of approach. I can take this one, Tila. That's a great point. And I was thinking with those pictures, that code enforcement is a part of this story as well, and I don't know for sure exactly how like what level they would require compliance for those type of things, especially particularly for the one that got completely destroyed, we wouldn't likely allow them to put something like that back. They'd have to come into compliance with our standards once it's removed. I'd have to look into that a little bit more. But I just want to express that we understand that this is an issue. Unfortunately, we are trying to keep this scope limited because we have that state deadline for the off street parking. And we do think that it's really important that as we make those changes to off street parking, especially if we are pushing for eliminating minimum bike parking requirements. We want to have the Tdm ordinance coming at the same time, and the changes to the on street parking. And so that's why we're really focused on keeping this scope.

[62:00] As as is so that it's achievable and approvable by the end of June, when we need to meet the deadline for the State. That's not to say that we would not be enthusiastic about looking into this as a future project. If it's put on our work plan, and certainly we have, there's more we would need to look into. I know the like. The city attorney's office would need to look into the legality of retroactive application of things, and you know it's a little bit outside of the norm. And you mentioned we do some retroactive, but it's more for like life safety things like wildfire. So it's a it's a complex issue. We have a very specific deadline, which is unusual. But it all kind of comes back to that trifecta that we really want to have all 3 of these topics considered together and not just tackle the off street parking by the deadline. We want to bring in Tdm. And on street parking at the same time, because they do so, so integrate with each other.

[63:01] Thank you. It was a really nice way of letting you down gently. Garrett. I didn't know if your hand was up, or if it was just like a mouse icon, but I saw a hand on your side. You're trying to weigh in or no. If you see a hand I didn't purposely raise it. Okay, I see. Trini purposely raised her hand. So we'll move to Trini. Yeah, I mean, I think that this is such an important part of this conversation, because as a city, we're trying to encourage micro mobility, and we're trying to encourage more people to get on their bikes. And I know that if I don't find a place to park my bike and feel that it's going to be safe. I'm not going to go there. It affects in so many levels as a business owner, as a person that may choose to not do what we want them to do, because their fear for the safety of their bike, you know, and and with a lot of with, and rightfully so so maybe it could be approached from a different angle and just kind of integrated into a different part of the conversation. I mean, maybe you guys can get support through other

[64:11] funding sources. I mean, I really don't know. But I think it's really such a crucial part for us to thrive, and what we really want to do as a city. So that's just my 2 cents. Yeah, I I feel it's a bit akin to like Ada. Compliance right? There's there's some places that just are not and I don't actually know what the status is. If we, if we have a a property, a publicly accessible building. that, you know, has commercial activity, and it's not compliant for some of these, some. Sometimes it gets grandfathered in, and you just can't get there if you have a mobility device, but where we can make modifications, I think we should be seizing the opportunity to do so.

[65:01] Darcy, I saw your hand up. Yeah, you know, last time we had a conversation about amps at the beginning of this process, you know, we I think we all. I remember specifically bringing up the issue of trip chains and recognizing people's behavior as they move around the city, and knowing that, you know, just having new developments have to meet all these requirements. Doesn't allow people to continue their journeys on a bike. For instance, you know, you need to make sure that you're going to have safe, predictable bike parking at every part of your destination, and a lot of people are making lots of different stops during the day. Right. So I see this. I recommended to Council Member a shoehard some ideas that we've seen in Denver. So there's a company called Darrow that produces a electronic bike rack system that is called bike heap. And they're really amazing. They're not that expensive. And cdot is providing grant funding for those kinds of projects. So that's something I'll be looking into

[66:15] just in my professional capacity. But I think we also really need to work on making bike parking sexy and attractive to business owners and making sure that they are incentivized and want to accommodate bicyclists, you know, looking at Arapaho like Mike, I think that was a great sort of image that you provided of that section of Arapaho. that whole area is being Redone. Right? So Co. 7 is undergoing a big process. And this is a wonderful moment to make the project managers behind the Co. 7 project, including Jean Sanson, aware of those needs. And really, how do we integrate more space for better bike parking. How do we help make sure that those business owners are excited about providing more bike parking? As that becomes a more multimodal corridor. So you know, we've got a lot of these big projects happening right now with trying to really incentivize and increase multimodality.

[67:12] And you know, bike safe, predictable, well located bike parking that accommodates e-bikes and trailers is absolutely essential. So I want to see that also wrapped in. But I completely understand the issue of the timing of just getting part of this done and out there and approved. That's great. Let's continue to work together to make bike parking, you know, sexy, attractive, important, valued by business owners and helping them understand that their clientele will really appreciate it. But really keeping in mind those those trip chains that people are taking every day, I think, is essential as part of this process. Thanks, Darcy. this item has gone a little longer than scheduled maybe because we scheduled it, and I was hiding in the trunk of a car at the time.

[68:02] But we set this agenda. So I just want to have one last parting shot on the Npps. While we're having, you know, thinking about retroactive placement and and activity. changing the way the existing Npp works is does not function the same way as like a retroactive code enforcement issue with property owners. This is a program the outlines of which are in city code. But the regulations live with the city manager's office, and I am encouraged by several of the of the changes and the things that you're planning to look at with the Npp. And with Ramp, and I wish we could just pick one acronym and stick with it for all of them. but in particular, limiting new Npps to where they're really necessary. Seems to me to go completely hand in hand with reducing the ones that are not necessary. I've been prickly in particular about the Mapleton Hill, Npp. For a long time.

[69:05] because the lot sizes here are huge, and the availability of on street frontage in front of a particular house is huge, and there are blocks of that Npp. Where there is literally no house with a street address on that street. They are. It's alley access and side yards for some of these giant houses who frankly do not deserve a monopoly on the on street space there. and it is entirely walkable to downtown, and I understand people don't want come to, you know, strangers coming and parking in front of their house, unless it's their maid or their house cleaner, or their window cleaner, or their tree Trimmer and I see this all the freaking time. So I would really like, if we are going to examine whether Npps are serving the function, they ought to be

[70:01] and are not serving the function they ought to be. We shouldn't be falling back on a bureaucratic rule that says they have to be demonstrably under serving for 3 entire years, when you can just look at where it is and tell that that is not an appropriate block or block face for an Npp. So I'm I'm just gonna leave it there. But that was my fundamental. I got other comments, but I don't think any of them are going to be as You know they're not. They're not going to make a big difference for your presentation tomorrow night. To council. So in large part I share Pharisees view. This is very encouraging progress, encouraging work. Thank you very much for that. It's always, you know, good to see the steps in the right direction. But I think there are a couple opportunities here to make some of those steps a lot more meaningful. Thanks everyone. Okay. So unless I see any hands real quick from Tab Nope. Excellent! We are going to move on to the next item, the Sumac Avenue project update.

[71:05] which is somehow scheduled for 30 min, and I bet you don't need all 30 min. I bet we're gonna use significantly, less than the full 30 min. I thought so. Yes, thank you. Thank you. I wanted to introduce this item, which will be presented by John Mcfarlane, one of our senior planners. Sumac Avenue is an important project that we're working on between Broadway and 19th Street, and which many of you have heard about in the past. And what makes it unique is that due to annexation agreements that the residents along sumac are subject to at the time that they were annexed into the city of Boulder, they have a funding obligation to participate in the improvements of sumac. So this is an anomaly in the way we typically bring our projects forward. And because of that super intensive community engagement and bringing this one forward. We wanted to keep you informed about the process, and with that I'm going to hand it off to John.

[72:02] Thank you, Garrett, and good evening, Tab members. My name is John Mcfarlane, Senior transportation planner in the planning Division. I'm leading planning and public engagement for the Sumac Avenue improvements, and I'm also joined on the call this evening by our project manager for the project, Roger Kane, and, as Garrett mentioned. I'll be giving a brief update tonight on the project and what staff is currently working on and our public engagement. So since my last update to the board. In May of 2024, the project team hosted a public open house at Crestview Elementary photo shown on the right there, where we shared the project update since the project pause in 2020 and a concept design for the corridor on which we asked residents to provide their feedback. We also offered an online opportunity for residents to review the information and share their feedback, which lasted into the summer months in total from the open house and questionnaire. 80% of sumac residents participating supported the concept design. And since that last public touch point, we've updated the concept design to reflect feedback, we heard and shown on the screen. Here are improvements. The design focuses on this includes pavement, reconstruction, improving roadway drainage for everyday storm events, improving multimobile connectivity through new sidewalks and pedestrian crossings, a new flashing beacon crossing at Broadway to Wonderland Lake Trailhead, and preserving on street parking and restoring landscaping, where feasible which we've heard from the community as a priority.

[73:37] And here is the timeline showing where we're at in the project process in terms of where we're at and next steps we're in the concept and final design here highlighted in red on the screen, and Roger and I are currently meeting one on one with Sumac Avenue property owners. We are holding these meetings to discuss the design update since the public open house. And, as Garrett mentioned with the existing annexation agreements, we're also discussing their project cost, share obligation. Under these agreements.

[74:05] and, as Garrett mentioned, you know, the project is pretty unique for us in the city, because the funding includes city funds, and these contributions from property owners with frontage or land affected by the project, and this includes the Boulder Valley School district. Roger and I will continue meeting with the property owners through the winter, and as we're holding these meetings, residents may reach out to you all on the board with questions or concerns about the project and its funding, and we encourage you all to send Staff these inquiries, and we can help respond, Roger, and my contact information is on the next slide, and, as I said, we can help help respond to inquiries from the public. After means conclude, we'll finalize the funding agreements with the property owners, and we anticipate beginning construction in quarter 3 of this year with an anticipated construction timeline of of 9 to 12 months. So that concludes my presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions you all may have. Thank you.

[75:03] Thanks very much. Questions. Tab time in. I can't see you very well. John, can you say a little bit more about preserving on street parking on sumac? I'm curious about what the participants have said about that. Yeah. So with the project improvements, we'll be installing curb and gutter, and with that to accommodate curb gutter, and the sidewalk on the north side will have to restrict parking in some areas. And with that also kind of we're looking at the right of way lines and where existing landscaping is. And so in discussing with property owners, especially with that, they have the cost share obligation. You know. We want to take their feedback into account, since they'll be sharing the cost of the project. And so you know, one thing that we're talking to them on is if they want on street parking in front of their house. We can kind of accommodate that. We're feasible, but kind of on the flip side of that. If folks have landscaping and they want to preserve that that's kind of at the at the cost of on street parking. So Roger and I are as we're meeting with them to discuss the design and the cost share kind of walking through what that looks like in front of their house.

[76:18] Yeah, thanks. It's a really challenging street and environment. And it's another one of those areas that's very kind of constrained for access to crestview. So I would connect with the on street parking amps. Discussion. Yeah, we've that's a great point about crest view, and we've, you know. been in contact with the principal there. And Bbsd, and one improvement that wasn't listed on the screen. There is kind of striping the pickup and drop off zone in front of Crestview, you know. Right now there's kind of a gravel section right there, and have discussed some issues that Crestview has been having. So that should help. And then also, you know, potentially restricting, parking on the south side of Sumac right there across from Crestview. So parents aren't dropping kids off. And then they're kind of running across the street of school. So that was a request from the the principal. There.

[77:14] Thank you, John. Would you mind taking your screen down so I can see other people a little better? Thank you all all right. Any other comments or questions. Tab me neither. Thank you. Thanks very much. Okay. Last matter from staff I have is Broadway transit upgrades. Yes, I'll provide a brief introduction on this one as well. So, as you all are aware, the Broadway corridor is a super important part of our transportation network and is a main artery that is part of our core arterial network program focus, and is a principal corridor for bus usage and both local and regional transit. And we have a few different initiatives and efforts that are coming forward that we'd like to provide an update about.

[78:14] And so I am going to hand it off to Daniel Sheeter to talk about our updates here, as well as Brian Wiltshire, the project manager for a couple of these projects, and we also have Roger Kane on the line. Who's another project manager for the signal work coming forward. So, Daniel, go ahead and take it away. Great. Thank you. Is that coming through for everybody? I have your faces up in the corner. Just wanna make sure that's you're not seeing those again, as well. No, I can. I can see you just to clarify. Can you tell me what Broadway, between where and where? I was a little distracted for a second. Yeah, Brian's gonna kick us off here and and and he'll walk through that walk through the limits. I recognize that scene.

[79:00] If that that's not what you're asking, though. Brian, you there. Okay. I can see he's not muted. Yeah, there, that's better. Yes, thank you. I can hear you now without the headphones. Yeah. Headphones not working. All right. That's fixed. All right. Well. okay, good evening, everyone. My name is Brian Wiltshire City Boulder Project manager for this project, and I'd like to begin by thanking everyone for their time. This evening, as we spend a few minutes reviewing the Broadway Transit Improvements Project, the team began working on this project in June of 2024, and has been working diligently to bring you the Design and Bus Lane study that we'll be presenting this evening.

[80:00] Next slide. All right. Project area is between Regent Drive and Table mesa Drive. It's bracketed in blue that you see on the map in front of you. The existing transit service along the Broadway corridor is the most frequent in the city, with a bus every 2 to 4 min, the lines for each corresponding route you can see on the map, and each perspective or respective excuse me, peak hour frequency. Next slide. The overview map is oriented with North on your left, which is shown with Regent, and then on south, is on your right, which is Table Mesa. In addition to the short segments of dedicated bus lanes on the northbound approach to Regent and the southbound left turn approach to Table Mesa. The intersection upgrades will also include multimodal safety improvements for everyone traveling through the intersections, and we'll detail those in some following slides

[81:07] next slide, Daniel. All right. So the city has a variety of plans and policies that guide this project, including the transportation master Plan, the Can initiative, the sustainability, equity and resilience framework and the regional plans, including Rtd's Northwest area Mobility study or nams. The nams identified Broadway as a priority corridor for transit improvements to support bus regional transit service. The policy framework is detailed on the Virtual open house, Daniel next slide alright for reference in the southbound direction. The scheduled transit travel times on the corridor increased from 11 min during off-peak travel time to 19 min during peak periods and on demand performance falls from 85% to 70% in the peak travel period buses turning on to table. Mesa from Broadway are on average delayed 107 seconds at the intersection compared to 63 seconds for vehicles at Regent intersection buses and vehicles are delayed approximately 30 seconds.

[82:23] Next slide. The project will also improve crossings and upgrade facilities for people walking and biking and rolling at both intersections, including excuse me realigning and straightening adjacent multi-use paths, closing a secondary commercial driveway which is in the southwest corner of the Broadway table. Mesa intersection upgrading curb ramps on all corners of the intersection, to comply with Americans with Disabilities Act or Ada, and then realigning right, turn bypass lanes to create or sorry to increase the visibility and safety of pedestrians and other users at the crossing. So with that, I'll turn it over to Daniel.

[83:08] Thanks, Brian Daniel Sheeter, principal transportation planner supporting the project. So in this next set of slides, we'll walk through the proposed conceptual designs for the intersection improvements that Brian provided the overview for, and I encourage you to review the virtual open house which we'll link at the end of the presentation. and it has this slider feature that shows a detailed comparison of the existing and proposed configurations. So we're going to start here at the north end of the project area at the intersection with region drive. And so, as Brian mentioned. during Peak periods, those northbound travel lanes approaching the intersection intersection are are congested. And in that photo of multiple photos both the Intro photo and and the photo a couple slides ago show how buses can be stuck in traffic. There approaching a stop on the opposite side of the intersection. So the proposed design you see on the slide adds a northbound bus lane, through the intersection

[84:06] labeled with that number one to allow buses to bypass traffic queues and reduce impacts on other vehicles by by removing those buses from those primary vehicle travel lanes. This reduces travel, delay for transit riders, particularly during peak periods. People who drive can still cross the bus lane to access Regent Drive via the the right turn lane that you see in the center of the screen. And so this treatment has been very successful. At locations along Broadway and in the 28th Street Corridor. We looked at the existing queue Bypass Lane. Broadway, and Table Mesa heading southbound, that that exists today. And so this lane permits southbound buses like the skip, to have just a 2 second average vehicle delay compared to a 25 second average vehicle delay for southbound vehicles.

[85:03] So, moving on to some of the multimodal safety improvements of the proposed conceptual design that are informed by analysis from the vision. 0 Action plan, highlighted here in really Number 2 is a realigned right. Turn Bypass Lane from Broadway to Region Regent Drive that would increase the visibility and safety of people along the using the Broadway Multi-use path. and the design was informed by new guidance from the recently updated design and construction standards. Also kind of moving away from that right Turn Lane and the race crossing there, the project proposes to realign an existing pedestrian path that that diverges from the the 2 way bike path in this location into a widened path with separate pedestrian and two-way bike paths, so that continues through that through part of Cu, there that lawn and and connects back up to the Broadway path south of the intersection.

[86:09] and then, finally, as as Brian mentioned. curb ramps are upgraded throughout throughout the intersection, or on on all corners to to comply with Americans with Disability act and and improve accessibility. Moving south to the Broadway and Table Mesa drive intersection again. Congestion in the southbound left. Turn Lane here causes significant delays for transit that's bound for Table Mesa Drive and the Us. 36 corridor the. and and due to the way the the corridor operates. Buses can be delayed more than private vehicles in that in that southbound left Turn Lane. And so those long queues also spill back and overflow into the adjacent through lanes resulting in impacts on through travel as well.

[87:10] So you're seeing the proposed design here that adds a second southbound left Turn Lane that would be dedicated to buses only to allow them to bypass queue traffic in the adjacent southbound left Turn Lane. We'd also extend the southbound left. Turn Lane to allow for longer queues and move left turning vehicles out of the southbound 3 lanes. and then a couple of multimodal safety improvements are also incorporated here in the conceptual design, they include the closure of an existing driveway along the multi of the Broadway multi-use path that's very close to the southwest corner of the intersection to reduce potential conflicts between vehicles and people. On the multi-use path. Access to the shopping center is still maintained via driveways further south, on Broadway or off Table Mesa Drive. and then the final area to walk through is the northeast corner of the intersection, and so the project proposes to realign

[88:04] the existing westbound right. Turn Bypass Lane from Table Mesa to Broadway to slow turning vehicle speeds and improve safety for people on the Broadway path connecting to and from the Bear Creek Path and the Martin Acres neighborhood. The frequency of buses making this movement, as well as the intersection. Geometry made it challenging to change the alignment of the right turn. Lane further. But we were you are seeing an the Refuge Islands Island labeled with the number 5, there being increased in size to shorten crossing distance and accommodate a realigned westbound bike lane that reduces the area where bikes mix with right turning vehicles and buses. and all of all of that, us 36 regional transit and and transit from South South Boulder Road and Table Mesa. Here make this corresponding westbound right movement onto Broadway. So it's a really key transit movement onto the Broadway corridor.

[89:05] And then the final component of the project is the Bus Lane study. We are coordinating with Cdot and Dr. Cog to study the feasibility of repurposing the outside or rightmost vehicle lanes to bus lanes on Broadway, between Table Mesa and and Regent. So this map, again, oriented with north to the left. shows the study area in blue, which might be a little small on your screens, but it's these outside lines to correspond with where there already exists a 3rd lane, a 3rd travel lane. and the study will analyze traffic and transit operations to assess feasibility of repurposing that outside 3rd lane to a bus lane. but will not implement any changes. So the intersection improvements are funded through for construction through this project. But the bus lane. This analysis of bustling is just a study, and the project will not implement those changes.

[90:04] These curbside bus lanes would be used by buses and right turning vehicles similar to the bus lanes that were recently installed this past summer on Colorado Avenue, between Folsom and 30th Streets. so they help buses move more efficiently, facilitating on-time performance and improving safety by separating right turning vehicles from through traffic and intersections and driveways. Buses also do not stop in a through Vehicle Lane when accessing bus stops reducing the potential for rear end crashes. It's important to note that the grant received for this project, as I mentioned, only funds, the study and so further funding would need to be pursued in order to implement. Any changes recommended by the Bus Lane study and any future proposed bus lanes will also need to be added to Dr. Cog's Regional transportation plan prior to implementation. We also want to mention 2 separate but related traffic signal projects to improve pedestrian safety.

[91:00] These separate grant funded projects will be constructed at Broadway and region so kind of overlapping with some of the intersection improvements we detailed. That project is slated for construction in spring or summer of this year, and then The next intersection south of Regent with Broadway and Baseline Baseline Road would is slated for construction in late 2025. And so these projects. You see in these photos examples of the existing traffic signals from Regent and Baseline at Broadway, here on the slide, and the projects modify those signals to allow for different types of left turn signal phasing. And so the near term, Broadway and Regent drive project would implement left turn phasing that doesn't allow vehicles turning from those side streets of 20th or Regent to turn left when pedestrians are crossing Broadway at all times. and then the Broadway and Baseline project will modify the eastbound and westbound baseline road approaches to allow different types of left turn signal phasing to operate

[92:04] throughout the day, based on conditions and our and our signal practices. The team is not requesting feedback on these projects through the current transit improvements, open house due to due to separate timing and funding. So I'll turn it back over to Brian to wrap up the presentation with next steps for the transit project. All right. Thanks, Daniel alright. So next steps for the project are outlined as follows, the project is currently seeking feedback through the virtual open house, which is currently open. But this is the last week for comment. Then we have the design that will be finalized this spring and summer, and we have construction anticipated for the summer of 2026. So we definitely love for Tad to kind of get the word out about the virtual open house, encourage anybody to send in any feedback that they would like, and definitely visit the open house and kind of see what we're doing. So with that we'll open it up for any questions.

[93:05] Yeah. Thank you guys so much for this wonderful presentation I am taking over for Tila and just wanted to see if anybody from Tab had any feedback that they'd like to share. Mike looks like he has his hand up. Yeah, I think these are. These are great improvements for bus traffic and some incremental improvements for safety. It looks like I'm concerned that we're still working on on slip lanes. And obviously, these are not new slip lanes. But is there any thought about whether we should be continuing to have slip lanes which seem to prioritize vehicle speed over pedestrian safety.

[94:13] I can. I can start us off or go ahead. Gary, tackle that one. Yeah, sure. Thanks for the comment. Mike. Yeah, we we are proposing to maintain the the slip lanes or right turn bypass lanes. But as I mentioned, we are realigning them and squaring them up to the side street as much as possible. So the geometry changes pretty dramatically from from today in an effort to reduce those turning speeds, turning vehicle speeds and improve safety for for users. Crossing the Slip lane. The geometry of both of these intersections, both region and table. Mason. I mentioned it briefly on the table. Mesa slide makes it challenging to kind of square it up completely. Because they aren't those those side streets. table, mesa and region aren't meeting Broadway at a at a right angle. They're skewed so we did look at it. But but feel like this is kind of the best balance of

[95:08] still providing transit priority for the routes on Broadway. And there there may be an impact there to consider as well with with the alignment of these lanes, and then going as far as we can with raised crossings and the geometry as well. with what you saw on the screen, to to improve safety from the existing condition. Thank you. Daniel, because of what you're mentioning. I am very, very familiar with this corridor and these intersections. I travel them by bike, by car, but I walk them. I mean, it's just. I'm very, very familiar with them. And that particular crossing that you're mentioning because of the geometry. It's just the actual signal that 4 people in a vehicle turning left onto Broadway like heading northbound. If you're on Regent or 20, th

[96:05] it is so confusing, is so unclear. And at 1 point there's no left hand signal left like dedicated left hand signals. So you're left in the middle of the road, and you have pedestrian crossings. I think on a good thing, since you guys are working on these intersections. If you could also look at pedestrian intervals because that there's just so many kids and so many. You know, you have college students, you have students from New vista, and just like the regular commuter traffic. It's just really bike pedestrian traffic that's super heavy, and what I was going to suggest, if we can somehow straighten that that pole. So it's actually facing. I I don't know we'd have to visit it again. I mean, I know that when we did the cip tour I tried it, but

[97:00] but yes, it's such at such an angle. It's such an awkward facing. I don't know. It's just bizarre. So maybe revisiting that and and definitely adding some additional measures with pedestrian intervals. It's just really scary. But I really, I am so excited to hear all of these new things coming up, and and I think they will improve safety dramatically. So thank you so so much. Darcy. Do you have anything I I can't see. Oh, thank you. Now I can see Darcy again. No, I don't. I don't have anything specifically. I mean, I acknowledge that this is a study as was mentioned, and is not funded, and so if we get closer to implementing some of these modifications, I'll have more to. Thank you, and I think now I don't know if anybody. Trini, just Trini. Just a brief follow up on your comment the the separate signal projects I mentioned do realign some signal poles

[98:10] to accommodate the new infrastructure. So I believe that your comment there will be addressed to some extent by by that by that new signal pole location. So. That's fabulous. Thank you so much, Daniel. Yeah, because it is a true concern. It's it's scary. Daniel, we should probably clarify. It's it's only the study of the conversion to the bus Lane that is not funded. The intersection improvements themselves at Regent and Table Mesa are funded, so you will see those constructed next summer. So just to be clear on that. Yeah, that's very exciting. Thank you. And I mean, unless anybody else has anything else to add. I think we can move on to matters of the Board think it's whatever

[99:06] is that correct? Open comment. That's what I see next on the agenda. Yes. There's nothing scheduled training. Just if any board members have specific items they wanted to bring up. I I have something, but Darcy beat me so Darcy goes first.st Be brief. I just wanted to say, you know we we haven't discussed snow removal at all this evening, but I want to acknowledge that we've heard about snow rule issues from our community. And I had a very, I had a really moving experience. Recently walking on totally street here in South Boulder, walking from the table mesa shopping center, and I was heading

[100:01] south south. whatever I think it's south, right south, east, southwest. And so I'm walking. And I ran into Craig Teller from the Center for people with disabilities. He also lives in South Boulder. He's a wheelchair user, and he was wheeling down the middle of the street because so few property owners had shoveled the sidewalks. It was totally impassable by someone in a wheelchair unless he was out in the middle of the street. He's you know. He's a strong person. He can get out of the way if he needs to, but it was unsettling, and we did talk about it. We talked about how the sidewalks were snow packed and snow covered, and I myself was walking in the street because it was many of those sections of sidewalk were impassable, so I would like to encourage. I know that our snow removal. Guidelines and policies are are set. I really want us to do more to help property owners understand the importance

[101:10] of removing snow from sidewalks in a routine and efficient way that also ensures that ice does not build up on them, because there are so many people walking and wheeling, and you know all over the city who need to be able to get the bus stops who need to be able to get to their shopping areas to get home, and it's unsafe for children going to those schools as well. If you're kicked out into the street, if anybody's kicked out to the street, it presents a huge risk. So I want us to do better at helping property owners remove snow, and for you know, our policies to to complement the need for those efforts, and to just I would like to see more messaging. I'd like to see some contests or some incentives or prizes, or I don't know, because we've been talking about this for many, many years.

[102:02] But how can we? How can we do more to help property owners understand their responsibility and its impact on the community. So that's what I wanted to add today. Well, thank you, Darcy. Yeah, that that kind of goes along the lines of what I wanted to add. My comment is more as a driver. But I am I. Craig Teller is a dear friend of mine, and I really I mean, I've spent multiple days with him, and it's eye opening. It's just really mind boggling the things that we take for granted, and that, you know, really can make or break a a journey for someone like Craig and we do really need to highlight those things and like you said, I mean, I think I do believe in positive encouragement. So I think if there there would be like incentive programs from opposed to. I know that you're supposed to get fined, but I I think that it'd be so cool. If we could create programs that would actually, like, you know, encourage people in a positive way to

[103:08] to want to change things and to make it a safer community for everybody, and on that note I know that we approved a 3 inch removal, allocation of resources to bike paths or multi-use paths, and but I live in a very steep road, and even though it was a small snow accumulation it really because of how my roads like this, I mean, it was impassable, and if I wanted to ride my bike I wouldn't be able to get to the bike path. I mean, it was just. and then, of course it got cold, and so that slush turned into ice, and it was just a disaster. I know that there was a lot of letters that were written to city council members, and they share my concern. So I really invite us to re

[104:04] like, take a look at what we had approved, and kind of reanalyze what circumstances and what streets can be the exception to the rule. And perhaps we we have to take into account the temperature and not just the snowfall. I mean, there's other factors that will really impact how we can travel, whether it's by bike or by car or by foot. and and make it safe or not. I mean one of these times my car, I wasn't able to brake. So I was literally, I was terrified. So it's just really taking into account what we want to accomplish, and we want to accomplish safe roads that everybody can travel, and safe sidewalks and safe mobility. So so I don't know how we can do that. Maybe an agenda item coming up. I really don't know what the process looks like, but I really do think that we need to take

[105:00] that, you know, as smart thinking individuals. I think we we can go back and amend things that we have approved, and and make sure everybody's safe. I don't know if anybody has any comments on that, but. Yeah, I'll chime in here, Trini and Darcy to say, I appreciate your thoughts and your feedback about the snow and ice response program. As you've observed, there's been a lot of communication and feedback from a variety of community members about how the modifications to the program are going in this winter season. And so we are continuing to monitor the performance, and how it's serving the community, and I can certainly bring your comments and your thoughts back and discuss those with Valerie, as we're also interacting with the city council and the city manager's office, and all the inquiries that are incoming. So appreciate your your own personal feedback, and particularly the experience of those that are people with disabilities trying to navigate their way around the community. I thought you brought some thoughtful suggestions. Darcy so appreciate that.

[106:14] Thank you so much, Garrett, and I don't know I've never done this before. So I think that's all we have, Meredith. are we actually gonna end this early. Need a motion to adjourn. Yes, I. The time. I think so. I call for a more motion to adjourn. I move we adjourn this meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board. Before you second it like second it. Second. So we're adjourned. And we ended really early. So thank you so much, everyone for their time, and we'll see each other next month. Thank you. Thanks. Everybody. Appreciate it.

[107:00] Bye.