Mobility Committee Meeting Transcript –06/14/2016 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 6/14/2016 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 6/14/2016 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [2:55:43 PM] >>> >> >>> >> >>> [♪Music playing♪] >> [3:02:59 PM] June 14, 2016 mobility committee meeting,. [♪Music playing♪] >> [3:06:59 PM] >> Kitchen: Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to go ahead and get started. We have a lot to cover today. We are expecting more of the councilmembers to join us, but we want to go ahead and get started.We're going to start with citizens communication, and let me just say, just remind everyone if you're signed up for citizens communication, you should be speaking to something that is not on our agenda today. If you want to speak on what's on our agenda today then we need to make sure you're signed up under item 3 or 4. So I'm going to start with citizen communication, and again, just keep your remarks to something that's not on our agenda today. And our agenda today is to -- is all about mobility talks and our next steps in terms of funding transportation and the potential to bring forward a bond on the 2016 and/or the2018 calendar. So we will start with citizens communication. Let me say first we have approving the minutes. >> Zimmerman: I was going to move that we approve the minutes as written. >> Kitchen: Do we have a second. We have councilmember Zimmerman approved, councilmember Gallo seconded. All those in favor? Minutes are passed. We'll begin now with citizens communication. We have first robin Orlowskiand following him will be Fatima Mann. Robin, are you here? >> Okay. I was going to make a comment that improving [3:09:00 PM] mobility in Austin, it won't matter budgetwise if the drivers continue to take breaks on the side of the road when passengers have already paid up. This has been an ongoing problem. And you can draft anythingyou want, but this is the only major Texas city where this is ongoing happening. And council needs to pass a measure prohibiting this, unless passengers are boarding -- exiting the vehicle or emergency people,police - - including police, E.M.S. Need to board the vehicle, because this has been an ongoing problem and it's only going to increase with traffic. Eating chips, drinking soda, chatting on your cell phone, reading the daily newspaper, this is not an emergency, and it deters people who are passing in their own private cars from riding capital metro. They see this. They're not stupid. They see the driver relaxing, they see theparked vehicle full of passengers. And they don't want to ride public transit if this is what is going to happen to them. It wastes their time, it wastes public money. There are graphics out there showing that -- showing that capital metro is funded through the bulk of local funds. Well, guess what? Those local funds are being wasted if the drivers are just randomly parking. And that's the extent of my comments. Yes, council needs to act. I have worked in public workplaces where they tell [3:11:01 PM] you, if you waste public funds, you get fired. And that's what city council needs to do, they need to start firing the drivers. It doesn't matter if you're contracted. Responsible workplaces don't care. They still tell you, hey, you're going to get fired. You have to use public funds safely, you have to use public funds properly. It's not the driver's personal bus. There's a reason why it says capital metro and not personal driver on that side of that bus. It's time to Austin, Texas to get smart, long past time actually. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Next speaker is Fatima Mann, and then it will be Ashley gore did don after that. >> Good afternoon, I'm Fatima Mann on behalf of the Austin justice coalition. A couple of things is the toll ways and just toll roads in general. There are people throughout who can afford to pay tolls, but have the right to get to their destinations just the same as other individuals who have the money. Also my issue, and it will continuously be my issue is a lot of these committee members and community meetings do not always have people that look like me with the quorums that may be on the ballot. Whether we're talking about voting for anything, it's fact that there's a lot of people who look like me who take public transportation or are affected by public transportation or mobility who is at work right now and can't be here to speak on their own behalf. So it's just -- I want that to continuously be heard is that when we're talking about things that usually affect what society says the bottom, the bottom isn't here to talk about how we are affected and how it costs money for to us do a lot of the things that people who have money can do frequently, like on their [3:13:01 PM] lunch break come down here or tell their boss they will leave early. People don't have that right. They don't have the ability, don't have that privilege. So being able to make these decisions may be at a later time or a time where people who are really, really affected by this can really give some information because one of the biggest things about Austin, it being a beautiful and amazing city that I love, it just is not accessible to people who do not have money and do not have adequate transportation to even come to these meetings and really talk about what needs to be discussed. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Ashley Gordon is next and then Lyndon Henry after her. >> Good afternoon. I won't have to say as much because Fatima said a lot of what I was going to say. I would like to give an example of what she was speaking of with the tolls. I work in the same community she D we are part of the Austin justice coalition, part of atx environmental justice, Sierra club and several organizations that deal with social justice. And a mother came to meactually from the black lives matter Austin, and said to me that she lives up in pflugerville. Living in pflugerville wasn't a choice. She was displaced, like many people who look like me, they have been displaced tothe crescent cities, they live in pflugerville, Elgin, manor, del valle, Austin's colony. And she said she already has to wake up an hour earlier because she has four children and has to get them ready. And the only option that she has is to take the tollway if she wants to get to work on time. She says if she took 35 down to downtown where she works, she would have to wake up an additional hour earlier, but she can't afford to pay the toll. So she's just hoping that she doesn't get in trouble. And so a very big issue that I have is that we are taking [3:15:03 PM] roads that we actually need and making them toll ways such as 130, such as 183, mopac, having this new toll versus having an HOV lane. If you look at larger cities such as Houston, the Katie tollway you can have a Katy tollway because it's not a necessity, it's an alternative, but they have several alternatives or ways that you can go before you even get to the tollway. And it's the same with the Sam Houston tollway.Any toll that you see in larger cities, you just really don't feel like taking the four or five other alternatives you have. Here in Austin we don't have those alternatives and so therefore we need to find another way to fund our roads versus making them a tollway. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Next is Lyndon Henry and then Aaron farmer after him. >> Good afternoon. I'm Lyndon Henry. I'm a transportation planning consultant, a former capital metro board member and data analyst. And currently a writer for railway age magazine. Austin's mobility planning has serious flaws. A number of these have not gotten enough attention and I want to cite one case in point here for the public record. The lone star role district's plans for repurposing the union pacific railroad's line through Austin has offered the possibility of providing fast, attractive regional passenger service for central Texas and at the same time eliminating hazardous freight cargo through the city. But apparently these mobility and safety benefits have meant nothing to the city of Austin's political leadership and transportation officials. City leaders and officials have mostly shrugged and at on their hands since last February when the union pacific scuttled its agreement with lone star, leaving aside improving [3:17:03 PM] ability, does no one in the city leadership have any concern about the dangers of hazardous cargo traveling through the heart of this city? What does it take for someone to step forward and help champion lone star in its efforts to keep this project moving forward? Or do we have to wait for some part of central Austin to get blown to kingdom come before this issue becomes a priority? Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you.Aaron farmer. And then Dave Dobbs after Aaron. >> I signed up for the wrong one. I'm going to speak to item number three. >> Kitchen: Okay, thank you. Dave Dobbs? And after David will be Mary ingall. >> Good afternoon, chairman kitchen and mayor and members of the mobility committee. I want to talk about maximizing the amount of return on investment that we get out of our investment in November.There's a proposal on the thing, on the table for a 58.3 -- 5.3 operable segment from Guadalupe to Lamar that will generate 37,400 riders daily, initially equivalent to about four freeway lanes and it sets the stage for a citywide urban rail system. This is almost a four hundred-million-dollar locally funded option that could be eligible for 50% federal funds. It sees trains running in reserved lanes in the most part and preserves four travel lanes. It has a lower cost per rider than high capacity bus, and it connects regional passengers from the outlying areas to downtown directly by means of rail. [3:19:05 PM] It's supported and adopted by neighborhood plans along the ways. And it's consistent with the mobility conversations that we recently had. Based on western U.S. Light rail city experience, the potential return oninvestment is many fold. Dallas, for example, $5.3 billion in economic development since '96. Portland, $11.5 billion within walking distance of station since 1986. Salt Lake City, $7 billion in economic development since 2000. Phoenix has 8.2 billion dollars' worth since 2008. That's over 507% return on investment. And Houston, which is a line most like what we're proposing, has over 1800% return on investment. That's pretty hard to beat. Rail means real tax base. It's dollars going to be spent for affordable housing, parks and libraries, bikes and sidewalks, public safety and social services, and anything else that you have need. But it's a way of making money while increasing the mobility of the city. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you, Dave. Next we have Mary Engle and then after Mary, Mercedes ferris. >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Kitchen: This is citizens communication right now. >> [Inaudible - no mic]. >> Kitchen: Was that Mercedes? And then we have Roy Whaley, were you signed up for citizens communication? >> Yes, ma'am, I was. Howdy y'all, good afternoon. My name is Roy Whaley. I am the chair for the Austin regional group of the Sierra club conservation [3:21:06 PM] committee. We have been meeting in joint committee with our transportation committee and discussing the bond election, the upcoming probable bond election. But we have not taken a position on it becausethere's not enough information to take a position and I'm here to learn today. We did, however, take a transportation position in a general sense and I would like to read that to you now. Mayor Adler has designated 2016 as the year of mobility. The Austin Sierra club believes that our mobility focus should be on enhancing all forms of transportation except the single occupant vehicle. Adding road lanes has beenthe fall back solution to traffic congestion for decades, yet traffic problems continue to increase. Let's not add fuel to the fire. More road lanes should not be a part of the 2016 solution. We should focus on movingpeople, not cars. Existing roadways should be well maintained and improved and our urban corridors fully enhanced. Mass transit with a focus on improved and more efficient east-west bus routes should be a priority. All other funds and efforts should be spent on sidewalks and bicycle facilities, which were only 1 point '99% of last -- 1.9 percent of last year's transportation budget. Other efforts like the rocky mountain institute and the U.S. Transportation smart city challenge should eschew adding road lanes. I would really like to emphasize the need for east-west bus connectivity, enhanced routes. And we've done pretty wellwith the 801 and 803. I get north and south pretty easily. Going east and west that is really difficult. So we need to have that sort [3:23:08 PM] of express route going from east to west. And as my friends that live in east Austin tell me, it's hard to get from one place in east Austin to another in a timely manner, so we need to focus on moving morepeople more efficiently. And we will be taking a position and we appreciate the work that all of y'all are doing. And I will let you get on with your meeting. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Our last person forextension communication is kiebia white. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I just want to voice my personal opinion about some of the options that have been discussed in relation to what we should find in this upcoming transportation bond. I don't think that it's a terrible idea to put I-35 underground. I don't think it's a bad idea to implement the corridor plans that have been developed. I think that there's a lot of merit in both of those, and I realize that a lot of effort has gone into the corridor plans. However, we are faced with a decision on what are our priorities as a city. And I think that our money first has to go towards other options, and first and foremost I would say we need to actually get started on urban rail. It is insane to me and I think to many people in the city and I think that visit this city is that we have no true mass transportation system in this city of this size and with this many people and with the traffic problems that we do have. We simply cannot solve them without something more than we have, and it cannot just be buses. I love buses. We need more buses too, but we need to get started on rail. And the longer we wait the more expensive it is going [3:25:08 PM] to get. Every time we kick this down the road it is literally adding billions of dollars to what is going to cost to build a true mass transportation system in this city. So we really hope that you all will actually consider putting at least it on the ballot and let voters choose and I think it's important to have it separate from other options. Let's let people say I want this, I don't want that, and move forward with what folks do want. I also strongly support implementation and funding for the bike master plan. This city is hazardous on a bike. I have recently been trying to overcome my fear of biking in this city, and I'm still working on it. Every time I go across pleasant valley I literally fear for my life and I have to decide am I going to go on the sidewalk and probably have to get off of my bike if there's a pedestrian or do I go on the road and just hope that a vehicle does not run me over. And the last time that I was coming off of pleasant valley bridge, I had an experience with a very large dump truck and I literally thought if this person movestheir hands just a fraction of an inch I am dead. I'm not injured, I am certainly dead because the wheel was as tall as I was on the bike. It's not safe. We need to fund the bike lanes fully. And the same goes for our sidewalks. The lack of sidewalks and the condition of our sidewalks in this city is just deplorable. I thankfully am not disabled, but I don't know how people who are getting around on a wheelchair are doing it.[Buzzer sounds] Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Welcome to my fellow councilmembers who have joined us. Thank you for joining us. We have finished with [3:27:09 PM] citizen communication so now we'll move on to our agenda. And let me just say that our focus today is to take the next step after we went through the process of hearing from the public through our mobility talksand I want to thank our staff again for the excellent work they did in pulling together that public input process in such a short time. We did receive a briefing at one of our work sessions. I think it was June 1st.So the next step in this process is today with the mobility committee. So we have two items on the agenda, but they're really both the same. They're to provide us first with some information related to the proposals that are out there about the potential for pitting on bond -- putting a bond on the 2016 election. When we discussed on June 1st when the staff gave us the initial information about the projects, we had a lot of discussion about the need for what was happening with connections 2025, with the bus system planning as well as understanding what's happening with the planning around the project connect central corridor study which relates to the high capacity transit. So we asked them to come and speak to us because that will inform what we're thinking about in terms of transportation that we can fund that relates to the bus system. I'm going to ask them to -- cap metro to come and speak to us first. And then we will turn back to our transportation deputy who will be making a presentation to us. And then we'll go tocomments from the public. Let me say before we go down this road -- what I would suggest is that we have the presentations and then we have about an hour and 45 minutes of testimony from individuals so I would suggest that we probably hold our questions. We don't have to, but if we [3:29:09 PM] can kind of hold our questions for presenters for cap metro and atd until after we hear from the public that might be the best way. And also we have -- I want to say this before we get started. I hope peopled in that there's no done deal -- I hope people understand that there's no done deal out there. I had someone call me earlier about that. I hope peopled in that we have a number of ideas and potentials to think aboutthe proposals for a 2016 bond package and also to think about what we might do in 2018. We have the proposal that mayor Adler put forward for us. We have some ideas in the mobility committee today that might be considered a starting point. I know that councilmember Casar and councilmember pool have also put forward some ideas. So all these ideas are on the table. We're here to today to hear from people, to discuss these ideas. The committee may choose to take action or not. And then we'll be moving on to the council. And we have council meetings scheduled for the 16th and the 23rd where we will continue our discussion and decide whether or not to act and continue to hear from people. So I just wanted to emphasize that we have a lot to consider. We are balancing what -- I think one of the thanks we've learned from the discussions to date and from mobility talks is that of course transportation is a huge issue for everyone in this city. And there's an interest in moving forward with some funding for some major transportation projects. So our questions are how do we balance whether or not to move forward in 2016. If so what might that amount be? What types of improvements should we work towards? And we have to consider allthat in the light of the impact on property taxes and in light of the impact on additional needs like flooding, mitigation, parks, [3:31:10 PM] libraries and those kinds of things. So with that said let's go ahead and move forward with cap metro's presentation. >> Zimmerman: Quick question, just a point of order. What's the expectants, the time you're expecting to be going through this? >> Yes, sir. We have two pieces. One component should be probably 10 minutes and the other one five. >> Zimmerman: Okay, thank you. >> Kitchen: Okay. Go ahead. >> Thank you, chair kitchen, mayor, members of council. I'm Todd hemmingson, vice- president of development for cap metro. We appreciate your time today and we'll try to make this brief because we know you have a big discussion after this agenda item. We have two parts as I mentioned. One is on our connections 2025 study. It's currently underway. And that's being led by a firm called tmd. We have the principal ofthat firm, Russ Chisholm here today and he's going to take a few minutes to walk you through a status update on that report or study that's in progress. I'll follow on with a brief recap of our other study that's also underway, the central core study. Let me turn it over to Russ. >> Thank you, Todd. It's a pleasure to be here this afternoon. Chair kitchen, members of the committee, mayor, and other citycouncilmembers. I just want to give you an update of where we are, what we've learned so far. Some of the design principles that are in discussion. And then the perspective on the city's role in helping with connections 2025. We're about halfway through, we're in the process of -- we've completed a market analysis, service evaluation, we're in the process of developing the plan, which should go to the board inAugust with the entire plan following outreach, a third round of outreach completed by the end of the year. The three major components in terms of what we've accomplished so far is two rounds of [3:33:13 PM] outreach with community members, riders, operators, stakeholders in both February and this past month. An extensive market analysis that just looks at the opportunities for improving public mobility with transit, and then an evaluation on how capital metro's services are operating today both from a ridership standpoint, performance standpoint. So what we've learned? Some of this is obviously no surprise. The city's going to be growing and one of the key questions that's come up repeatedly is how do you maintain your current quality of life or improve it through mobility? The increasing cost of land and housing, weheard a little bit about this this morning, is pushing development out. We've got some displacements happening. We continue to have an auto-centric, automobile-centric development guideline which makes things like transit, walking, biking very difficult. And we also have emerging employment centers that are outside of the homework central core. 40% of everyone who uses capital metro uses it in the central core.Definition being downtown, UT and the Riverside area. Again, correlation with higher concentrations of people, jobs, activities. Basically this is the live, work, play environment where bikes, pedestrian movement and transit work best. Development due to topography and other things, the street development is very challenging. Houston had a grid and said everyone get out your reliers. Here it will be different. We heard about enhancing east and west network. Again, this will take creative thinking and a strong partnership with [3:35:13 PM] the city to identify those. In terms of the design principles, and many of these the focus and the approach is going to be discussed with capital metro's board tomorrow, but in general the design principles are weknow we have to create something that's simple, easy to understand, easy to use and importantly easily to operate. How we design it can affect how reliable it is. We've to build a more extensive and frequentnetwork. And the last plan that capital metro did, they introduced the beginnings of a frequent network. It has worked well. Those are the high ridership routes. And again part of the goal is to get customersfrom just using a route to using a network. When we by this public mobility, urban mobility, they don't ride routes, they use the transit system, they use the bike network, they use the pedestrian environment.So to do this we have to attract customers. There's been a point discussed a few times during the planning process, which is to attract customers, don't chase riders, meaning we have to create products that attract people to use them and don't go choicing them in front of their houses because that's very cost ineffective. So we want to match the service to the various markets. The plan is looking at a broad away of different transit -- types of transit ranging from exclusive right-of-way services down to kind of community shuttles and other kind of links to the private side. The key critical element here is to kind of change the customer experience. And not just change it a little, but change it a lot and change it on a network level. We know from research here around the country and over seas the two factors influence people trying transit. [3:37:13 PM] The first is frequency. The second is speed. And when we compare the two of them, frequency is three times more important. So if we've looked at it and said let's run relatively infrequently, but run very fast, that will not generate anywhere near of the ridership response that the more frequent service will. Part two of that is retaining the people that try transit and getting them to use the system more. That's all about reliability. Do we deliver the promise everyday. And the last two elements are to integrate and complement basic transit with a lot of innovative public mobility initiatives. And this ranges across the board from things like bike sharing, car2go, to other shuttle services, taxis, corporate shuttles, things like that, but creating this so that it works in an integrated fashion for customers and the public. And then last, we need to increase ridership generation that's service effectiveness, meaning have more people use the services that are provided and do so in a more efficient manner so there's additional money to continue to improve the system. Now the reason we're here. What can you do to help? The first is partnership with capital metro and recognizing the importance of linking land use and public mobility, specifically transit.Where we've seen transit work here in Austin as well as around the country is where this linkage is working well. If we look around at every city that you would consider being like, they have this kind of linkage.Second, continue to support the higher density mixed use development projects that promote liveable communities. But don't necessarily do this in just nodes, but [3:39:13 PM] coordinate it around linear corridors that become part of a network of services for people. Locate multi-family housing, especially affordable housing and the services that are acquired together with the activity centers along a frequent transit network. Fourth, strengthen the east-west corridors. We talked about this being a significant challenge, but for the network to pop and become very useful for people, the east-west travel has to improve dramatically. And then lastly, to partner with capital metro to identify transit prioritization locations and techniques, everything from transit signal priority, bus bulbs, queue jumps, dedicated lanes, but to do it in a complete fashion. We've seen this where it gets tinkered a lot bit and success is -- a little bit and success is fleeting. Where you make a large commitment, particularly linked with bike and pedestrian improvements as well, we've seen major improvements. In conclusion, when los Angeles rolled out their metro rapid over 15 years ago, they were shocked to find ridership jumped 40% in the first six months. And they were doubly surprised when they found that one-third of the ridership growth was taking people out of their cars. People have a choice. So bus can work, but we have to give bus thelevel of prioritization, the importance to actually start to capture community mobility. Okay. Any questions? >> Kitchen: Would you all like to ask a few questions at this point or should we keep going? We're going to keep going. >> Mayor Adler: My only question would be I [3:41:13 PM] want to make sure that -- because I think this is the person that's doing the capital metro report, the consultant on it. I want to make sure he's going to still be here. If he would leave then I would ask questions, but if he's going to be here then I'm fine. >> Kitchen: Can you stick around because we'll have more questions later? Okay, thank you. >> As I mentioned, the other study we have underway, and this one is in the beginning stages, is called the central core study. If you think about the study that Russ just described it's really about our service and our network of service and how to make it -- how to enhance it andgrow it and make it serve the community better. This effort is really more about capital intensive, perhaps longer range projects, specific focus on what we term high capacity transit, which could be bus rapid transit, it could be additional rail service. Or even express service on express lanes or managed lanes. Just a brief recap of this one, we again are in phase one at this point. We've kicked off several months ago the real beginning of this study from a public perspective will be in the fall of this year. We've broken it out into three major phases. Phase one is to identify, so what are the high capacity needs, what are the potential projects that can meet those needs, and then how do we deal with the financial constraints and funding mechanisms? Phase two is to evaluate. That is to take a very detailed look at each of the alternatives we've identified. Look at how do we optimize what we already have. What new alignments, technologies and service operations, cost effectiveness, land use and so on. Third phase is really into selection. So how do we prioritize. We know we have many needs in this community. How do we prioritize and select those projects that make the most sense, have the most feasibility in terms of community support, [3:43:14 PM] technical support as well, and the funding or at least a pathway to get to the funding? In terms of engaging the public, which is a critical part of this effort, we're really in what we call a soft launch phase at thispoint. We're reaching out to partner agencies, including the city, who will be a critical partner. Others include ctrma, txdot, Travis county, other counties and so on. And having discussions with them, confirmingthe scope and the goals and objectives make sense and are reasonable. We're also gathering data from prior studies and other work as well as new data collection. Then over the summer we'll be identifying apurpose and need, which is from a federal perspective to get federal funding, that's a critical piece. Identify the preliminary corridors and project identification. In the fall we'll really roll out with a public launch.Phase two as I mentioned is the evaluation phase. The steps are laid out here. Really it's defining the projects and then evaluating the projects: And phase three is selection. So again, that's significant publicinvolvement, getting people's input, stakeholder input, partner input, who are the different alternatives, which ones make the most sense and are ready to move forward? And then we do want to follow the federal process. Even if we were, for example, to select a project we wanted to move forward with local funding, there's a lot of benefit to having the federal process followed because if we're going to expand in the future, if you follow the federal process, you can take that local investment and leverage it can additional federal dollars moving forward. Then we move into project development. That's really advancingspecific projects with engineering and environmental work. Developing interlocal [3:45:14 PM] agreements and establishing that fundable set of priority projects. So that's a brief snapshot of that effort. It is time consuming, but we have learned from past efforts that it makes sense to be thorough, to full hi engage the public, to build community support and to have a system and prioritized list of projects as opposed to a single project to be able to bring forth to the community and for funding. So with that we'll be glad to answer any questions. >> Kitchen: Can you stay with us? >> Yes, ma'am, absolutely. >> Kitchen: We'll come back to you with questions. >> Very good. >> Kitchen: Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Kitchen: Now we'll turn to Mr. Goode who will be presenting to us from the transportation department's perspective and the city's perspective. >> Robert Goode, thank you for the opportunity to give you more information. What we thought we would do today is frame the discussion, remind you what we did on June 1st and we gave you a whole lot of written information. I apologize for that. I'm sure you've had fun trying to read through that as we put that together. We've been striving to get you information as quickly as we can. So we'll briefly touch on what's in -- in those documents and then we'vedeveloped a little bit of a funding alternative that we'd like to discuss with you on the proposal. We'll go ahead and start. As a remind E the June 1st work session, we talked about the results of the mobility talks public engagement process. We discussed some financing options with bond capacity evaluation that deputy cfo Greg canally did for you. And then we unveiled some alternative funding options that you couldlook at as you consider this issue. So as a reminder, on mobility talks, the key findings were we got quite a bit of input from citizens that agreed the concept of improving some of our major city corridors. [3:47:14 PM] They supported improving mobility options, including public transportation. That's why I'm glad that cap metro is here today as a partner going forward in this issue. They talked about providing safe connections in our neighborhoods. And then also additional mobility funding and priority funding in the near term. So generally those were the results of the mobility talks that we -- Mike Trimble and his group were seekingfeedback from the community as I mentioned on a pretty short- term project. The capacity issues that Greg canally unveiled to you is that if we had a constant tax rate that the capacity would be about $300 million. If you chose to raise the tax rate by one cent that would give you a 500-million-dollar capacity and two cents would provide 720-million-dollar capacity. Is it ranges from the 250-million- dollar package up to a 720-million-dollar packages. I won't go over that in great detail today. Just as a reminder that those are the packages that we unveiled on June 1st. And then a reminder on the next steps you have August 10th through the 22nd if you choose to call a November 8th election that's the time frame you have to do that. And if you do that we he would recommend that you do that in the month of June so we can begin the education process throughout the community and the summer as we move forward with that potential bond program. So what I'd like to do today is to wrap up the presentation, is there's -- provide you alittle bit of a new information we've provided in the documents that we gave you yesterday and also there's some more detailed information. And I want to run through that. So when I talk about the corridor mobility development program, we've got quite a few questions from councilmembers and from the community how did we select these corridors. So I would like to run through that very quickly. We got a lot ofquestions on program [3:49:15 PM] implementation, how do bond programs work in the city of Austin, if this council chooses to put it on the ballot in November and the citizens vote to pass a bond program, what do we do with that funding andhow do we implement that? Program oversight, what's council's role, what's the bond oversight committee's role? We talked about that real briefly today. And the safe route to school is new information that wewould like to talk to you. We've heard quite a few concerns about how the sidewalks are prioritized and if you put a bucket funding for sidewalks, and if the safe route to schools would actually be prioritized.We've got some information to share today on that. So talk about the corridor mobility program. Rob spillar and the transportation staff have put this together over the last few years, beginning with the critical arterial list where they focus on the corridors with the highest traffic volumes and transit boardings as a starting place. And then they began looking at how to leverage investments with our counties, Travis, Williamson and hays, and also with our transportation funding partners, txdot, ctrma and other agencies. We also look at private development partners and how those partners are proceeding throughout the community and use hopefully some private development funding to partner with us as well on these improvements. And of course council resolutions as you tell us are your priorities then we consider those as we put those corridor programs together. Just as a reminder in the 2010 and 2012 bond programs through the citizen communication through the bond -- the bond committees, those corridors were prioritized and that's what's before you today as some of the funding corridors got funded in the 2010 and 2012 bond program. We also looked at the Austin area metropolitan transportation plan. As you know that's an old document and that is underway for being revised through the Austin strategic mobility plan as we speak and that will help us look through to establish visions for the next corridor plans as we move forward. So now moving on quickly [3:51:17 PM] to bond program implementation and oversight. If you all choose to put a bond program on the ballot for November and the citizens approve that document, what we would then begin to do is do further work.We already are involved in this work now to look at the staffing and resources requirements that would be required for us to deliver that program successfully. We begin to look at more project and program phase development. As I spoke to you on June 1st, some of these corridors are now dated, these corridor reports. So if you give us funding and the citizens agree to that funding, then we would look at how that funding would be best used based on changes that have occurred in the corridors since the reports have been done. So that's how we begin to refine the budgets and look at different alternatives as we move forward. We also then begin internal and external coordination. Internal means there's a lot of utilities. The water utility, Austin energy, will be Austin Austin energy will be looking internally. An external coordination with private utilities and with neighborhood associations, businesses and people that live along those corridors, we begin that coordination as we move forward. There are also procurement methods that we seek council's approval on design, build, perhaps some projects. Schedule planning. Again we begin looking at more detailed information to develop program plans to how to implement the projects that the council and the public have told us to go implement. So the project implementation side, our public works department is the main capital project delivery department. They work with sponsors departments to developthose projects specifically to ensure that those metrics that the sponsored departments put together are being met. They look at program milestones, metrics and outcomes trackings, as well as the capitalproject office. Mike Trimble's group looks at more of overall bond programs to ensure [3:53:18 PM] that we're on track as a city to develop and implement the bond programs as approved by the voters. On the oversight side, you all have asked some questions on how the bonds, if the citizens adopt and approve these bonds, how we are ensuring that we're building the project as you all envision them. There are many ways that the city council and the public are involved in that. First you all appoint a bond oversightcommission. That commission's main focus is to focus on the bond programs that were developed by staff, put on the ballot by council and approved by the public that those bond programs were beingimplemented appropriately. Internal oversight, the capital planning office and financial services department look internally. Every year they put together a plan and a program through the bond oversight committee on the financial metrics to ensure that we're on track on that fashion. Council oversight, you look annually on bond appropriations and through the capital improvement program that you approve annually through the budget process. That's again how you all are engaged in that process. You appoint the bond oversight committee and we would be giving briefings to council as you request and to themobility committee as you request on implementation progress on the bond program. Public oversight, there are many ways that we try to be as transparent as we can with the public. We're improving that as we speak. Public works is doing a great job of trying to get all our projects online. So the neighborhoods can even track the project of interest in their neighborhoods. And we continue to work on that process. That's -- we're excited about the development properties so we can continue to -- development process to we can make this a very transparent program to work on our progress. I did mention earlier that we had attorneys Kearns from our -- concerns from some citizens and stakeholder groups on how would the [3:55:19 PM] safe routes to school program be prioritized perhaps in this bond program, if there's a sidewalk funding bucket that you all choose? If they're not rated high priority sidewalks, how could safe route to schools be prioritized in those programs. So we thought we would take a few minutes to describe the safe routes to school program that public works heads up. There's three really kind of programs within that. They do enforcement and operations. They have all our crossing guards that ensure that all the crossings are manned by guards to ensure that the children can cross safely. They do an education program where theelementary school students are annually try to educate them on how to be safe as they walk to and from school or bike to and from school. And then we're real proud of this part of the program. Public works does a great job of engaging with each school and each campus to develop what's right for their school because that's right for one school may be not the same -- wouldn't be appropriate to a different school district.So they work very hard to engage with the schools to find out what the right programs should be for that particular school. Removing barriers along the route, that route to school, may need capital funding and that's why we wanted a suggestion alternative for what you've seen in our package on June 1st. With close communication and coordination with the campus advisory council, we could develop with these partner schools some programs that we could look at and projects that we could look at again to enhance the safe route to school program. Most infrastructure requires capital funding and it might be a better path instead of just having a sidewalk bucket and a bike bucket of program funding to actually set aside some money in the bond program for safe route to schools. So we thought as we moved forward that we would change, at least show you how to change some of the packages to accommodate that, so we've added a safe route to school package that [3:57:20 PM] you could consider as you move forward in all the packages that we presented and how we thought we would show you how that could occur. We would just shift some funding from the sidewalk and the bicycleprograms into a safe route to school capital program for the 250-million-dollar program, then that would result in a-million-dollar package for safe route to schools that we would be dedicated. The public works would work with each campus to find out what the priority projects within each campus. Now, that money wouldn't go too far. There's a lot of needs for our school districts throughout the community, so we raisedthat money that -- the categories didn't change in the package, but in the 300-million-dollar package we raised that funding bucket to three million dollars. That would give us much more flexibility to work with campuses. Again, you see the differences in the sidewalk program and the bicycle program to accommodate that funding allocation. Those categories didn't change in that -- in our 300-million-dollar package then. The 500-million- dollar package, we still have that in the program as well as you can see the changes in the sidewalk and bike program. Really all these reflect is a way that if you choose to dedicate somefunds to the safe route to schools program, this is a way that you could do that. There are no changes in the 720-million-dollar corridor package. We didn't know if you would want to do that or not so we left thatalone. Here then again is the summary comparison, the totals didn't change within the big categories. It's just shifting some money throughout the programs for the sidewalk and bikeway and safe route to schools. So with that, chair, we could either take questions now or after public comment, whichever you decide. >> Kitchen: My thought would be after public comment. >> Kitchen: My thought would be after public comment. Is everybody else okay with that? We do have quite a bit to get [3:59:22 PM] through. >> Zimmerman: He's got the thing cued up. I wanted to go back to page 9 and ask a quick question >> Kitchen: If we can keep our questions pretty short because we have a lot of folks we want to hear from and I know we want to have a longer discussion. >> Zimmerman: Sure let me ask a quick question if I could >> Kitchen: Okay >> Zimmerman: Look at the top item here, the critical arterial list. In my district, district 6, they would say probably the Anderson mill cut through between 183 and 620, somewhere around 40,000 trips per day, astronomical number is in front of my local district office but we have very few transit boardings. There is a bus route 383 but very few are taking the bus because we're way out in the suburbs. My question is how is this or why was this decision made? Because if this is the metric, if it's critical, if it has highest traffic and transit boardings then we're screwed. We don't have transit boardings. We're in the suburbs. My question is how was that decision made and what can I do to change that and get rid of that requirement for high transit boardings to be up on the priority list >> Kitchen: I think you're pointing out a policy issue that bears if you recollect discussion >> Zimmerman: Sure >> Kitchen: Unless you have an answer, maybe can we park that for further discussion? I think your point is well made >> Zimmerman: It looks like it may be baked in and that's the problem we have. You have to make some assumptions, right, about how you're doing priorities and those things seem to be baked in before the stuff comes to us to even talk about it >> Kitchen: That's a good point. We're going to go and starthearing from folks right now. And I would ask you all, it's critical to us to hear from y'all. So, you know, you have three minutes. If you have the opportunity to make your point in two minutes, that will help us get to hear from everybody sooner. [4:01:24 PM] So please bear that in mind when you're talking. So first we have Brendan woodstruck. I would ask you to come up to the podium and then the next person come up to the other podium and that way we canmove quickly between folks. First is Brendan woodstruck and if Hayden black-walk we are like to come up up to the other podium >> Thank you. I'm a senior design associate with [indiscernible] And the chair of the north central I-35 neighborhood coalition two. The story of this bond in my opinion is going to be told in the city's corridors about he -- we know these streets. They are lynch pins of movement, generators oftransit and vital meeting places. When they fail they prioritize the movement of cars over social environments we should create. When they fail they preordain the singularity of the automobile, create the trafficwe say we so loath and entice the speed that we know is killing austinites in a stunning number. This bond is an opportunity to realize the most transformative, most mode-shiftingments of our previous corridor elements and this bond is an opportunity to identify and fund our next transformative corridors in all stricts with the goal of having not half but 100% of Austin's population living within 2 miles of such a corridor.Everything in this bond should support a story of transforming our corridors into places for people and there should be nothing in this bond that doesn't help tell that story. There should be no port barrelintersection funding that -- [indiscernible] Sing vehicle [indiscernible] And the multimodal city there there should be no additional lanes or turn lanes on fm1969 or direct disconnecting of vibrant streets that do not belong in our city core and we must ensure that we do not abdicate any responsibility to see that the future of I-35 is [4:03:24 PM] a future for Austin and not a future through Austin. I want to commend the hard work of the mayor and his staff in working with the senator to fund I-35's future without leveraging resources against it but we cannot in light of this acquiesce the faith of our largest corridor solely to txdot whose even most current plans are splitting neighborhoods from one another, spilling noise and air pollution, prohibiting safe passage along the corridor and do next to nothing to build new connections than the downtown area. This is why on behalf of the north central I-35 coalition to -- I repeat our appeal to does for a study of the I-35 that appeals to the interests of the city and not just to txdot's idea of transportation and I hope that that could be part of this bond and I want to offer my personal support to the efforts that have gone into this and to the bonds, the bond language proposed specifically that by councilmembers Casar and pool this morning I think is taking us in the right direction. Thank you all very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Hayden will be Scott Johnson. Scott, if you want to come up to the podium. >> Thank you. Hayden black-walker, councilmember pool's appointee to the commission and I service the vice chair F the pedestrian advisory council as well as a volunteer for vision 0atx. With adequate sidewalk funding we can build sidewalks within a quarter mile of all of our schools, parks, transit stops. In 2012 we passed bond money that was multimodal and have been building sidewalks with that money but that money is now gone. We need $15 million a year to repair existing sidewalks. And $25 million a year to build missing ones. Right now we spend about $5 million a year and at that current rate it will take us 200 years to build a complete sidewalk network in the city of Austin. [4:05:25 PM] I think a lot about the people who don't drive, the ones that are too young, ones that are too old or the ones that are not able to, they make up a third of our population. We need to provide safe places for people to walk or roll. For all ages and abilities. And I think it's important that we make Austin more equitable. And health err. Last year 30 pedestrians died on Austin streets, recently a 3-year-old was run over andkilled by a truck. Traffic violence edition disproportionately affect the old, young, people of color. We need a complete network for all ages and abilities. We need safe places to cross our streets. We have corridor plans along our most important corridors. This bond would fund improvements to the corridors, which is great, connecting people to each other. A safe network gets people safely along and across corridors, and it should apply to even the biggest one. And I would say the ugliest one, I-35. Senator Watson has figured out great ways to fund some of the I-35 improvements so money doesn't have to be on this bond but we still need an I-35 corridor plan similar to other corridor plans that looks at how we can have pedestrian, bike, transit along that corridor. Think of many ways we can connect Austin. Connecting us to jobs, services, health care, neighbors in our community. Thanks very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Is Scott Johnson here? No? Okay. Next is Nancy crather and after is [indiscernible]. Is Nancy here? Thank you. >> I used to drive through -- used a drive-through. Thank you councilmembers kitchen, mayor, other councilmembers. I come before you as I have [4:07:26 PM] before and representing the community of people with disabilities and the importance of access in Austin, which we've spent decades doing. As Hayden just reported, I don't have 200 years to finish the sidewalk projects here. If we could and we should make that a priority. If we stop now, we'll never see it again. That money will be eaten up faster than anything. It seems ton the -- it seems to be the lion's share of themoney. It provides adequate safety for people who have mobility. Everybody should be out walking. I'm sorry, the sing occupant vehicles -- single occupant vehicles don't have the right-of-way on sidewalks. And there's too many people getting hurt and killed by the single occupant vehicles. The sidewalks, the trails, all the accessibility issues need to continue. I'm also a house -- a property owner and I want to -- I don'twant to see my taxes going up. Corridors are real important to me. And also getting the money used within a timely manner. Because I know how quickly the barrels run around here in the state. So whatever you can do to utilize the moneys in the most effective manner, with the priorities being mobility, pedestrianism and safety, it's really where my heart comes from and where I hope my tax dollars go. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After fatama will be Ashley Gordon. >> Hi, so I just want to follow up with a story. [4:09:27 PM] Last Friday I took the bus from highland mall up to north Austin but tech place is actually right off of I think 360. It was a mile from the bus stop to the actual place where I was going and there were no sidewalks whatsoever in walking. There's plenty of place that's I actually run where there isn't any sidewalks and I am an able-bodied person. I was running actually thinking about who would be traveling down this road.Because no one could. If you go down pleasant valley from east Riverside there's a point where their sidewalks actually stop. I ran that yesterday morning. Being barefoot gives me a totally different perspective on different things. Also, just being able to take the bus, right? So being able to not have to walk a mile just to take an adequate bus to go to the other side of town, which takes about an hour five minutes. I already get up at 5:00 in the morning. I don't have kids so I can only imagine for those who do what that looks like. Also if you decide to put this vote on the ballot it being something separate so people can actually read what they're voting for and not putting everything under one to say if you vote for this you have to vote for it all instead of saying this is what we're going to put the millions of dollars into, so if you're putting it into sidewalks it needs to be said in plane language that people are voting for the money to specifically be put into transit and/or sidewalks, not corridors. There's a lot of people who don't understand what it means to put money into a corridor and going into voting. Just being able to provide people with information of what they're even voting for if you decide to put it on the ballot I believe is important. Because I've been talking to people about this issue and a lot of people don't even know that this is an issue and that this is coming up on the November ballot election. So those are I would say the [4:11:28 PM] things I would think about, is that as an able-bodied person I'm saying there needs to be better sidewalks and especially places people take the buses, as well as if you're going to put the vote on the ballot it needs to be separate so people actually can understand. I absolutely support the drafts that was given by councilmember pool and councilmember Casar so I just wanted to say that as well. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Ashley will be robin stallings. >> Hello again. My name is Ashley Lee Gordon and I am the green party candidate for county commissioner for precinct 1 and being as such theenvironmental and social impact of this bond is very close to my heart. I get to spend a lot of time out in the county, and so when I talk about mobility issues, it isn't just a packet or a line item or a councilmeeting. I actually see how it affects the people in our community, including myself as being someone who is disabled. I am also from -- originally from Port Arthur, Texas, also known as cancer alley. And I've realized since I've been in Austin most of my adult life and I realize that when we have discussions about development, we don't talk so much about the environmental -- or if we do it's secondary or tertiary, that we don't realize the grave impact it really can have on us. So I want do start off using the word "Prioritize." It's not that I'm against the development of the highway system, in building more highway structures.It's that I think we should prioritize our funding towards mass transit right now and from the environmental impact side I would say mass transit and I was talking to the air quality people outside will help alleviate the traffic on the road. If you're alleviating traffic on the road, you're alleviating how many emissions are put out. To put this into a more real-life example, my own [4:13:30 PM] father died from lung cancer, and it was because there were air quality issues in port Arthur. It's not something that they took the time to say we need to regulate this and my father along with all the men whoworked with him at the refinery at the time died from an environmental injustice and I'm telling you as a breast cancer survivor myself even if you survive the quality of life you have goes down. So it has a real environmental impact, not just what we're seeing in studies. It has a real environmental impact on us. Also when we're thinking about developing, I think that we need to take a step back. We are very quick to develop in this area, and we're not thinking about the long-term effects of the environment. So we have issues with flooding now. And our flood Zones are actually costing people their lives and so if anyone wasaround here during Halloween of last year there was a situation out in thoroughbred farms and the -- where coda was built. There wasn't enough study about the effects of putting so much concrete down there sothe runoff went into that neighborhood, it flooded and people died and people are still dying. And so when we don't take the time to think about these things and also even on 35 the drainage is terrible on 35.There have been many times that I've been just right near downtown the water has splashed and almost -- [ buzzer sounding ] -- You know, blinded me. I just wanted to us realize the impact -- that we need tofocus more on people and mass transit and then take more time to look at the environmental impact before we make decisions about adding highways. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After robin stallings willbe -- and I apologize I'm going to get this wrong is sharmarka Hasan. [4:15:39 PM] >> Madam chair, committee members, thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to speak today, this very important issue. You have a lot to weigh and we appreciate it. I'm robin stallings, executivedirector of bike Texas. We have been working a very long time towards where we stand today. The potential to have a balanced plan between the sidewalks and the bicycle master plan and corridors can do a lot to improve the quality of life in Austin but also to really improve Austin's brand, that the sidewalks are prioritized to connect to transit and to schools, fully funded would be 250 million with the sheets that you see front and back. The bike plan, which is maybe one of the best bike plans in the country. We've seen a lot of them. And that could eliminate 20,000 trips a day into downtown Austin for $150 million. And you can see that it's well spread out. It's across the city. Everybody gets it. And to quote my favorite mayor, it combines mobility, safety, and sustainability and also equity and affordability. Because it -- when you can --2 miles -- rather half a mile to a transit stop you can walk. 2 miles you can bike. With the new electric bikes you can go 4 miles to a transit stop and that there ISES the -- increases the value of our existing transit assets. With so many baby boomers aging we have a silver tsunami, many of you have heard it, this will give you the chance with these two plans to age in place so it can save families money but keep people in their neighborhoods that if people are able to use the sidewalks and the protected bike facilities better combined with transit, it also gives [4:17:40 PM] them a chance to give up that second car. $9,000 a year is the average cost for an automobile. That directly addresses affordability for people that would have choices. Many cannot get out of their cars so those that can will clear up a little road space for those that can't. I think it's interesting to note that district 1 needs 205 miles of sidewalks just to get to the schools and transit. District 2 needs 64 miles of sidewalks.District 5 needs 82 miles of sidewalks. District 8, 98 miles of sidewalks, and district 1052 miles of sidewalks. Purely a coincidence that I named those districts about anyway, thank you very much. And we look forward to working with y'all to improve the excellent start on the bond packages that have been proposed so far by mayor Adler and by councilmembers pool and Casar. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Next will be linden Henry after -- did I proin Austin your name right? >> You got it right. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thanks for having me. I would like to share biking history in my life when I first came into Austin as a new immigrant, it's really helped me a lot because when you come in new country you are starting off your life back to school -- square one it's really key to, you know, get at this petition to wagon -- from work to your house. Actually, a lot of places when you go and there is which kind of transportation you use it's really very difficult for us to get a job when you don't have any kind of reliable transportation. And but the first opportunity I got was like a second shift where, like, then the midnight business hour are not working so it was really very helpful to use my bike from home [4:19:42 PM] safely to my workplace. And it was only about the bike lanes and we feel more safe, more secure. There is a lot of places we don't have a bike lane and we feel less secure and, you know, when you come into newcountry and you don't have a lot of traffic, you know, to bike around, it's really very dangerous for us as immigrants. It will be more, you know, helpful to use the bike lanes and [indiscernible] As much as we can get. It is very important for us and I really appreciate for your time, and I look forward this fund will go as well as the bike lanes and the bike [indiscernible] In Austin. I really appreciate it. Thank you so much for having me. Have a good afternoon. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After linden will be Steven [indiscernible] >> Good afternoon again. I'm linden Henry. I urge you to include a measure for urban rail in the proposed $720 million mobility bond package. Now, under consideration. I support the proposal for an affordable 5.3-mile electric light rail minimum operable segment on north Lamar and Guadalupe from crestview todowntown. Currently, 83% of the proposed $720 million package is devoted to road projects. Surely some of these road projects could be replaced with the $260 million to $400 million that would facilitate an urban rail project. It's absurd that the $720 million bond package you're considering could be labeled a mobility package despite no major initiative for transit, let alone urban rail, which has been studied and affirmed as a necessity for decades. This bond proposal stands in contradiction to the decades of official green rhetoric and policy initiatives such as envision central Texas and imagine Austin that have [4:21:43 PM] verbally embraced public transportation and high capacity transit as key mobility alternative measures necessary to keep Austin moving. This road focus $720 million package tries to address congestion by narrating throughput of vehicles unfortunately experience and evidence suggests this is a losing approach trying to tweak more capacity to squeeze more cars typically just induces more traffic. Furthermore, this influx of ever-growing traffic imposes more stress on congested areas such as Austin's core. In contrast, this light rail plan and future expansions throughout Austin removes traffic from roadways by attracting motorists to the transit service, adding the equivalent of four lanes of extra peak capacity to this corridor. Can the same be said for the current $720 million road-folked bond plan? I suggest that urban railproviding highly attractive rail transit service on its dedicated tracks makes far more sense as a solution for alleviating mobility congestion than simply trying to squeeze for traffic on to the crowded streets, roads,parking spaces. I've heard the argument urban rail is not ready to be offered as a bond measure yet polls indicate resounding support for public transit and urban rail and the community has gone through yearsfamiliarizing them with the technology and the issues. The public seems more ready than ever to support rail. It's Austin's civic leadership that seems to have cold feet. Finally, whatever bond package you choose, I urge you to unbundle the roads bonds from the small proportion of bicycle and pedestrian bonds and possibly other alternative mobility. This would allow the community at least to consider these alternative mobility elements separately. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After will be Susan [indiscernible]. [4:23:44 PM] >> Hi, I'm Steven zetner, live near burnet road. I do support the multimodal vision for our transit corridors, like burnet road. I want to talk a little bit about the cost of corridor improvements. And illustrate that I'm going to talk about trees and tree shade on the corridor. Shade is an element that our community realized many years ago is an enabler for walking, biking on said corridors. So between 2010 and 2015, weplanted about 200 shade trees on burnet road and nearby corridors. That's given me some expertise to talk about the challenges of planting trees. I want to walk you through a thought exercise here. Where would you plant a shade tree on a corridor? This is a segment of burnet road, about 25, 30 feet of right-of-way here that's pretty luxurious by Austin standards. You should be able to plant trees at a location like this. You're not going to be able to plant the tree in the existing sidewalk, online. You're not going to be able to plant the tree in the driveways, and we have many curb cuts along burnet road nor within 10 feet because you don't want to impair driver visibility. You don't want to plant the trees in the clear zone near the overheads. Nor over water and wastewater lines. Nor over the telecomms or gas lines. What I'm illustrate willing here is for a location like this there's no place to plant shade trees in current conditions. We've taken a look at burnet from 2222 to 183, about a two-mile segment here and there's only about a third of the right-of-way along this segment of the corridor where you can plant trees. The rest of the places along the corridor would require [4:25:45 PM] deep restructuring of the corridor, which is what city staff is proposing to do. Now that's expensive, but my point here is that doing nothing is also expensive. We have to maintain the aging utilities that we already have along these corridors, and right now we're tripping over our own feet. Every time we add elements to these corridors like sidewalks or, in this example, the trees that we planted and repairs of those existing utilities are required, we're having to pay for those repairs and we're digging up features that we just added to the right-of-way. So on a per--mile basis it makes a lot more sense to do it once and do it right and get everything done in the right-of-way. I think the question, then, is who is going to pay for that? Is it a public funded initiative or are developers going to do it piecemeal over time. Then my teaser question is, if it is public funded initiative, what -- [ buzzer sounding ] -- Implications for codenext rules on developer impact fees? Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Susan ingleking would be inan [indiscernible]. Will be next after Susan. Go ahead, Susan. >> Hello. Thank you for having this session for us. I'm the cofounder of tiny transit advocacy and strategies. My cofounder is Dr. Katie can. Dissertation was a feasibility study for continuous flow network for low speed vehicles in Austin and this probably won't surprise you it was faster to go places in a 25-mile-an-hour continuous flow lane than to go in ordinary traffic so it's quite feasible. We are advocating a low-speed, low-emission continuous flow [4:27:46 PM] protected network. It's the only game changer on the table for transportation in Austin and for our congestion mess. It also happens ton the only game changer on the table for affordability, city of Austin of living -- cost of living, social equity. It has extreme benefits for the environment, air emotions, and making smart city's technology more broadly available and the reason I got into this, it dramatically changes and improves public safety and road deaths in Austin. We're talking about cost today. I want to mention how this approach is so different and so complementary and supportive of other modes. I know this city council you were elected to do great things and you want to do them and I know you can be dragged down into fights with neighborhoods and traffic data and infill development. This completely changes thatconversation. It is the silver bullet and it costs nothing to include tiny transit -- in what we call the lien infrastructure in infill development projects. It costs nothing. And in fact it ends up saving time on the part of city city staff and all of you mediating unwinnable disputes. Katie and I have worked on this project separately for two years and now one year together. It just gets more exciting. We both are full-time -- workfull-time, both have small children. Two of mine were here. One was going to testify that when you get to her name you may pass her over as this crowd is a little large for her, her name is Jolie Rosenberg. We'd like to get on each your calendars and we've been on some of your calendars because we have proposed an implementation that is remarkably low cost, [4:29:47 PM] remarkably easy to get going that doesn't take decades or hundreds of millions of dollars and it works with those that do require that. And so we will be back with each of you shortly. And, again, I believe ifAustin wants to make a difference in how we're developing, we cannot consider transportation in a silo. We must also consider economic resilience. [ Buzzer sounding ] Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Is anan here? No? Miller nettle is next. And after Miller will be Mike Rawlins. >> Hi, councilmember. All councilmembers, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for having me today and I really appreciate your leadership taking action onthis mobility bond. I think the public is really desperate for some solutions about how to address mobility regardless of how people get around right now. So thank you. I want to call your attention to a couple things that came out of the mobility talks, input process, which I'm sure y'all have read multiple times at this point but I thought one thing that was really interesting was the two pie charts that represented howpeople currently commute and want do commute if you look at the slice of the pie that represents biking and public transit each increases three to four fold which you ask people how they want to change their behavior. I think there's a ton of demand for people taking public transit, riding bikes, walking. We need to build a comprehensive network to harness that demand and get people out of their cars and into alternative modes of transportation just like the consultant from connections 2025 was saying. We have to really think big about building these networks, making them comprehensive and protected if we want to see -- really ease congestion and give choices for how they get around. I think even if that means, you know, discussing a small [4:31:48 PM] tax increase to give us the flexibility to fund these projects that's a discussion that's worth having. I think the public wants to see real change on the ground, want to see change in neighborhoods, see their kidsbe able to bike and walk to school safely and want do see their corridors made into human places that are meant for gathering rather than just driving very quickly and dangerously through. Thank you all for thinking -- thinking big and looking forward with y'all to make this happen. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Mr. Rawlins will be Jose cabrillo. >> Mayor, madam chair, councilmembers, Mike Rawlins,president of the Austin chamber of commerce. I am not here necessarily in just the capacity as the president of the Austin chamber of commerce. I'm actually here representing a growing coalition oforganizations, businesses, employees, that are all supporting mayor Adler's proposal on the bond, potential bond package for November. I'll go into more detail on that. Yesterday I think all of you received communications to us with a statement of that support. I will not take the time to read that but maybe talk a little bit about some of the key points that are contained within that. Mayor Adler was elected by allthe citizens of Austin. We believe that he is -- he has listened and put together a very balanced approach to having real transportation and congestion relief for this community. You know that for several years now the number 1 issue polled by various groups in this community, including us, including the Austin music people poll that came out Monday, indicating that a margin of 2-1 of austinites say transportation improvement is the number 1 issue. Some plans have called that Austin transportation stops at the corridor of the city. That's not what the people want. People from southwest, people from northwest, west, east, [4:33:48 PM] and other directions of this community want to be included in the improvement plan. So arterial roads are very important to Austin. 60% or more of the population lives outside of the core of the city. 75% plus of the voters of Austin live outside the core of the city. We believe a plan that recognizes all of austinites and the serious pain being caused by lacking transportation, real transportation improvements and congestion relief is -- should be shared by all. I would also say there's a very good case that's been made by the mayor and city council about transportation and affordability being linked together. We've talked about the need to have more supply on housing to bring affordable housing to the community. The corridor plan combined with land use, imagine Austin and codenext, which has not moved forward in four years,will remedy this and we need to take care of the corridors as well as the arterial roads. So we urge the mobility committee to support mayor Adler's proposal and move it forward to the November bondreferendum. We believe that 720 million is the right number to do some major improvements for this community. Thank you. And I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Mr. Cabrillo will be Susan pantell. >> Mike just spoke on behalf of the chamber so I'll pass subtract next is Susan is [indiscernible] And after Susan Jake spadell. Is Susan here? No. Okay. Jake. >> [Off mic] >> Kitchen: We'll come back do her. Are you Jake? >> Yes. >> Kitchen: You can go ahead. >> All right. I'm Jake Spidel. Nice to meet all ofall. I'a big fan. [4:35:49 PM] I am a bicyclist, taxpayer, I commute basically everywhere I go on bicycle as much as I can. I represent pretty much all of my friends who aren't as passionate about alternative transportation as I am. And I was in a crash about a month ago, was a hit and run crash. I had the right-of-way in the bike lane and I was very -- scary and a horrible experience. And I support any sort of bond and any sort of anything that you guys can do to improve bicycle safety, bicycle connectivity, anything that can help me and all my friends and a lot of people that I know get around town safely and just basically don't have to worry about anything that you can do would be a great help. So thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Next, if Susan is here, she can come down and be next. After Susan will be Neil tanner. >> Sorry to miss my -- I think we have a lot of mobility needs in the city, and I really support a full 720 million bond package. I think that we need to make the first priority to improve our bus system. I really appreciate capital metro's presentation. There's a lot of things the city can do to help the bus service. Putting in priority lanes, queue jumps, signal priority. We can help with bus stops throughout the city. There's a lot of mead for busstop improvement and lighting at the bus stops. This is an equity issue in addition to transportation [4:37:51 PM] needs. A large number of people in the city rely on our bus system, and many people who are lower income and people of color who -- whose needs have not been adequately met so I think for that reason it needsto be a priority and also for affordability. It helps people to stay in the city if they can have fewer cars, share a car in their household. I think the corridor plans look good, but they may not necessarily be the highest priority for transit. That's why I think it's really important to set aside a certain amount for transit enhancements that we can use wherever most needed throughout the city. And I think it should be clearon the bond measure, as much as possible, to what extent the money is going to each mode. So people are very confused about bike lanes seem ton in different categories and safety and, you know, to get some idea of how much money is going to each mode and, again, I really think that our bus system is the basis of our transportation system. We can build on it from there. We can, you know, add bike lanes to the bus stops and tncs from the bus stops but we really need a solid bus system and we really need to coordinate the priorities about capital metro. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Neil tanner will be he wily mcfaden. >> Good afternoon, my name is Neil tanner, and I'm -- mission to being a cyclist I'm a engineer. I think in terms of Numbers so I have a few Numbers for you. The first is my 6-year-old is [4:39:52 PM] very, very proud of the fact that he biked to school all 161 days this year. As a kindergartner. And he would have -- he wanted to come down and talk to you about that, to tell you himself but I told him hecouldn't come because there are zero safe bike routes from our house in northwest Austin to downtown to attend something like this. Part of the reason there are no safe bike routes here are the 59 vehicles parked in the bike lanes that I saw on my route down here today and that's just an example of kind of a haphazard approach to bicycle infrastructure that varies a lot throughout the city. So I want to state my explicit support for big, bold action on mobility in general including but not limited to fully funding the bicycle master plan. I think this bond election is a real opportunity to do two things right with respect to this infrastructure. One is to be proactive and the other is to be consistent. On the consistency, it's you can't bike realistically to get anywhere unless you have a way to connect from where you're going from to going to. My route down here went through four city council districts. This is a citywide issue and needs to be dealt with consistently across the entire city and I think the bond gives the opportunity to do that. The next is proactiveness. We have a great bicycle master plan that does consistently envision what should be done throughout the city. And we need to step up and fund that and do it now and not play this whack a molegame of wait until a kid gets hit on each street before we figure out how to make that street safe. We have a master plan that [4:41:52 PM] lays out how to do this and it's time to fund that and execute it fully, not halfway. So I fully support a big, bold initiative such as the one mayor Adler proposed. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you.After Elliot mcfaden will be Dave Dobbs. >> I think I had someone donate time for me. >> Is thing here? Go right ahead. You'll have six minutes. >> Thank you. Chairman kitchen, Mr. Mayor, councilmembers, thank you for being here today. I am here representing bionic share of Austin as its executive director, we are the nonprofit running the bike share program, Austin bee cycle. Tanning you to a little about the master bike plan, how we can use this opportunity with the bond election to possibly meet that goal. So just a quick summary, since launching in 2013, the bee cycle system in the urban core has grown from 11 stations to 50 stations. We're closing in this summer on half million trips in the system. Over 1 million miles ridden. And we are sustainable system. We've actually done that without any local tax dollars being put into the system. It's all been done with federal grants, private matching funds, and we actually cover -- will be covering this year 100% of our operations with ridership revenue, which is the best rate in the country for bike share systems. So under the master bike plan it rather ambitiously asked us to grow this to 300 stations by the end of next year. That's a big jump but we think it's doable. And I wanted to tell you what kind of impact that would have on the city and the bike share program. So a 300 station system would [4:43:54 PM] grow the bike -- bee cycle network from just the downtown area and adjacent neighborhoods to over 50 neighborhoods across seven council districts, going from rundberg lane all the way down to west gate mail mall, lake Austin boulevard to airport boulevard. It would add 2 million bicycle trips to the road every year. It would remove over half a million car trips from the road. Importantly it would also be a job creator, long-term job creator adding those stations in the system that supports would add 30 long-term full-time jobs to the city paid at living wage with full benefits and all of that, after the capital investment, would be at zero additional tax dollars. We have a model that allows us to continue to operate with a combination of ridership and sponsorships. So how do we get to that 300 station goal? It's a $12.5 million capitalinvestment. The good misis that our nonprofit has already done a lot of heavy lifting and continues to do heavy lifting to get us quite far along that way. With the existing infrastructure on the ground, federal grants that are in process now and private funding, we are -- have secured and are securing -- we can cover half of that capital investment. 6.5 million to get to 150 stations. So how do we get that additional six informal I think we've got a great opportunity with the transportation bonds and we really think focusing on the corridors is a key part of that. The bee cycle system, when we talk about corridors beingtransformative, can further that transformation and really accelerate the kind of change we want to see. When we look at the corridors, it makes sense to grow the bee cycle system both operationally and where the citizens of Austin are asking us to put stations. And it can be a multiplier. [4:45:56 PM] They're in the corridors. Really creating that last mile connectivity to make transit work better and to provide a short trip solution for folks. I would say that we can do this also without adding anymore need to the capacity, the capital construction capacity, active transportation currently has. Because we take that on and our manufacturer builds the equipment. So we ask for you to consider matching the work that we havedone already to grow this system and to make a commitment from the city to grow this city asset. And honor the master bike plan. And we ask you to do that by looking at appropriating 6 million of the discussedcorridor improvements to grow the bee cycle system. And really when we think about bee cycle, it's really the best of what a public- private partnership can create. We are leveraging public and private dollars in a way that the public sector and private sector cannot do by themselves and we allow a nimbleness and ability to change and innovate that will meet the demand of the public for the future. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. We have David flores next and after David, Claire berry. I'm sorry, Dave. I didn't see you were here. David flores next. After Dave Dobbs. >> Thank you, chairman kitchen and hello again this afternoon and thank you for listening to our concerns. I'm going to speak contemporaneously here because one of the things that is not understood is why public transit is not more than what it should be in Austin. Why it is insufficient. And the reason for that is that public transit riders do not have political clout. And one of the reasons that [4:47:57 PM] they don't have political clout is because they're insignificant in terms of the private sector, which is beholden to transportation infrastructure, which is largely centered around the automobile. Until that shift takes place inside the city and private development is very active and very centered around rail stops, capital metro will always be a secondhand player in the game. Now, I congratulate this council for finally returning the quarter cent to capital metro. A quarter cent that was taken away for almost 30 years, hundreds of millions of dollars that could have gone to transit improvements were lost because our electedofficials before you did not want to raise taxes. They didn't want to pay for the things that they needed to do on the streets so they took capital metro money to do it. Not only that, capital metro had to give up its funding in 2000, its savings, over a hundred $000,000, because politicians wanted to fund the toll road up mopac. Now, until that rail line is built, capital metro will never be anything more than a secondhand bus company. And all the things that Dodd and his colleagues have offered to you, will never come to pass. When rail is in place and the development is around those stops, it's a huge generator. It's a huge return oninvestment that neither the city nor the private sector is therefore, it is defended. So I urge you to understand [4:49:58 PM] why this must go forward this November. We delayed. Delayed is the deadliest form of denial. We keep doing it and doing it. We've had four studies that concentrated on guadalupe-lamar, that 5.3-mile segment done by two persons. That all occurred from 1986 to 2000. We know what the costs are and we know what the outcome is. [ Buzzer sounding ] Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After David flores will be Claire berry. >> Thank you, councilmember. Mayor. Councilmember, I want to remind you back to about this time last year I hosted you and councilmember Casar on a very hot day on north Lamar, walked you through that neighborhood and showed you what we experience on a day to day weekly basis. As I'm sure you remember, the councilmembers will fill new, we walked different sections of that area, of course up in that area there are no sidewalks. There are no curbs. There are open drains. Open ditches. Very unsafe for what is considered a major corridor part of the city. Along that route, you know, we have school children that are trying to get to school. Trying to across rundberg and Lamar, deemed one of the deadliest intersections for pedestrians here in the city. I want you to consider obviously this bond that you're considering and the safe city proposal that has been proposed but the infrastructure impacts it would have as it pertains not only to sidewalks but also bike paths to make it safe for multimodal transportationthroughout the entire city especially up in north Lamar. This past weekend my uncle lives around that rundberg and Lamar area had car troubles, as I know we have all had once before so he wasn't able to [4:51:59 PM] drive his car to get a few auto parts sew decided he would take his bike. I asked him how did he get from his apartment just east of rundberg and Lamar over to O'Reilly auto parts and he said he had to navigate his way through ditches and foot paths. He couldn't ride on the road because there's no bike paths. Couldn't ride on the sidewalk because there's no sidewalks. So in between dodging pedestrians that are walkingin the foot path, a ditch, traffic on north Lamar he was able to make that and get the parts. To me I find that absurd and pretty crazy. Another thing that will probably be touched on tomorrow and hasn't beentouched on quite yet is access to transportation also grants access to healthier food options. As I think we all know, there's a lot of equity involved as it pertains to transportation and how well that is placed throughout the city but also the food aspects for individuals, people to eat healthier and to live a healthier lifestyle. Lastly, I want to leave you guys with this saying that was pointed out to me by a friend of mine in district 4 who works in the planning department here in the city. As it pertains to north Lamar in particular there's this dichotomy and paradox between roads and streets. Roads are meant to connect people from far distances. Something that we currently have right now with north Lamar, burnet and other major corridors that are currently not owned by the city. Streets are full of buildings and other city life. They're full of apartment complexes, they're full of restaurants, stores, shops and the like. [Buzzer sounding] With that said, this bond proposal is a great idea. But to further capitalize on this initiative, we immediate to look at wrestling across away which is being undertaken of these major corridors from tex do the -- txdot. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Claire berry here? [4:54:00 PM] No? Okay. Next is Adam Kahn and after will be Julie Shaw. >> Hi. I want to encourage the council -- I was expecting to just see to the mobility committee but since most of you seem to be here I wanted to encourage the council to think small and use this bond package as an opportunity to build trust. I don't think I need to remind anyone on the dais that we just came through a horribly divisive period in the cityand I don't really think there's -- it would be a good idea to go through another one almost immediately. There are a number of things that we can do in terms of low-hanging fruit that would allow us to improve the mobility situation in the city without necessarily busting the budget. Specifically, I was actually surprised, I took a look at the mayor's proposal yesterday for smart corridors, and in terms of the bus stopcomponent, the left-turn component, and the signal-timing component, there could be a lot to work with there without necessarily doing something massive and hugely expensive. That being said, I also don'tnecessarily trust the city bureaucracy to actually implement it the way that it is sold to us during a bond election. So I want to encourage the council to think small, use this to build trust. I think a big, clunky bond package with lots of moving parts will be horribly dividive, just like the 2014 package was, just like that thing that happened six weeks ago was, and I would encourage everyone to avoid it. [4:56:00 PM] I would encourage whatever decisions you make to break them into their component parts. One thing that I am pleasantly surprised hearing the other people who have spoken today say is that I'm not the onlyone encouraging that. But I think a - - breaking any mobility package into its component parts and allowing voters to select from a diverse range of a la carte options will allow the council to focus on some low- hanging fruit and do some things that won't be horribly divisive and may allow us to actually make progress instead of having another horribly divisive beijing that ultimately means nothing gets done until 2018at the earliest. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Go ahead. You're Julie, right? Kieba white is next after Julie. >> Hi, Julie Shaw and I just wanted to express my support for urban light rail and masstransitting in. My family lives near Westlake drive and 360. My husband and I work in different areas of downtown so we each drive our own car to work. We have three kids ages 14, 11, and eight and we highersitters to help us get kids to afterschool activities. At a minimum our household puts three cars on the road every day and I wanted to share our story and tell you we would all prefer to take public transportation if reasonable options were available. So thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Next is Clark Schaeffer and then Scott Morris. Is Clark here? Scott here? Okay. Then Leo Anderson -- wait. I'm sorry. Are you -- you're Scott? Right. Come on forward. Okay. After Scott will be Leo Anderson. >> Good afternoon, thank you, [4:58:01 PM] chair and committee members, councilmembers, mayor. My name is Scott Morris. I am with the central Austin community development organization. Cars don't fill jobs. Cars don't use our parks. Cars do not attend school or conduct business transactions. People do these things. Transportation success is measured in moving people. Not in moving cars. Rail offers the greatest capacity for moving people. Surpassing any other mode for its cost effectiveness, capacity and throughput against any other method proven or unproven. Our proposal for light rail minimum operable seg segment based on several decades worth of planning and discussion, neighborhood planning ordinances, and over $20 million in federally funded transit studies. They have arrived at a singular conclusion, Guadalupe north Lamar would be a great place for a light rail investment. It woulding the next step in Austin's utilization of rail and would cost effectively serve a corridor with the highest transit ridership, highest population density and the highest employment density of any other corridor in the city. One of those studies was for the fta in 2000. That light rail plan used the same footprint in our proposal plus track to Mcneil. But ours goes further, connecting 23 additional miles of existing metrorail providing red line passengers from east Austin and northwest Austin a light rail transfer to 145,000 jobs in the Guadalupe north Lamar corridor. But this is just the next step.Our system concept extends light rail to destinations like east Riverside, south Lamar, north Lamar and to the airport. It delivers social equity by providing areas of why and dove springs with access to [5:00:01 PM] jobs. It builds and operates extensions in southeast Austin towards the airport with the hotel occupancy tax. This proposal returns a very high roi and it connects people to economic opportunity. Polling in 2015 showed a 66 support support for mass transit as well as the taxes for that project. We only need a seven.change to pass a bond measure. So the people also need your leadership. In this year of mobility we need public transit, a proven mobility alternative on the ballot. We feel the people of Austin are ready to take that step. Voters deserve that choice in November. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. What is your name. >> Kitchen: After Mr. Anderson it would be Jeb Boyt. >> Good afternoon, mayor, chair and committee members. My name is Leo Anderson and my request is that you prioritize the master plan and the sidewalk plan in the mobility bond package. I'm part of our choir that spoke earlier. I think Miller and Neal and rob did a great job of doing that. I like riding my bike more than riding the car. I ride downtown about three times a week. And I have neighbors who like riding their bikes. A lot of us ride in the neighborhood, but they would not consider riding downtown. So I think it's very important that we do [5:02:02 PM] this bond package. I think as we heard earlier today, one of the members talked about their fear of riding downtown in the pleasant valley area or riding the public streets. So it's very important that we startimplementing these plans. I know our city planning organization has already studied this and said we can reduce car congestion by up to seven percent if we do implement that master bicycle plan, as well as the sidewalk part of it too. So that's what I think we should do to actually aleve congestion as well. So in conclusion what I want to do is request that you prioritize your support for bike -- master bike plan and thesidewalks. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Mr. Boyd will be Mercedes ferris. >> Thank you, councilmember kitchen, mayor and councilmembers. My name is Jeb Boyd can alliance of publictransportation. We are here to express our support today for a bond election this year. We would like to see an election that provides at least $55 million for each year of the proposed bond cycle for funds forbicycle plan, the sidewalk plan and other active transportation projects. We would like to see the expansion of the dedicated transit lanes north along Guadalupe as called for in the Guadalupe corridor plan and also to expand the travel of lanes south of downtown and out Riverside. We would like funding for implementation of the corridor plans for burnet road, north and south Lamar, airport boulevard, Guadalupe andRiverside drive. And we would like to see the city ensure we build not just along the corridor plans within the areas of transportation and the bike and pedestrian facilities, but also build a network of sidewalks and bike ways to connect the neighborhoods and schools and workplaces to these corridors. Finally that any funding for roadway project not diminish anything for the transit projects and that any roadway project [5:04:02 PM] should include a significant transit benefit. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Mercedes will be Aaron farmer. >> Hi, good afternoon. First I would like to thank you for all your hard work. I'm sure this is not an easy task for you. We appreciate outwork on this. I'm Mercedes ferris with bike Austin, executive director. Whoa support the mayor's bond proposal as we believe it will get Austin moving andimplement changes that would be immediate. Coming to a common ground that would work for the future of our city isn't easy, but we need it. By making major improvements in parts of our city that willimpact affordability, access to care, healthy food and most importantly safe access for our children to get to school. This will not only offer a safe route for our children, but a healthy option. We seem to forgetchildhood obesity is an epidemic in our country. We would decrease car dependency which would also increase household affordability. We have that in our pathway to equity report. Last year was an homework high with 102 deaths in our city. Last week -- recently we've had a total of three children in the past six weeks due to lack of adequate infrastructure. If we don't make changes now we will surpass the number of last year. Bike Austin supports the 720 million mobility bond. This bond will offer our community a plan that will work for everyone, regardless of your socioeconomic background. We need a complete plan for all ages and ability and that is fair for our city. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. After Mr. Farmer will be John Woodley. >> Did afternoon, council. -- Good afternoon, council. My name is Aaron farmer and I'm the president for the Austin board of realtors, also a proud member, homeowner in district 8. The Austin board of realtors is the largest trade organization in the city and in central [5:06:03 PM] Texas with over 10,000 members. Austin has for years deferred the real work needed for mobility. The problem with this is that it's a lot like a house. The more deferred maintenance you have, the more expensive sieve it gets to repair it and the more urgent the need guess for those repairs. This upcoming November election is a critical window of opportunity that we can't miss. We urge you to be bold and make a meaningful difference in what practically everyone agrees is one of the most pressing challenges facing our city. The alternative of waiting two more years when we already have developed plans and meaningful projects ready to go now is to continue to defer maintenance that we know we need. We understand this proposal will be -- will provide for much needed corridor improvements that complement and improve our ability to implement the goals of imagine Austin and codenext. Improving our key corridors with smart traffic signals, dedicated turn lanes, medians, pullouts for bus stops and separate like and pedestrian paths would help improve the flow of traffic on the roads that can't be easily expanded. We are also supportive of this bond package providing leverage and synergy with senator Watson's plans for improvement along with the congested I-35 corridor. We urge you to be bold in pursuing a bond package that will make a meaningful difference, a smaller bond package does not accomplish this. It's also important for us to point out that any bond package the voters approve will result in tax increases. Though a 300-million-dollar bond package would not increase the tax rate, it is misleading to say that it would not increase taxes for mosthouseholds. The widespread increase [5:08:04 PM] in appraised taxable value in Travis county means higher tax bills even at a constant rate. At the end of the day the total tax bills will really matter. We are in strong support of the mayor's proposed bond package that would make a meaningful difference in improving the quality of life in Austin. We are not in support of other band-aid approaches. That is what we've been doing for the last 20 years. Thank you. >> Kitchen: After Mr. Woodley will be Mary ingall. >> Hello. I'm John Woodley, I'm an advocate for disability access and a bike Austin member. I would like to -- I had a problem trying to print out what I wasgoing to say today. Basically the entire -- I'm in support of getting the entire master plan funded, whether it's for transportation, bicycles, sidewalks, urban trail. The object is to get the city fully A.D.A.Compliant and accessible and safe for everyone to get around. I think just to fix the sidewalk problem is going to cost over a billion dollars, I don't think we should spend two hundred years, 100 years, even 50 years to get all these infrastructures built. We need to get them built so that we can actually use them within our life times and our children's life times. [5:10:05 PM] And when it comes to the paratransit services for public transportation, the rural areas that don't have very much funding, they provide door to door services, and I don't understand why capital metro in theAustin area, which has more funding options, are limiting paratransit users to three-quarters of a mile. When it comes to some of these public transportation, like some of these rail things going in, I agree we need some of the rails on both sides of Austin to be improved. But I would like to see some monorails put in instead of actual rail tracks on the ground. I think they would be a lot safer, cheaper to put in and they would take up less road space. People are already complaining about bicycle lanes are taking up. And the monorails can be raised above the roadways and they can actually go over private property. We need to stop the Russian roulette with bicyclists and pedestrians and make it safe for everyone to get around and make these protected pathways. So I'm going to ask that all the transportation Austin be fully funded. If you can't get the full -- every option fully funded, I would like to see a timeline -- [buzzer sounds] -- Of getting all these packages together of when they can get funded. So thank you. >> Kitchen: After Maryingall will be Jennifer Mcphail. >> Thank you, [5:12:06 PM] councilmembers, and mayor Adler. I'm Mary ingall, president of the Austin neighborhoods council. First of all, I think to get improved mobility we have to have a change of the mindset. I think the mayor hasalluded to that several times with electric bicycles. I think you have. But I noticed in the advertisement for this meeting it's made particular reference to parking available in the garage. So I just want to pointout that not everybody -- if you're going to insist or make emphasis on people driving cars or you want people to take public transportation, let's start with our advertisements for meetings. And let's live the lifethat we're trying to make everybody else do with improved mobility. Many of us have been participating in several processes that are happening right now. Cap metro is doing a master plan of connections 2025.Codenext is going on. We have the neighborhood housing and community development department doing a master plan. I personally -- I signed up neutral on this. I would permanently rather see the masterplans completed, the codenext document completed before we start impacting our corridors and imposing something that may be detrimental on to our community. We have to get this right. Because if we get itwrong it will take too long to correct it. And I'll point out some examples. For example, in cap metro master planning process, it was pointed out that one in six people live in poverty. Mainly east of I-35. I don't know if that's a correct number or not, but there weren't any increased bus routes in that plan. All the bus routes that I saw on the map were focused on the downtown zone and that's where the money is. [5:14:07 PM] So I think we need to go back and look at who needs the transit, where do we need the transit and let's be fair about this. In the neighborhood housing and community development master plan, which has references about high frequency transit, those aren't transit corridors, those are routes designated by cap metro and they can come and go. For example, I happen to live on Duval street. And Duval street iscalled a high frequency transit route. That could change at any moment. It changed on Guadalupe. We have to actually have good coordination of terms and we have to have definitions and we have to plan this out comprehensively. So also just following codenext -- [buzzer sounds] >> Kitchen: You can finish your sentence. >> I won't get to embark on that topic, but I would like to really see a better coordination ofdepartments and plans before we make a deplorable mistake in improving our transit. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Jennifer. And after Jennifer is Mr. Salnek. >> I'm Jennifer Mcphail with adapt. And we came here today to impress upon you the importance of fully funding the sidewalk master plan. I don't think that if we -- we don't need to do anything much fancier beyond that. I think that we need to make sure that we know what needs to be done out there, have the proper inventory. I have to say we were [5:16:08 PM] concerned and disappointed to find out that you didn't have the detail that you needed to be able to deal with safe routes to schools. We started working with that program in the early '90s and it's concerning to me that we don't know a great deal of detail about which schools need improvement and how widespread the problems are. But also this notion that if you fix the schools that the children's problems are over as a Fred is a misnomer -- as a pedestrian is a misnomer. I heard a previous speaker speak of the danger of north Lamar, Rutland and rundberg and we've been trying to improve that area for many years now. The children live in a low income employment complex in that area around long spur. They can't leave their apartment complex without taking their life into their hands. So I don't see how we can pretend as though ifwe make their school in that area more safe that we've solved their properties. There has to be connectivity throughout the city because children don't stay in one zone of the city. Doubts don't stay in one zone -- dolts don't stay in one zone of the city. We have to be able to move around to be able to see what the city has to offer. There was criticism because the matrix scores government buildings and other things very high. And one of the reason that is is because of the sheer volume of human traffic that goes in and out of those buildings. Children go with their parents on the W.I.C. Office. Children go with their parents to the department of aging and disability services. They go all over the city. So we need to recognize that it's not just what's on that paper that makes the plan important. That plan has to evolve and there has to be citizen advisory mechanism to allow that to evolve correctly so that if something is [5:18:08 PM] over or underscored we can deal with it in that moment that we find out that there's a problem. But we don't need to pit one group of people against the other. My fear is that it will pit people with disabilities against one another or children. And we all go the same places. There's not a place in the city that I haven't been at least once in my life. And so in terms of planning the main thing that we need to keep in mind is that we need to fund them properly and we strongly believe in adapt that the funding schedule that's in the sidewalk master plan is well thought out. Funding schedule that has aggressive -- an aggressive approach to the problems. >> Kitchen: Thank you. >> Any questions? And I want to finish up this with, Mr. Mayor. We were here Saturday afternoon for the meeting. We weren't able to connect with thepedestrian advisory committee in the meeting that you had. We sat in the parking garage for quite awhile. I don't know why we missed everyone. The understanding we had is we were supposed to meet in the parking garage and go to wherever the destination was in city hall. But it's water under the bridge now. One of the things that we would like to propose to you is that we are able to go over your plan in detail. I think our group has some institutional knowledge that will be beneficial for this process. >> Mayor Adler: I apologize for you waiting. I was unaware of that. There were a lot of people there and I don't know how the word got to some and not others. For next time let's make sure you have some of the cell phone Numbers of me or my staff that are on the committee so that if that ever happens again you can actually get ahold of us and we can make sure that you're not left behind because we would like to talk to you about it and get your [5:20:09 PM] expertise. >> Let's make sure we get a meeting scheduled together because I think we can benefit greatly. >> John-michael is right there if you could arrange with him. That would be great. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Mr. Salvek, you are our next speaker and then SHAWN Compton. >> My name is SHAWN with adapt of Texas. As Jennifer said, sidewalk connectivity is very important. We support the current bond package.And also I do not and I will not be pitted against children or bicyclists for my safety. I would love to talk to you about urban rail and I would love -- or proposals of urban rail, but first you need to have safe sidewalks that connect people in all parts of the city to its rest of the city. And we are a city. We are not a small town anymore. People -- it is said that 150 people move here a day. And some of those are people with disabilities that use walkers, wheelchairs, no matter what they use. As Jennifer also said, Mr. Mayor, we were here Saturday, we were unable to connect with you. And also, we would love for you -- we still have to meet with you as members of adapt of Texas, we would love to do that. Thank you. >> Mayor Adler: I would like that too. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Mr. Compton? And I believe is Andy lark inhere? Okay. So you have six minutes. >> Thank you, madam chair. And mayor and councilmembers, it's a pleasure to be here, and my name is SHAWN Compton with tbg partners, a planning and architecture firm. I'm here on behalf of Austin habitat for [5:22:09 PM] humanity. On that team. This is an important mobility bond under consideration. And Austin habitat for humanity are very appreciative that meadow lake boulevard is being considered for this bond. This connection of a fragmented part of the city is a public-private partnership. And it is important in that it's been connecting fragmented part of the city that is -- was devastated and displaced a number of citizens in the southeast part of our city. We've been working closely with staff and very appreciative of working with staff to come up with a complete street design. Austin habitat for humanity is prepared and willing and able to donate the land. We've designed the street and it's a complete street and it also is providing a safe route to schools to Perez elementary school. Did I say that a little bit better than last time I was in front of council? I hope so. I'll take that as a yes, I hope. Our team is prepared and available to work with staff to streamline costs as well as improve time to provide and bring affordable housing to this community. And that is really the it thrust of this project. It's over 120 affordable housing units and it's in part of the city that is in need of additional housing. It's going to enhance safety and provide bothbicycle and safe pedestrian routes to -- along this road. Finally, just kind of off script I want to say as a planner and designer, listening over [5:24:10 PM] the past hour, hour and a half, it's been quite honestly a real pleasure to hear of the diversity of merits of ideas that are being brought to you, this committee and council. I don't think that for too long Austin and many other cities suffered from a sole purpose of transportation. And the fact that there's such a diversity of ideas being brought to you, the leadership, and that are being brought to you by staff I think is a real positive change for this community. I think that's a very -- I know it's -- these are important critical decisions, difficult decisions, but it's something that's really important. So in closing meadowlakeboulevard is something that we believe will be an important asset to southeast Austin. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Our last speaker will be Roy Whaley. >> Howdy again, y'all. My name is Roy Whaley and I'm speaking as a private citizen, as an individual at this point. Earlier today I had to drive my car for some errands. Then to come down here to this meeting I rode the 801. I rode my bike over, picked up the 801, came down here from here. I'll ride over to Schultz's beer garden for the monthly Sierra club meeting and y'all are all invited. It's being presented by the borderlin's team and they will be talking about the impact of the wall on the environment and the social impact along the Rio grande. So y'all please come. [5:26:10 PM] Then from there I'll ride home to crestview. So I do about a third of my trips by car, a third by mass transit and a third on my bicycle. This may be as close as I will ever get to being a well balanced individual.[Laughter]. But one of the problems that I've not heard addressed, and this is a campaign I've been on for awhile, is yes, we do want a walkable Austin and yes, we do want a bikable Austin, and yes, we want to have a sociable Austin. In August it's hard to put all three of those together because when you bike or walk and it's 105 outside, it's hard to come to a meeting like this. So one of the things that I don't hear in any of these plans is the idea of public showers. Not free showers, but public showers. For-pay showers. At critical locations around town so that a person can ride or walk and be able to clean up when they get to their destination. One of the problems I've heard with this or the objections that I've heard of this is oh my gosh, want the homeless people want to use those too? Well, heaven forbid that we have clean homeless people in Austin. It's bad enough that we have a homeless problem. This would not be a problem so long as we can do it in a safe way and there are safe, enclosed shower structures all across Europe, all across the United States. So I would like to see a little bit of money squeezed out somewhere so that we can have public showers. Not free. [5:28:10 PM] We'll pay for them. Coin, bill, card swipe, whatever, but we need to be able to clean up after we get there. Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Thank you. So that concludes our public testimony. I want to thank everyone for coming and visiting with us today. Of course, this is not the last opportunity by any means to share your thoughts with us. So what I'd like to do now, if it's okay with the committee members and the rest of the council, is to take some time for questions, both to cap metro and to our staff. And then I know that there are a number of proposals -- there's one proposal in particular for the mobility committee to consider and then others -- the mayor or councilmember Casar or councilmember pool may want to speak to their proposals. But first I think it would be helpful if we asked questions. Does that work for youguys? So who has questions? Councilmember Zimmerman, do you have any questions? Councilmember... Garza, do you have any questions? >> Garza:, I guess it would be for cap metro, whoever is going toanswer cap metro questions. There's been a lot of discussion about rail, adding rail to this 2016, which is something I -- I support rail. I think we are a big city. But there's a disconnect for me that I'm having alittle confusion with because I feel like the gentleman spoke earlier and said the public's ready for it, the public is ready for rail. I'm a board member on cap metro, so is councilmember kitchen and soon Renteria.We haven't had this discussion at the board at all. I feel like it would be the equivalent of us [5:30:10 PM] saying, hey, Travis county, we're going to put the courthouse back on the -- a bond back on the ballot. And we've decided this is the best place to put it. I'm having a disconnect. So I guess my question is, is cap metro ready for us to put a 2016 rail bond on -- in November? >> That's a challenging question to answer. I think that I'll harken back to the presentation I made earlier this afternoon regarding the central core study. And I think what we've seen over the years of experience is we've had at cap metro as well as elsewhere is that much to many people's frustration it's a diplomatic active process that it's absolutely --deliberative process to do the community support tox do the technical analysis and to have a system plan and not simply a single line. And that's what we hope to achieve with central core study. Having a single line and moving forward as we've learned because we did that, you're opening yourself up to challenges on what about corridor xyz, ABC, so on, et cetera? And if you don't have definitive answers for why corridor as being recommended is better than these other corridors you get stuck and that's what we've seen and that's what happened. So we feel like we need to take the time, again, despite and fully understanding that it's frustrating that it does take time to do the analysis properly, to do the public input and to do the potential vetting of all corridors, come up with a prioritized list and that's when we would be in a positionto move forward. [5:32:11 PM] >> Garza: Okay. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Councilmember Houston? >> Houston: Thank you so much for that information. I've got a couple of questions. Can you tell me what outreach has been done in the various districts. For phase one? Is that what we are in now, phase one? >> Again, there were two studies underway. Connections 2025 we have niche 80 and that was the one that -- initiated and that was the one our colleague Russ spoke to, yes, ma'am. That one is the central core study, we have not initiated public involvement for that effort. We're developing the public involvement plan. We've developed a draftand are vetting that internally. But we will absolutely focus on making sure we get outreach to each of the districts as we move through that. >> Houston: Thank you. And then the other thing is that this is just my view and I'm a very simple person. There's a difference between -- I'm talking about rail. There's a difference between moving people around the city and moving people into the city without cars. And so when I lived in cities with urban rail, the point was Chicago, D.C., the point was to leave your car at a park and ride, get on the rail, go into the town, go back, get in your car and go home. So I think there's adifference in my understanding of why we would just try to move people around town rather than encouraging people to leave their automobiles outside of town and bring them in and take them out. The other part is that once people get in the habit of driving a car into a place, it's hard to break that habit. >> Absolutely. >> Houston: I just wanted to share that. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Kitchen: Any other questions on this side of the dais for capital metro? Councilmember Gallo. >> Gallo: Yes, thank you. So I'm curious as capital metro determines new bus routes, do you [5:34:12 PM] have metrics that you determine that with? There's a large portion of district 10 that is west of 360 and is concerned about the lack of public transportation options. I've been saying over the last couple of weeksis we have talked about mobility and transportation that as long as Austin has a low density mentality about our community that that equals vehicles. So how does capital metro input into that discussion so that when my community that's west of 360 says we would ride if we had it, how do you determine when they would have it, if they would ever have those opportunities? >> Yes, ma'am. I think a couple of responses.One is we do have a document called service guidelines and standards that does spell out when and where we provide public transportation service generally speaking as well as with some detail in terms of the types of land use, the densities, the makeup of the street network, which is a significant factor. As you heard Mr. Chisholm mention in Austin, unlike other cities, it's not a simple grid with are you can go down street a, B, et cetera. There's discontinuous streets and a topography particularly in the area that you referenced. When we do the studies such as connections 2025 we look at the whole range of factors. Is the market there to support transit, the street network there to support transit? What's the future growth patterns looking like? And we also talked about what type of transit would make sense. In the urban core afrequent big bus on a major corridor running every 10 or 15 minutes or better makes sense. In the area you preference it's not the right area. [5:36:12 PM] It could be a park and ride, it could be with partnering with some of the other mobility providers and finding more innovative ways such as what we worked with the city on the smart city application to develop partnerships where there are more on demand type response, on-command response type services that may be a better fit for that particular market. So it's not like there's a simple cookie cutter formula, it's a complex factoring of a number of different issues into the equation. >> Gallo: So I guess where I struggle with this conversation, particularly in the more suburban, less dense areas of the districts, all the districts, is that what is the reality of being able to provide? They have a survey, they fill it out, answer the question that says if this was available you would use it more, I would get out of my car and use it more. But layered into that conversation is the reality of whether we as a city and capital metro can make that happen. And until it happens we have to provide the roadway abilities to vehicles. So I'm just trying to understand is do you feel like that we will get to a point in the near future or is it five years from now or 10 years from now or 20 years from now that we actually have those options available to the less dense burn areas of the city of Austin? >> Sure. I -- again, a difficult question. We're actually having that discussion with our board tomorrow at a work session and some of you will be there. But part of the trade-off discussion is what do we as a community value, what as the board value, as a city and community value in terms of balancing priorities? We don't have the resources to do everything. So you can put service in low density areas, knowing that you're providing access and mobility, but for a smaller number of vehicles for a higher [5:38:12 PM] cost of trip or concentrate your service on major corridors or you get more ridership and a lower cost per trip. So both have community value and that's the questions we've been asking the community as well as the board to help shape the plan. >> Gallo: And I appreciate that because I do think that as we have that discussion it is a balance, but I think we need to be realistic if it doesn't make economic sense to provide public transportation in these outer areas, then we as a community also need to support those areas, understanding that they will be in their vehicles and be using those vehicles. And the road capacity and the road infrastructure is going to be important. So thank you for trying to help me walk through some of that thought process. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Councilmember pool? >> Pool: Thanks, chair and thanks for being here. It occurs to me that in the exchange just now that we're talking about like right now, for example, but maybe 10 or 15 years from now the areas that are now less densely populated and where cap metro bus service would be a difficult decision because the ridership, that might be different, 15, 20 years from now. We're not saying never, right? It's just that right now and the way things are shaping up at this point. And what kind of a long range -- like when you have that conversation in your head are you thinking five years? I'm talking about the short-term or owe. >> The connections 2025 study is specific in itsscope. We looked at five -- we will be developing a five-year plan and a 10-year plan. The five-year plan is quite detailed. It says this route will be adjusted this way at this time, subject to public review and boardapproval. The five to 10 year is [5:40:12 PM] more speculative might be a little too -- >> Pool: More fluid? >> Thank you. That's a better word. A little more fluid because we know things are going to change and we try to update these every five years, but it gives us a programming sense for our capital improvement plan, for how many buses we'll need and those type things. But absolutely looking into the future, that's why things like codenext and imagine Austin and other development plans are so critical because we know that land use and transit go hand in glove. So we are watching carefully and working with the city to try to, you know, make our points about these are the places that -- where transit is going to thrive and play a huge role. And if we develop in a different way, maybe not so much. >> Pool: And in the 2025 plan were you also looking to kickstart or include the conversation about light rail or commuter rail, whichever type rail? >> The central core study is absolutely positioned to do exactly that. >> Pool: Okay. And then I had one last question. >> Kitchen: I'm doing a time check. We have 20 minutes and I'm wanting to focus on on talking about the bonds. But please go ahead. >> Pool: Okay. So my last question was on the new routes. And I think it was yourconsultant that mentioned new routes. There was some mention, but it was about an hour ago. And so my question was how long does it take for a new line or scheduled changes to penetrate into the -- into people's habits? Because we're all creatures of habit. >> Sure, that's a good point. Generally we say a minimum of six months and up to two years to -- if we, for example, upgrade a route from every half hour toevery 15 minutes or every 15 minutes to every 10, it's going to -- it's not immediate. We do obviously try to [5:42:13 PM] get the word out, let people know. But you're right, changing habits doesn't happen overnight. So six months to two years is generally what we try to look at. And in fact, the federal transit administration when they gauge projects such as metro rapid that they help fund they look at a two-year mark after implementation as their point of measurement. >> Pool: Thanks so much. Thank you, chair. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Councilmember Zimmerman, did you have -- okay. And again, you can go next. There's a lot that we could talk about with cap metro. >> [Inaudible]. >> Kitchen: Let's finish with cap metro first and then turn to -- go ahead. >> Zimmerman: I did have a quick question. Thank you for being here. So I guess what puzzles me is how we can't seem to come to grips that a city is diverse. We can have dense areassuch as we have downtown where we're sitting right now in a dense area, bike trails, bike paths, buses. When we have a dense area that facilitates a different mode of transportation. The bikes and buses makemore sense. Then I get out into district 6 in a suburb, it's very sparsely populated. I've got long distances, a lot of green spaces. The bikes and buses make no sense. They just don't make any sense. They can make sense in a densely populated area where they do not make sense in a sparsely populated area. So I don't understand why we can't approach this and say -- and put into our bond packages what works in a denser area, what works in a less dense area. And that could be part of the bond package and a way to get constituents around the city to say, you know, if I vote for this package I've got something that works for me in my suburb. The downtown area has something that works for them in that area. That's another way we could approach this whole issue. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Did you have a question for cap metro? >> Mayor Adler: I do. [5:44:15 PM] >> Zimmerman: Maybe more a comment, I just don't see how it's feasible to provide a usable bus service. The thing that kills you on the bus service, it doesn't show up whether you need it to, it doesn't take you where you need to go. And that's the thing of Uber and Lyft and the tncs and why they were so popular. They're on demand, they show up, they pick you up when you need to get picked up, they drop youoff where you need to go. A public transit system can't do that. And that's why it's not popular, that's why ridership -- in my opinion ridership has been dropping as the city grows. It's not because people hate buses. It's because it doesn't pick you up when you need to be picked up, where you need to be picked up and it's physically not possible to do that. >> Kitchen: Thank you, councilmember Zimmerman. Let's move on. Mayor, did you have a question for cap metro related to the bond? >> Mayor Adler: I do. I think we had Mr. Chisholm down here before. Did he stay here? I'm not sure who the questions wouldultimately be for. We have at this point -- there will probably be more ideas because we'll be discussing it now and next weeks in terms of plans that have been proposed. There's the one that councilmember kitchen posted and the one that was the press conference today with councilmember Casar and pool and the one that we posted as well. All of them have in common that they talk about putting some moneyagainst the corridors that have been studied in the city over the last decade. Burnet road, south Lamar, north Lamar, airport, Riverside, mlk, 969 and Guadalupe. They differ with respect to how much gets putagainst them and they differ with respect potentially to what they would do. There's a memo that capital metro gave to us that you looked at a couple of different funding levels of those corridors, the corridorsthat most of us drive [5:46:16 PM] on. The corridors that are closest to -- I think the number was a third of the people in Austin live within a half mile of these corridors that we've been studying. And my question goes to as I looked at the planthat you had, -- just so I know, Mr. Chisholm, what other cities have you worked in? Have you done consulting for? >> Recently San Francisco, la, denfer, fee -- Denver, Phoenix, Des Moines, San Diego,Charlotte. We've done approximately 100 plus system rethinks like we're working with capital metro. >> Mayor Adler: So there seems to be at least three and there are probably more measures of how much wewould do on these kind of corridors. There's the short interim stuff, the relatively low dollar. Obviously these are still huge dollars, but relatively low dollar. And then there's the more -- there's the plan that was presented by the staff that you analyze and then there's the corridor plans that would include the elements that you say need to be included. And I want to ask questions about all three of those. The plans that correlate to roughly $150 million to be spent on these corridors, plans that would be $450 million, but would not include the last element of items that you put in your memo. And then actually doing it all. Save and except taking any lanes off that are being used for cars. So I'm going up to that limit, but doing all the things you mentioned other than that. And my question is what is the relative benefit of those three things with respect to transit [5:48:17 PM] in the city? >> Kitchen: I think those are good questions. We may need atd staff, unless you guys are very familiar, because there's a lot of different -- different things happening on different corridors under those different scenarios. >> Mayor Adler: I understand, but these people have given an email they've analyzed the plans, the transit people. I hope we ask the staff that question too. But you've called up thetransit people first while they're here. I'd like to hear transit's perspective on that. >> Kitchen: Sure. I'd like to hear it by corridor because there are differences according to the corridors. >> Mayor Adler: Isthere a general answer to the question? I'm just trying to ask some questions here. Generally speaking when you have the short-term low stuff, the bigger package stuff or going all the way, can you talk about the relative benefit for transit in the city? >> I think there's a few relationships here. Different systems around the country have tried all three approaches and most often they're actually trying all three approaches at the same time. They may target a couple of major corridors for very heavy investment, but recognizing the need for a network. They'll also do lower level investment so that you end up with varioustiers of service quality and service types. Now, an important thing that really hasn't come up is today in the future relative to land use. You know, one of the candidate miss ideas -- this is one that other places have used, they pick a corridor, they focus, they use sustainable development, smart growth, all of those things around those corridors. So transit can kind of follow development in the case of, say, Guadalupe, or it could lead development where -- say burnet. Burnet is -- it's almost a target rich [5:50:18 PM] environment where it's not quite there in terms of density for transit, but it's a lovely corridor and could become just fabulous over time. And that sort of goes to your question. Even though we're looking at five to 10 years here, we really have to think out 20, 30, 50 years. To a great degree some of the decisions you're making today are going to be part of the 100-year Austin plan. Very much what places like Vancouver and Portland have done in the past, Denver is doing today, amazingly Los Angeles is doing that today. Los Angeles took the approach when they introduced it, they did the Orange line, which was exclusive right away brt. Could have been rail. They chose brt. It grossly out performed what anyone thought it would. They followed it up with the silver line, which is a freeway-based brt. And again, you've got both options, you know, in front of you. They could be rail, they can be bus. They're actually looking at whether to upgrade the Orange line from brt to rail. Now, what they did on the arterials is they started way back in the'90s with metro rapid and they looked at what they could do quickly because they recognized they needed a network. And they did many of the same things that you did initially with metro rapid. They are now going through, adding things like the off-vehicle fare payment -- >> Mayor Adler:. >> Mayor Adler: So the question I'm asking is -- and I don't know what the right answer is. I'm trying to figure out for myself what would be transform tif. I think that -- transformative. I think that the citizens and residents of our city want us to actually do something about congestion in this city and traffic, and with respect toimproving transit service in this city, increasing rider ship, making it more of a choice function. [5:52:18 PM] And I'm trying to figure out what I can do or what I should recommend or what I should vote for on what would be transformative. I want to make sure that we spend enough to do something that would have a great impact, but I don't want to spend more than I need to spend, but I also don't want to do minor tweaks that in a matter of a few years people are going to look at and say well, what was that? I want to know if you have a feel, if either of you have a feel for what advice, professional advice as a transit person you would give to us on what level of investment, generally speaking -- I'm sure we'll go through each ofthe transit corridors at some point, but generally speaking can you tell us anything about what level of investment as a community we should be making? >> I would say you need to go big, partly because the big investment, the permanance aspect, which generally is why people prefer rail. I think we heard it today. I have a frequent route on Duval, but who is to say that won't change? The bigger investments will bring the economic benefits, will bring the intensification, will bring all those good things that help for neighborhood and community quality of life. The challenge is coming up with the money for it and the challenge is more a question of prioritization. San Francisco is going through right now not spending a whole lot of money, but they're putting in the red bus lanes and the green bike lanes, and they're not as worried about accommodating every car they have currently on the road. So they're not having to increase the supply, they're kind of reorganizing and reallocating the supply on the streets. >> Mayor Adler: Iunderstand that. Other than 969 we're not adding any lanes either under the corridor plans. Is that your understanding? You looked at those? >> Yep. >> If I could chime in on that point. [5:54:19 PM] With our analysis of the corridors and just thinking about best practices and in fact reinforced by reviewing the nato transit street guide this morning, it's the whole package that makes the difference. It's not the single investment. There is no silver bullet. It's the comprehensive reenvisioning of these corridors to be complete streets that support walking, biking and transit. That's what's transformative. >> Mayor Adler: Thank you. Those are all my questions. >> Kitchen: Thank you. I didn't mean to cut you off. I've just learned that -- I didn't realize this and I have to apologize to everyone, that the planning commission is is in here at 6:00. So we're obviously not done. And we have more to do both as a committee and also just to listen and talk. So I'm open to suggestions. I don't know if we can move the planning commission to another room. What do you think we all need? Another 20 minutes or so? To do the mobility committee's business? >> Zimmerman: Or maybe another mobility committee meeting. This is a hugely important subject. Should we schedule another special one? >> Kitchen: We don't have time for another special one. >> Zimmerman: This month we don't? >> Kitchen:. We have the city council meeting on the 16th andthe 23rd. >> Mayor Adler: It wouldn't be a mobility committee meeting, but we have this on the agenda for the work session tomorrow. And I'd be happy to let you chair that section of the work session if you wanted to do that. We also have it set on the council meeting on Thursday. The work session the following Tuesday and the council meeting on Thursday if that's of my help. >> Kitchen: If we want to take action as a mobility committee we're posted to take action today. So we could move forward to that section of the -- of our agenda and then I will just have to ask the planning commission to bear with [5:56:20 PM] us. And we will -- and we'll move forward. Again, my apologies to my colleagues. I just missed that point, you know, in terms of our time. So let me ask the mobility committee members, shall we proceed with what we were proposing to consider from our committee and then we can -- we'll have an opportunity to ask more questions on Thursday, is that right? Does that work? Councilmember Garza? >> Garza: I believe, chair, I believe that the bulk of the conversation will happen at our Thursday council meeting as we're -- but in that vein, I'd move your -- the proposed language that you've presented. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Garza: I have -- and then I guess I'll wait for a second to discuss it. >> Kitchen: Somebody second that. >> Zimmerman: I'll second it for discuss Baugh we put it -- because that way we can put it up on the overhead. >> Kitchen: I'll lay it out very quickly. Let me just say that the purpose of this resolution -- actually, there are two resolutions here. The purpose of these are to be a starting point for discussion.The council as a whole has to consider quite a bit to both balance the amount that we're talking about in bonds and also to balance that against 2018. So there's a lot of further discussion. This is simply beinglaid out as a starting point for discussion. And I'm sure that various councilmembers on our committee may choose to make changes even to this as we move forward. But I think it's a good starting point fordiscussion. And let me just quickly explain what it does. This resolution proposes, as I said, an approach as a starting point that sets an amount at 300 million. Which I must say is very significant. Our previous bond proposal since 1998, the [5:58:22 PM] largest one was 195. So 300 million is a significant and a bold place to start. For discussion purposes. What this also does is it tracks the priorities that people expressed during mobility talks so it tracks the priority on corridor improvements, on transit, on sidewalks, and it does make meaningful improvements at this point in time. And you know, given the limited amount that we can spend every year at 300 million this will make significant progress on the corridors. Second thing it does. Just again as a starting point for discussion, it preserves funding for other needs in 2018. Like flooding mitigation, parks and libraries and other needs. It also preserves the opportunity for funding for transformative mobility improvements in 2018. That might be identified through major planning initiatives that will be completed next year such as the regional high capacity transit plan, such as the strategic mobility plan, and our housing plan, not to mention codenext. So this approach also at 300 million also avoids raising property taxes. So again, this isthis is just being brought forward as a starting point for discussion purposes. And what it does, it puts puts approximately 46.5 million into regional areas, 91 million into local, which includes transit enhancements, bike and walks, and 123.5 million in corridors. So with that said, I offer this for our committee to consider. Again, this is a starting point. And ask if any of the committee members would like to say anything. [6:00:24 PM] >> Garza: I think this is going to be an incredibly difficult decision. I have -- I absolutely -- I see the benefit investing in our corridors, and infrastructure. For me, I would prioritize infrastructure that supportsmultimodal options over adding capacity. I think it's -- we can't sustain continuing to build more roads and build more Rodriguez and also have to be able to repair those roads. That being said, I think we have to look at the realities of the bond fatigue that this community has seen lately. I appreciate the go big. I love bold actions. But my concern is, going big this year is the first step in going big again for rail. And my concern would be that bond fatigue, in that even if we were able to get the public support behind going big this time, we might not necessarily get it for the next going big step. So I'm trying to consider therealities of the decision we have before us, the political realities. I'm trying to consider the holistic approach that we have to take when we're -- you know, we have a housing plan coming forward, we haveconnections 2025 about we have so many plans that haven't -- aren't done yet, and in looking at that for me, I'm not sure where I am. I'm somewhere between waiting until 2018 to go big that includes rail or I'm at a place where we keep it low, keep the bond amount low so it doesn't add additional taxes for our residents. I appreciate the corridors in many of these plans are used by half the city, but the other side of that coin is they're not used by half the city. And it's really hard for me, as someone who is a big proponent of ten-one to feel [6:02:25 PM] like hypothetically honoring the spirit of ten-one when many of these corridors when you look at where the studies have been done they completely ignore southeast and south Austin. So I have big concerns aboutmy constituency being asked to invest in parts of the city -- I understand I have to look at the city as a whole but these are my concerns. I feel like this is a good starting point for all of us, just one option we canconsider on Thursday. >> Kitchen: Councilmember Gallo >> Gallo: So there's still so much discussion left to be done on this, and we've been doing research and reaching out to groups to really try to understand the specifics of the proposals because I think it's important. When we talk about transportation and we talk about connecting with the community so the community trust that we will spend money that we ask them for and they vote to spend, that we will spend it in the way that they are understanding we will spend it. And so I think it's very important to understand that -- the specifics of all of the proposals. The -- this is a good starting place. I would not be a proponent of doing nothing. So that's not on the table for me. I think this proposal analyzes both the corridor plan. It also reaches out to the other parts of our community that I think have been underserved with spending from mobility. Particularly west of 360 and that encompasses three of the councilmembers' districts, and I think it takes that into consideration also.So I do think it's a beginning plan for our conversation. The implications for our property taxes and the affordability of this community I think are a really important part of that discussion. We have not had thatdiscussion here today, and so I look forward to making sure we talk about that. When we talk about the impact on taxes, I think it's important for us to continue to have the discussion with [6:04:25 PM] the impact on our tax bills, not just the rate. It may cause the rate to go up, but the rate already is going to cause a higher tax bill because of the appreciation that we're seeing in our community. But balanced with this discussion on the bond, the transportation bond, is also the discussion that is coming up with our budget. And if we increase the tax bills because of our budget decisions that we're going to have in a couple of months and we also increase the tax bills because of the bond choices we make, then we are impacting affordability in this community. And so I think it's a very connected conversation that we need to have. We need to spend very carefully. We analyze just briefly the short -- so we have the corridors divided up into short-term, medium-term and long-term. Some of the corridors have only short- term and long-term. Some have all three. We went through and asked our bond oversight commission appointee to go through and look at the corridor plans. He found the plans were very different in how they were laid out. He also found that the shower storm funding was more specific and more targeted so you could read through it and actually figure out what you were getting for those dollars. And that was about a $75 million spend to fund the corridor short-term. It looked like within that that there was -- of the 75 physical there was about 37 million being spent on vehicle capacity. There was about 24 million being spent on pedestrian.There was about 8.6 million being spent on bike and about 4.7 on transit. So even within our corridor plans, there is very healthy spending on pedestrian, bike, and transit. So I think that that conversation really looking at these is going to be important, obviously, we don't have enough time to do that today but I think that the very minimum amount that I would want to support would be what you're proposing today.And I think that gets us a start on the conversation. >> Kitchen: Councilmember [6:06:25 PM] Zimmerman >> Zimmerman: Thank you, councilmember Gallo set a lot of things I completely concur with. When I look at what's on the panel right now, we have three crisis areas in district 6. It's rancho 620 and 2222, the Anderson mill road section between 183 and 620 that needs to be completed out and then we have the Parmer lane up in the Avery ranch area from sh-45 north. To me those are the three crisis areas. In addition the 620 being a parking lot all the way from lakeline mall all the way down to pretty much lakeway, steiner ranch and all the way down. So I appreciate you putting this up. Yeah, I don't think we've got time to swing for the fences and do the big home run with the 720 million. If we had started back in 2015 we might be in a position now, after a year of working with it, to where we could put a really big package up but I appreciate the fact that you put a smaller one out here. But our constituents, if if we can only afford one project, if I'm looking at what's on the screen with Parmer lane to the north in Williamson county they're going to be very happy if they don't get their improvements but then you've got the river place, 2222, they're going to be unhappy, Anderson mill has been screaming for theirs for adecade. I want to keep working with you on it, but we can't do anything on it today. It's too early. >> Kitchen: Okay. I would like to say that I think this is a -- from my perspective, this is a starting point for discussion. I also believe that it's appropriate for us to do something and timely and we must do something this time. I think for me, the three hunt million is a minimum. I might consider higher than that as we go forward with discussion. But I think the 300 million is [6:08:26 PM] a good starting point for discussion because it gives us the opportunity to balance what we can do right now against what we know we're going to need to do in 2018. Not only with other needs like flood mitigation and parks and libraries, but also with the opportunity to consider rail in 2018, the opportunity to consider other transformative mobility needs after we finish our strategic mobility plan and finish our connections2025 and also if we do this -- if we do at least 300 now and perhaps a bit more, then we can start down that road and make some very significant progress. We can't even spend 720 million in two years. So -- so that's why I suggested bringing this forward again as a starting point for discussion. I very much appreciate the leadership that our mayor has shown in his -- I very much appreciate his focus on bold approaches to try to address transportation. And I also appreciate the work that councilmember Casar and pool have done in bringing forward their recommendations. And I know we're going to have plenty of time with worksession, with next Thursday, and possibly the Thursday after that to discuss all of these options. So with that I'd like to go ahead and take a vote. All those in favor of moving forward this option as a starting point for discussion with our fellow councilmembers, please say aye. >> Zimmerman: Point of information >> Kitchen: Yes >> Zimmerman: Are we moving it to the full council >> Kitchen: Yes >> Zimmerman: -- Forconsideration with or without a recommendation? >> Kitchen: I would suggest -- I think it was the recommendation to consider it as a starting point. Is that what I heard you guys say? Are we okay with that? >> Zimmerman: I guess so, [6:10:27 PM] sure. I'll go for that >> Kitchen: Okay. All in favor? Okay. That's 4-0. Again, my apologies for not managing our time a bit better. And thank you to councilmember Casar and pool and to our mayor for bearing with us and we will certainly have plenty of time to discuss all of these options on Wednesday. And on Thursday >> Garza: Councilmember kitchen, wasn't there a second -- there's a second part >> Kitchen: I'm sorry. We have a second -- we have a second resolution. Let me talk about that real quick. Just bear with me a minute. This one is to start the process for the 2018 bond and so what this is a resolution that -- that sets forth a process for creating a bond election advisory task force for 2018. It follows the way those have been set up in the past, in that it has two appointees from each councilmember and appointee from the planning commission. It also recognizes that we have an existing bond oversight committee. So ask for appropriate representation and coordination with that existing bond oversight committee. And then it goes on to say that that task force would be appointed, I believe we said, no later than October to start their work and they would bring back their recommendations to us by January of 2018. So I'd like to propose that resolution. Do I have a second? Second, councilmember Garza? Any discussion >> Gallo: I do. Probably what I'll do is just abstain from this. I'm still trying to figure out why the current ordinance that we have with the bond oversight commission isn't specific enough to allow them to do that. I know there was some discussion about adding members to it, but that's a different conversation. [6:12:28 PM] But it does say that the mayor and council shall work with the commission to set priorities and goals of each new bond issue to be submitted to the voters and it says the commission shall advise the council and propose bonds and the implementations and projects approved in those bonds. It looks like it is already asking that commission to work with the council to set priorities for potential new bond issues. So help me understand why that doesn't -- I mean, would it be better just to make amendments to that ordinance versus starting something new? I mean we already have people -- I think the -- to get up to speed on the whole bond discussion and becoming educated with that, it's pretty intense and we were talking to our commissioner that we appointed, and he just felt -- he was trying to understand why the existing couldn't do what I think you're wanting to be done already >> Kitchen: We can certainly take more time to think about this. I guess bringing this forward because there's -- I was bringing this forward because there's so much work involved in this effort we would need to expand the bond oversight committee. If the committee is not ready to vote on this >> Zimmerman: I was going to abstain for similar reasons >> Kitchen: This is something we can discuss more over the next couple of days. We don't have to do this now by any means. So -- >> Gallo: I don't encourage each of the councilmembers to reach out to their appointments to the bond oversight commission because we asked our appointee whether they felt like that they would want additional people to help, and the impression we got was that they felt like -- he felt like he could handle it within the scope of work. I think it would be important for each of us -- >> Kitchen: It's a huge amount of work in addition to the bond oversight because they have to do both jobs. Okay, we can discuss this further. >> Casar: Councilmember kitchen? >> Casar: I hate to bring you all with another 120 seconds >> Kitchen: Go right ahead >> Casar: Since the mayor and [6:14:28 PM] y'all have had a chance to lay out your proposals, I just wanted to spend two minutes passing this one out. Councilmember pool and I had a press conference about this morning so it's very clear. I will give the abridged version but this proposal really is about proportions. So while this -- what you have laid out here is what it would look like at 720 million but if we have to go to smaller sizes, the idea is really about proportions. It is a plan that is really base inside our comprehensive plan -- based in our comprehensive plan, obviously the tex department of transportation manages our highway system, intends to focus more on roadway expansion and car throughput, and we as the city should be the alternative to that. And so it includes, instead of -- it's basically built as amendments to the mayor's current proposal. Instead of 120 million for local mobility projects it moves that number up to 220 million. Instead of 500 million on the corridors it brings that down to about 420 million, especially cutting out the sections that are lane additions on those corridor improvement projects. And moves money away from the regional mobility projects that I think are outside of what our limited dollars should be dedicated to and instead of dedicating money tocontinued sprawl development and pushing folks out of town, a more compact and connected city requires us to serve many of our existing residents and as we've heard from lots of folks we have underservedneighborhoods and so it dedicates $80 million to the kinds of bus shelters and sidewalks and safe routes to schools that so many of our residents and folks especially in places like north Lamar that you heard about so direly need. So that's that package. [6:16:31 PM] It's not about some parts of town getting served as opposed to to others but with limited resources I want to dedicate our funds to transit, supportive transic centric multimodal transportation that provides for people's everyday safety. This is, again, a starting point and I'm very willing to continue talking about what a good package looks like in November from here >> Kitchen: Thank you very much. I think we're -- unless councilmember pool, did you feel like you wanted to say something? >> Pool: Yeah. Since I'm here, may as well >> Kitchen: Go ahead >> Pool: And I appreciate councilmember Casar's work on pulling together the specifics and working up the Numbers. I haven't tied myself yet to any specific dollar amounts, primarily because we've just started the conversation. I really want to hear from the community. But, generally, whether it's 300 million, 500 million or 720 million, I want a strong focus on safe routes to schools, protected bikeways and the expansion of our urban trails. And get that network really connected up.And then there were four points I wanted to toss out there really quickly for staff. I want to look specifically at including bee cycle in our discussions so I'd like to see some money set aside for bee cycle. They are bringing a really important element to our community, primarily, frankly, but not only, but in large part for folks coming into town to visit. And it's a -- when I travel, like in Montreal, I used their -- I can't remember they called it but it was a bee cycle thing, the state highways transfer, I am very serious about looking for money to come from the state to us if we are going to acquire the responsibility for the right-of-ways and for the state highways. I want to see maintenance money come with it from the state to ease into that acquisition. Otherwise it's just another requirement and responsibility, funding responsibility, for the city [6:18:32 PM] that we're not ready for. Deferred maintenance is missing. It was in the early concept discussions but I think deferred maintenance on our roads is missing and I'd like to see that returned. On vision zero, I've mentioned this previously, I'll mention again, I'm interested in lowering the speed limits, we can start internally with our neighborhoods but I'd like to lower our neighborhoods by 5-10 miles per hour throughoutthe city, a vision zero specific item. I think it will make a big difference to getting our injury and death rates down if we're really serious about vision zero. So thank you >> Kitchen: With that I think we need to adjourn and let the planning commission have their space >> Zimmerman: Motion to adjourn >> Kitchen: Okay. I think we're adjourned. Okay. Thank you. [ Meeting adjourned ]