Mobility Committee Meeting Transcript – 05/03/2017 Title: ATXN 24/7 Recording Channel: 6 - ATXN Recorded On: 5/3/2017 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 5/3/2017 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== [3:11:54 PM] >> Kitchen: Okay. Good afternoon, everyone. We're going to get started with the mobility committee. We'll call it to order about 3:12 in the afternoon. First item is approval of the minutes, so I do have a motion to approve the minutes. I have a motion from council member Flannigan. Second from council member alter. All in favor? The minutes are adopted. Thank you. We have two guests today, so the mayor and council member Renteria. Thank, y'all. I think we have one person for citizen communication, and then we'll -- I'm assuming that both the mayor and council member Renteria are interested in particular in the bond, so we'll start with that. But first, we have citizen communication. I think we have one person signed up. Yes. David, you signed up, right? Okay. >> Thank you, chair. I appreciate it, and vice chair and committee members, mayor, and council members. I'll be real brief. I just -- this morning, I listened to Kut, a story about Fremont, California, they're dealing with cut-through traffic in neighborhoods and finding out that these apps offer Google maps and other ways that map software are basically guiding motorists through those supposedly shorter routes, because of congestion on the main roads, and so what they're doing is they're talking to these map companies and saying, hey, this is a problem, and they're working together to say, you know, the first step is identify the problem where they have cut-through traffic, and they say that doesn't really help, allowing cut-through traffic does not help traffic flow. It's not a good thing. You know, it doesn't relieve the traffic congestion. In fact, it creates safety issues in neighborhoods, and that's what they're seeing, and so the neighborhoods put up no left turn signs or no left turns during certain periods of time to try to stop that, but yet we have this routing software that routes folks through those very neighborhoods, and so they've gotten with Google and said, hey, please update your software to show that there's no left turn here during these timeframes, or there's no right turns so that that software will no longer direct folks to those routes, and I hope that Austin is doing that same thing. [3:14:26 PM] I mention it in the context -- I know there's another item on the mobility bonds and corridor improvements, but when those improvements start occurring and we see lanes being shut down to implement these upgrades and improvements to the corridors, we're going to see more cut-through traffic, so I think we need to get ahead of the curve here and be ready for that. So, thank you for listening to my comments. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Okay. As our first order -- we're going to take things a little bit out of order and take our second item first. Actually, item number 4 on the agenda, and that's a staff briefing with discussion and possible action regarding the 2016 mobility bond implementation and prioritization. So, welcome, Robert. >> Good afternoon. You've been here a long time. So, what I wanted to try to do today is mainly get to your questions. I know you all have several questions brewing, but what we heard that you wanted to talk about is the program implementation, mainly the prioritization, how we're taking the bond program, the 720 million, and prioritizing and selecting projects. So I'm going to walk through each program. I've got an army of staff that the greatest team in the world behind me to answer some specific questions that I can't answer, if you have some later on, but I'll kind of walk through each program and tell you how we're prioritizing the projects as we move forward. I wanted to start with reminding you that every program has a tremendous coordination mechanism built into it. The team has pulled together, and every Friday, we're meeting with members of every part of this program to ensure that we're coordinating across program lines and it's a massive undertaking to make sure we're spending the funds in the most appropriate and biggest bang for the buck, so we coordinate projects together. That takes a lot of work to do that, and we're obviously comfortable doing that. [3:16:29 PM] We've done that before with other bond programs. But I would suggest we're doing that more this bond program than we've ever done in the past by just pulling all the team together and working through that process. So I wanted to remind you of that before I go into each program. Starting with regional mobility program, as you well know, 101 million was set aside for the regional mobility projects. It really is a two- part program, four partnership programs with tx-dot, and proprojects that we're working on with city resources. I'm going to go through each appropriation. December, we didn't ask for any funds, but in this may request, we're asking for $9 million. That's going to be essentially the full funding for the city's share with tx-dot, the 620 and F.M. 222 project. From a prioritization standpoint, all the regional projects are under way. We're working on every one of them, but each has a different timing constraint with environmental reviews, tx-dot schedules, when they're the leading agency, and the environmental side for the oak hill project. All projects are launched, so there's no real prioritization. There's a different timing on different projects as we move forward with our partners. On the corridor program, very specific roles, with reduced congestion, and the connectivity and transit operations. This is really a two- part program. There's an implementation of the corridor program, and we're developing the corridor construction program based again on the many criteria that you all gave us to evaluate. And from the funding and appropriations side, we ask for $4 million for the corridor consultant in December, and in this may request, we're asking for 12 million to complete the corridor consultant and launch every preliminary engineering report for the remaining next set of mobility corridors. As you recall, these are the list of corridors. [3:18:32 PM] We have on the left side of the screen, the corridors that we're going to implement with construction on all those corridors. Different elements on those. Depending again on how the corridor construction program comes forward with council and what you all approve with that. On the right are the corridors that we're doing preliminary engineering reports on, essentially preparing for the next funding cycle, just like we have done on this cycle for construction on those corridors. So, again, the December appropriation is asking for money to launch every one of those preliminary engineering reports on the next set of mobility corridors. As far as prioritization, council was very specific and in contract with the voters on exactly what we're looking for and how to allocate the construction funds for the $482 million for the corridors that we are going to move forward with construction of some elements of those corridors. As you know, there is not enough funding to fund the construction of all of those corridors, so we have to bring forward a program that suggests how we would recommend to council on how to prioritize those construction funds. I'm not going to read through all these. These, again, the council's resolution on the three priorities, and then we also make allowances for these three elements, and then we are also subject to emphasize these further elements. So we have a very detailed list of things that the consultant is going to help us evaluate for each one of the construction components, and we'll bring it forward in October for a list of the priority methodology that we're going to be evaluating and then bring that forward to council for your approval before we move for construction funding on those corridors. Moving on to local mobility. As you recall, there's quite a plethora of different funding buckets for this -- for the local mobility projects. 37 million for sidewalks, 27.5 million for safe routes to school, and as you recall, that was split up evenly amongst the ten districts. 26 million for urban trails, bikeways, fatality reduction strategies, which we also reference as vision zero, and 11 million for substandard streets, which, again, a corridor element of sub center streets and cap renewal. [3:20:42 PM] I'm going to run through each one of these programs and show you how we're prioritizing amongst those programs as well. We're going to start with this graphic and try to explain it to you. It's not a map for how you get home during rush hour in Austin, Texas, but it could be used for that. I wanted to give you an example of how we are doing an enhanced coordination effort this bond program than we've ever done before. We're trying to ensure that all the local mobility projects, sidewalk, bicycle, safe routes to school, safety, as well as utility coordination, we're all pulling each one of those specific projects into a one-center hub, street design component, looking at how we coordinate all those programs together. So we may have some funding from a sidewalk program combined with funding of a bicycle program to build both of those elements on one project. So if it makes some sense to coordinate that, we're going to work real hard to make that coordination happen. On the right side of the screen, you'll see three different components on how we can deliver projects. We can deliver some projects fairly quickly with some field engineering and some idiq, which are indefinite quantity project or construction contracts that you have approved some of those recently. We can do the typical design bid build, and then also we can move with some different program funding again to move some projects forward as fast as we can. As you've given us this challenge to move, a dramatic, huge program forward and a very aggressive schedule, we're trying to do our best to coordinate that effort and make sure we're delivering things as efficiently as possible. One enhancement that I think you will appreciate that we haven't done with previous councils is we're going to try to take that coordination effort and bring this list back to you with what we're calling an annual local mobility plan. You'll then have a snapshot of what we're proposing to put together for the next funding cycle, the next construction cycle. [3:22:45 PM] We expect to bring the first one forward in February, and you'll see how all these coordinator projects come together. Now, that being said, we launched a whole bunch of early out projects to try to get this program going as quickly as we can, so constituents in your district can see construction on the ground as fast as possible. So we haven't done these annual local mobility plans for your purview yet, but we're launching a bunch of these early out projects to ensure that we're getting this program going as quickly as we can. So that's the funding that we've asked for in the December allocation, the funding that we've asked for in this budget amendment that you'll be considering tomorrow to ensure that we get these early out programs going, actually even before you see this annual local mobility program. So I'm going to go into each program a little bit more specifically, with a reminder that each one of these programs will coordinate together, but for the next few slides, I'm going to talk about each program individually. The sidewalk program, as you know, we have a sidewalk master plan that was adopted, and the update was adopted last June by council, and that indicated quite a substantial need in this community, as you are well aware. I'm sure you hear from all your constituents on the absent sidewalks in this community, and so we are looking forward to this 37 million that the voters approved to allocate towards this. I'll tell you, though, it's a drop in the bucket on the sidewalk needs, and I know you all know that, and so we have to do a good job of prioritizing where we spend those funds and get the biggest bang for the buck. The sidewalk program has done an outstanding job. They asked for $10 million in September and we are actually beginning to build some of the sidewalks. Funding for the 2016 bond this month. Those are some of the first early out projects, and I'm really excited and want to give a lot of kudos to public works for moving that program quickly. The may request, we're asking for another $2 million to continue those programs and also to start this coordination effort with the other programs. [3:24:50 PM] As you may recall on the sidewalk master plan, it developed a ten-year program that we would address the very high and high priority sidewalks within a quarter mile of the schools, bus stops, parks, and one side of residential streets. That resulted in 390 miles based on the 2016 sidewalk master plan, just as the order of mag -- magnitude, we're going to build -- that, again, indicates the substantial need we have in this community for sidewalk programs. The initial prioritization that we're already working on, these early out projects, using that sidewalk master plan and the criteria and prioritization methodology that council approved, we're using those with that methodology to develop this list. That was included in your February 28th report, in the appendix, it had all the sidewalks that the public works department is moving forward in early out projects, and it even had the next traunch of sidewalks that they'll be looking at for feasibility with the bikeway program and trails and the safe routes to school. The feasibility analysis that the department looks at is every sidewalk is different, and so when there's an absent sidewalk, some are very easy to build, and so we can go ahead and get those done quickly. Some require retaining walls, utility relocations, and when we hit that feasibility challenge, sometimes it just makes better sense to move onto a different sidewalk. We'll be, working with each district in the next few months to look at that annual local mobility plan to help us prioritize those. Because unfortunately, we have a lot of high -- so if you can tell us, we'd like -- sidewalk a is more important to our constituents and sidewalk B, that will help us in evaluation of which project to move forward. So, again, we'll be looking forward to talking with you all in the near future. [3:26:54 PM] Taking that list, we thought it was really important, and I know this is different than you've seen, for example, where each district was allocated an even amount and in the safe routes to school, you all chose to allocate equal amounts to each district. We're allocating these funds on the sidewalk program based on the sidewalk master plan and the assessed needs throughout the community. So the very high and high priority sidewalks based on the percentage that is in with each district, that's how we're allocating the funding to move forward. That seemed like the most objective and fair way to move forward. I know that results in some districts getting more money than others, but I think that's the biggest bang for the buck. We want to hit the high priority sidewalks in the community among this allocation method. I talked about the plan that will be facilitating council feedback on that process to help us choose which one of those high and very high sidewalks, absent sidewalks in your district are more important to your constituents. If you remember, the program was 27.5 million and you all decided to allocate that evenly to each council district, we're going to be working with each school district school within your district to determine which critical programs would be moving out first. As you recall, in the December appropriation, we put $3 million to put some of those early out critical needs in each school and the public works department is working right now with each school in your district to determine that. We're asking for a million and a half in the appropriation for tomorrow to continue that work, and to really bring in a consultant, we've never had this level of capital funding and safe routes to school program. That's very exciting, but we've never done a master plan like sidewalks, bikeways, and urban trails have done to really determine how should we prioritize the future funding for these schools, and so we want to bring in a consultant to help us do that, really do an infrastructure review, and you all help us prioritize these projects as we move forward. [3:29:06 PM] Schools will obviously be involved in that priority methodology. We anticipate out of that work that each school will have our own prioritized plan that we can move forward in working with your district in how they allocate their individual funding. So that's an exciting program to move forward with, and, again, we'll be hand in hand with the school districts and your offices as we move forward with phase 2. We have an urban trails master plan, and identified tier 1 trails. 26 million were allocated for urban trails in the 2016 mobility bond. We asked for a million dollars to begin some design work in the December appropriation, and we are asking for $5 million in this may request to continue the design for the various trails. I know there's some questions on how to prioritize trails. The urban trails, they were already launched in some of the previous bond programs. Focusing on extending the urban trail network, including connections to transit. So there are more tier 1 trails in the city's master plan than we have funding for, so we do have to select how to move forward on those. As we showed you in this February 28th report, these are the trails that public works is recommending we move forward on. Again, because they're in the status of these trails, we think we can get design done on some, and even the construction and completion of some of these trails that have been in the works for years. So that, again, was published in the February 28th report, and as we move forward, we intend to move forward on that. We do have the urban trails connecters, which were not dedicated or earmarked to specific trails, and that's $750,000 that we have set aside to work on some connection points that might come up as we move forward in the next few years. The bikeway program, we do have a bikeway master plan, but that didn't really have a priority methodology set aside for it as much as the sidewalk master plan. [3:31:11 PM] So one of the things we're doing is we're also asking for consultant funding to move forward in helping us engage the community as well as you to try to develop how do we prioritize the funding that we have in the 2016 mobility bond. Now, there are some projects that make some sense. We're doing a street reconstruction project. There's an opportunity to do a bikeway program or project that connects to existing bikeway lanes. That makes some sense, and we'll probably move forward with those, as we move forward. There's a coordination that we're working on. But as far as the standalone bikeway projects, we think it's important for us to talk to the community. We've already been engaged in your districts to ask for public input on that. How should we prioritize the bike lane infrastructure program as we move forward, and we're getting good feedback on that. We expect to bring that back in the near future to show you with this consultant work, here's how we think -- how we suggest we prioritize this bikeway program as we move forward. The safety issue. The transportation department put together a list for the bond program of 27 intersections that have the highest traffic incidents, and that was identified and essentially adopted, contract with the voters. So we have those list of 27 intersections. We expect to be able to fund about 15 to 18 of those intersections with the program funding that you all allocated in the bond program. We've asked for 1.75 million in December and another 2.5 million in the may request. Those are for the three early out intersections. We hope to move forward very quickly. And then as we move forward in future years, we'll again work on the next intersections on that list. Here is the list. If you don't recall, I thought I put it in the presentation. [3:33:11 PM] It's also in the February 28th report. Those are the intersections that we will be moving forward on as we complete this program. Again, the early out projects. There were five that came at the top of the list. Two needed additional coordination. We'll be moving forward in the next tranche of projects. Coordinating with the other programs to ensure is there a sidewalk project, is there a bikeway program, any other program we can connect with those intersection projects to make sure it's a complete program as we move it out. Substandard streets and capital renewal. You may recall that we had -- let me get to that list. Well, I don't have the list. I had the list in materially one. Preliminary reports for substandard roads, which are really another corridor report to look at should this two-lane road be a three-lane road or a four-lane road. So we had identified two different sort of corridor programs, and one is the mobility corridor. One is substandard streets. I think that's a little confusing. We're treating those really as corridor reports. We're moving forward with these substandard street preliminary and engineering reports really as corridor programs. You did allocate two design projects for substandard streets on followwill lane, and those are moving forward as we speak. We asked for $6 million in the December allocation to do the design for those streets, and $4 million will complete all the preliminary engineering reports for all the substandard streets and we're asking for that in may. Our intent on all the corridors, once we get this funding, is to launch every corridor, so we'll have all of those going as soon as we can get the funding put in place. So, to just get to your questions, in conclusion, I wanted to remind you that we're excited about the challenge, but every time I get in front of you, I'm going to remind you about the challenge. [3:35:12 PM] This is a huge program, and we're doing it in probably half the time that we anticipated we'd be able to do that. To do that, we're going to have to look at some critical delivery components. Staffing, as you well know, there's an rca for your consideration tomorrow as we've said consistently throughout this program. If you want us to do it in that kind of timeframe, we're going to need some additional resources and be able to accomplish that. Program coordination, I'm really proud of the team behind me. They are doing an outstanding job, and it's fun to watch, and it's going to be even more fun as we deliver projects that have a little bit of each one of these components in it. Some bikeway money, some sidewalk money, some safe route to school money. It's going to be exciting to see all that come together with complete projects. The contracting and procurement process. This has added a burden to the existing staff, that they have stepped up and really push out some early out projects, but as you saw on this staffing request, they're going to need some resources to continue this pace as well as fellow minority business resources. It's an awfully important for us to have the contracting program in place and ensure that we have compliance and all the programs going forward and they're going to need some staffing to do that. Utilities and right of way are going to be really important elements, and always in any bond program, those are the ones that slow us down. If we hit a right of way requirement on projects, that is a challenge to get -- to acquire right of way in any community and it isn't any different in Austin, and if we're having to relocate utilities because of projects, that's going to take some time as well. So those are critical delivery components. Right now, we're trying to evaluate, especially in the corridor programs, what risks are involved in moving forward and ensure that we can get those projects done within the eight-year timeframe that you've given us. The approval process from the permitting side, it is also going to be a challenge for us as we move forward. We've already got some staff dedicated from the bond program to work with that. You're going to see development services also. [3:37:14 PM] At some point, I would suspect come forward and say, if you want to prioritize these projects and move these through the system, they may need some staffing support as well. That's not included in your request for tomorrow. And community involvement. It's awfully important in Austin, as you are well aware, to involve the community. That takes time. That takes time, and we're not just involving the community just to seek their input and not do anything with it. Sometimes the projects change because of that input. Any time a project changes, that means that we couldn't hit some delays, and so we are excited to do the involvement, but that also is a risk in the delivery of the program. You're going to hear me say this every time I'm in front of you as well. The results of all those delivery components is I guarantee a schedule will change. The team knows that in February 28th, when we gave you that report that set out the expenditure plan, that is our baseline. We're going to hold to that, but we're going to -- schedules will change, and we're going to report to you the deltas. When something happens, it comes to us, that something has to change schedule. We're going to report to you. But if I was you, I'd put that February 28th report somewhere where you can access it easily because we're going to be using that for the next eight years. That's the baseline on this schedule. Same thing on the cost. We took that and allocated them per project and per year, and so the team also knows that the cost -- the spending plan that we put together February 28th is again a baseline, and we're going to be held to that and show you as those costs will change, I guarantee you they will, then we're going to be able to show you why and give you reasonings behind why the costs have been changed over the next few years. With that, I just want to remind you about, again, the delivery challenge and we're excited about the program. We are comfortable and confident that we can produce it in eight years. But we need to continue to have the pace that we're on to do that. And the pace that we're on, it feels like we've done probably about a year's worth of work since November, and the team, I'm sure, is feeling that, and we're going to need some reinforcements to come in and help us, and it's an exciting program, but it's going to need to have this continual focus in the next eight years. [3:39:33 PM] This is just a real quick graphic to show you we are all over the city, and this is in 2017. We are producing projects throughout every one of your districts, and we're excited as we move forward. The rest of this, I'm not going to walk through those, but if you wanted to ask any questions, I just had that in the slide deck so we could refer to that. And with that, council members, I am open to questions. >> Kitchen: Thank you very much. I know we've got questions. I'm going to ask one quick one, and then turn it over to others. And that's on the trails. I want to go to slide 21, and -- first off, let me say that the early out projects on the trails, I don't have any questions about. But I do have -- maybe it's not 21. Whatever the page is with the list of the trails. >> 29. >> Kitchen: 29. Okay. So my question has to do with another tier one trail, and that's the birkstrom spur. I just want to mention it again. A place that goes from the airport to an area off of, you know, just the other side of congress, just south of Ben white. It's a potential trail opportunity. If it's not -- we could lose the opportunity forever if we don't consider purchasing that land. I know there's some challenges with it right now. We don't really know yet whether we can purchase it because of questions related to U.P., and questions related to primarily U.P., I think, and there may be some other questions related to that. [3:41:36 PM] But I wouldn't want the February 28th report, which doesn't even have the Bergstrom spur on the list to be funded out of this to be set in stone at this point in time, because I'm thinking that it's very important that we maintain the ability to potentially purchase the Bergstrom spur, or perhaps parts of it or whatever, going with partnership with cap metro or whatever our options are. I don't want to cut that off right now. So my question is, with what we are approving on Thursday with regard to the funding for trails, is not the whole amount for all of the trails at this point in time? Is that correct? >> That's right in. The local annual mobility plan, you'll see all those things come together, so nothing's precluded at this point. I will say just because something is on the list, or isn't on the list, maybe this is a better way, and Richard can add to it as well, the urban trail program continues. So they're still looking at other connections. Bergstrom spur being one of those to look at, partnerships with cap metro and what the appraisals come back at and then bring that back to the table for you all to look at. So it's still on the table. That being said, these are the ones that we identified at this point. We're moving forward with the design on some of those. Now, at some point, when we hit construction, that's when the real dollars hit. You all will have to adapt as we get new information. So the project is not dead from our standpoint, Bergstrom spur. We're going to continue to work that project as well as every other project that isn't listed there on the trail program. This is what was funded, what we recommended be funded in 2016. But we'll move that forward. >> Kitchen: Well, I understand, but this is the pot of money that we have to deal with right now. >> That's true. >> Kitchen: So I understand they're continuing to work the Bergstrom spur, but if we work it and we cut off this pot of funding for that, then that's what I wanted to avoid, because this is a sure pot of funding, as sure as we get with pots of funding, and so we haven't identified another pot of funding that's potential for Bergstrom spur at this point in time. [3:43:45 PM] So, okay. So I'm hearing you say that it's still on the table, it's still being worked, by moving forward with the early out trails, we haven't committed ourselves so far that we couldn't then later, if it's -- you know, if it works with y'all's -- with what you guys find out on your due diligence and if it works with the council's priorities, that we could potentially fund Bergstrom spur. >> Council could do that. >> Kitchen: Okay. Someone else have a question? Council member Flannigan. >> Flannigan: Thank you for all the information. It's really very exciting to dig into this every time you come to the mobility committee. On the program delivery, I know that on Thursday, we're approving some funding agreements with tx-dot, but we're -- for example, the project on the chart on your slide, it says the funding doesn't happen until 2020. Can you help the community understand why that is? >> Right. So what we're doing on all the advanced funding agreements that we're bringing forward tomorrow, we're asking for your permission to negotiate and execute, and because tx-dot right now has -- they're a great partner and we want to kind of solidify that to a certain degree, but we don't have the number put in place yet with tx-dot. This is negotiate and execute. So we're going to continue to work that through. And it doesn't -- you also know on Thursday, tomorrow, you don't see the appropriation of that money. You just see the afa. So we're going to have to come back later when it's more appropriate to get the funding and say, now we need this 17 million. So this is just us putting something together with our partner or tx-dot to make sure that that deal is essentially ready to go when we need the money. >> Flannigan: Thank you. I think it can be a little confusing for the community. >> That's right. >> Flannigan: Because it's not an allocation, but the amount of money is in the posting, even though we're not actually approving the spend, that happens later. >> That's right. >> Flannigan: So I think it's important for the community to note that. And then also, in accordance with that, the chart that shows us these regional mobility projects having their funding allocated, that is not necessarily representative of when the work starts. [3:45:50 PM] >> That's correct. >> Flannigan: Can you explain that a little bit too? >> I know you're interested. Anderson doesn't have bond funds dedicated -- the design is funded through a different program, so the design is preliminary report right now, is already launched. That's why you don't see the funding starting for a while for the mobility bond 2016 because we don't need that money until construction, so that's why that shows. >> Alter: I also had some questions about the material for tomorrow. Is that the appropriate time? So, for 360, my understanding is it was over 200 million that was allocated by the Texas -- by tx-dot's commission, but this says 181 million is estimated. >> I think it was 200 million. >> Alter: Okay. So that's just an error on -- I don't want to lose -- >> That's right. >> Alter: So if we can get that corrected as appropriate, I'd appreciate that. And then I had some questions about trying to understand the -- how we're paying for some of the new positions. >> Sure. >> Alter: I think it's great that we have room to fund these from existing funds, and obviously, we do need the staffing. But I just would like to understand the reserve balances that are being used to fund these positions better. And I guess it's across several departments, but I was having trouble kind of following all of the lines there and the sources of the funds. >> The funding comes from four different funding sources. Rob can comment on the fund coming from the transportation user fee. The bond program is funding some of these programs, or employees, and that's Richard also is from the capital fund that he has, so [3:47:55 PM] -- and rob can probably answer some of your questions on the tough funding. Rob, maybe you want to? >> Sure. Speaking simply for the positions that will be funded with transportation, this bond was passed in November, so it was after our budget period, so we weren't able to budget positions in October for a potential positive vote in November. And so that's part of that reserve that was held back. I didn't deploy all my funds. I kept some of my funds back. The transportation portion of this, it's separate from parking. Generates its own revenue, not just from the transportation user fee, but also from right of way rentals, through the right of way permitting process in addition to fees. Development has been skyrocketing over the last few years, and so we have probably consistently over year to year underpredicted how much development is going to occur. That's actually a good thing in terms of being conservative with our budget. And so when we do that, that goes to our base balance of our fund, but we can't expend it to the following year. And so that tends to create a little bit of a cushion that builds up. What's nice is when we have an opportunity to do a one-off capital project that makes a lot of sense, that gives us some reserves to do that. It also gives us reserves to answer emergencies if we have a big set of blowdowns, for instance, on signals. I typically have the funds to address that. So, that's where those funds come from. The plan had been to try to spend as many of these positions that come out of transportation as the owner of the projects on our fund balance, and wean ourselves down to a reasonable fund balance that we could then build into our annual operations budgets. The reason we need more staffing, at least from transportation's perspective, I've already dedicated a supervising engineer from signals to the bond, and also another senior engineer just to get the regional projects going. [3:50:09 PM] I need to keep the lights on as well, so I need to re-hire -- the back fill those folks. With the two other bond programs, the local mobility as well as vision zero, I need staffing to support that, and so that's where we're funding from. >> Alter: So there's nothing that's going to be cut or gone from within the departmental budget to fund these staff decisions, which obviously you need? >> Only budget reserve. >> Alter: Okay. And can you explain how you plan to continue funding these positions beyond this fiscal year? >> So, some of the positions, I've got a right of way position that's in there. I anticipate it generating -- you know, we'll generate continued right of way funds, and so it will actually be a value to have a person full-time assigned to the bond. That position, I believe, comes out of the bond, and so there is a higher -- I'm anticipating a higher recoverable, where I'm expecting higher recoverables of my employees, which means they're having to do work that's reimbursable. So there's the quarter cent project that falls into that. The quarter cent project, sorry, to fall into that, as well as a number of other projects. So, thank goodness we have really smart budget people that help me make these decisions, because it's beyond my engineering capability. But the point is that we're watching that budget very carefully. I have an annual budget of about 20 to 25 million, and every year, my target is to come in within 1% below that target. I can't go over. So you can do the math probably, that only leaves me about 200,000, $300,000 each year with. >> If I can clarify, too, just so you know the positions. The project managers are going to be assigned to projects, those are going to be bond funded. We took some of the ones that were more broad public information specialists or some of the higher level program manager kind of deal, and those were going to be funded from transportation user fee and rob's offering budget. [3:52:13 PM] Then there's some that are support staff on the capital contracting side, and the side that did make sense to fund exactly through the bond program, and Ed can comment on that. So that's the support services fund. Because they get allocated out to all the capital programs, and so they're going to be doing more than perhaps just 2016 bonds. So that didn't make sense to fund from the bond program. They're going to be in the Normal support services fund and be allocated out to all the departments. >> Alter: So there's extra money in the support services fund that is being allocated to this then? I mean, I know when you did the budget, you anticipated there might be a bond, and so this may have all been budgeted. I'm just trying to understand where it's coming from. >> Well, in fiscal year '17, we didn't anticipate these additional positions, but we're estimating in our fiscal note that -- on the very conservative side, it would be $186,705 would be the total cost for these financial service department positions, and so before we come to council and ask for more appropriations, we always go back and scrub through our budgets to make sure -- like rob was saying, are we projecting we're going to end the year with enough savings to cover that, or do we actually need to ask council for additional appropriation? Right now, we're projecting that we will have sufficient funds and financial services to cover this $186,705, and again, I think that's very conservative. We're estimating that most of these positions will be funded for nine pay periods in fiscal year 2017. That's going to hire some really aggressive hiring practices to get those new staff filled that quickly, but again, we're trying to say, this is the most it could cost us in fiscal year '17 if we're able to buy-in the perfect people quickly, get them onboard really quickly. They give no notice to their existing jobs. I think nine pay periods is very optimistic, so probably won't even be that much. But, again, before we come to council and ask for appropriations, we look at our existing budget and make sure that we don't have savings elsewhere in the budget that can cover these costs, and we've found that we did. [3:54:22 PM] >> Alter: So you've mentioned the financial. You've mentioned the atd positions. There were 21 positions for the snbr. Is that also from support services funding? >> Yes. >> Alter: And then where are the public works capital moneys coming from? >> The capital project management fund, they're going to be -- those will be positions that will be reimbursed from the bond program. So they'll actually be billing their time to the projects that have funding through the bond program. >> Alter: Great. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Any other questions? >> Mayor Adler: You may catch me with chocolate chips in my teeth. >> You going to share with the rest of us? >> Mayor Adler: This wasn't even my cookie. [ Laughter ] Just being honest. [ Laughter ] >> I have a quick question about communication on housing issues as it applies to corridor prioritization, communication on -- and talking about transit issues, and finally, on a pedestrian question. So, first, on housing, as you guys build out the matrix for how to prioritize corridors, my understanding from a recent conversation in our planning and housing committee is that we are trying to work within our neighborhood housing department to expand our tips potentially or paid public improvement district policies. So is the conversation open with the consultants, and with the housing department and transportation to see if landowners who may benefit from some of these improvements being put nearby them are willing to tax themselves to achieve the vision of the bond of mixed income, mobile corridors, if that is -- is that coming along? [3:56:23 PM] You know, is that something that's still in consideration, or something that y'all are going to do? And the council really clearly said we wanted to focus on both mobility and housing through this bond. So if there's any update on this bond, I think that would be really helpful. >> Council member, I'm with the corridor office. We have just started those conversations, but we already looped in nhcd, so we're starting to look at what information we have in place to look at, as we look at the mobility priorities, also the opportunities to meet some of these other outcomes, including affordable housing. So we have started those conversations, and we're just at the front end of that, so those conversations will continue. It will take us a couple of months to work on developing the prioritization criteria and looking at those opportunities. We do anticipate coming back to council to brief you on the prioritization and the criteria, probably around the October timeframe. >> Renteria: Great. Thank you. I think just as we saw with the development services building, how different private landowners were willing to compete to bring down the cost of that building, because the city investment was important to them fiscally. I anticipate that we might have similar opportunities with the corridor investment, since some folks will see it in their financial interest to help us achieve those city goals. On transportation, connections 2025 got done by the members of the cap metro board, is there a phase there in prioritization of figuring out which corridors cap metro is planning on making transit investments into, and since some of these corridor plans were done before that, some even right around imagine Austin time or before that, are we thinking about design for -- or rethinking design for transit if connections 2025 starts considering rail lines or significant transit investments on some of these corridors? >> So, a couple of things to that. One is we are, again, just getting started with the process, but we are looking at basically the corridor studies that have been done and any conditions that may have changed. [3:58:24 PM] So if there's any updated plans, policies, other things that we need to take into account, they exist now that didn't exist when we did the corridor reports, that's definitely something we're looking at. And then in specific coordination with cap metro, connections 2020, and project connect for that matter, we are reaching out to those teams. We have already started the coordination process, and we're actually coordinating pretty well with project connect, and there's several different things that are in play right now that we need to coordinate with. So, yes, all of that will be coordinating with and getting feedback from them as we go through this process of developing the prioritization criteria. >> If I could just add one thing. The original corridor plans, you mentioned some came about before the 2035 or when project connect was going on. In fact, we worked closely with cap metro all the way through that, and I think the 2025 plan as well as the revolving project connect will be consistent with the corridor plans. A good example is Riverside. We talked about a high capacity transit investment in that corridor, whether it ends up being rail or bus, it doesn't really matter from the development perspective of the corridor in terms of how we might redesign that corridor to meet the neighborhood expectations. Similarly, on north Burnett and north Lamar, for instance, we already know we have a high capacity transit system in there, and so, yes, we plan those consistently with that type of service, and increasing the frequency and >> Casar: And then my very last question is, before I go find a cookie of my own. [Laughter] Is -- and potentially you may not have this answer at this point, but as we think about walkability on some of the corridors, I think one of the pieces of feedback that I've been receiving is that it's sometimes not just what's on the corridor itself but the walk shed from nearby to the corridor, and so maybe you don't have the answer now but something that maybe we need to look at from a legal perspective, and from an operational one is if the corridor is defined specifically as that street and the right-of-way for that road or if the -- if the walk shed around the corridor would need sidewalk funds or if we could actually think about the corridor and the walkability and safety of that corridor a little bit more holistically outside of that one particular piece of right-of-way. [4:00:54 PM] >> What I can share with you is the original thinking in the corridor plans is it was much more than just the sidewalk to sidewalk, that it did include the connectivity into the neighborhoods. Corridor investment is not very useful if it's not connected to the neighborhoods. I think we have to stay true to the direction that council gave us through the contract with the voters, but I think certainly connectivity of these corridors was a piece of that definition, whether that's pedestrian, bicycle or other roadways as they connect into these corridors I think is an important element of the concept of the corridors. >> Casar: Right. Thank you all and thank you for having me. >> Kitchen: I think we probably have some other questions on that subject. >> Renteria: I only have one quick question, and -- >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Renteria: There at the holly power plant, the trail is not connected there. You know? It's kind of awkward. You got the fence up here. You can't continue your bike trail. You have to go all the way around through the streets or you have to get off and walk up the railroad there. You got it blocked up where if you come down pedernales you can get on it -- you can't get on it. You have to leave the trail and go through the park. It's kind of hazardous, it has a hill there. I wonder, are you also looking at that trail, the connectivity of it? >> I think that's part of that trail connections piece that we don't have earmarked. So all these barriers to trails we'll be looking at. Again, the urban trail program is going to continue, and so the trail program itself will continue to look at barriers, and if that's a barrier or a connection, then we'll bring that forward for council's consideration. >> Renteria: I was wondering if you have begun with the park and Austin electric, because they're all part of that. >> We will. We will. >> Renteria: Okay. Thank you. >> Kitchen: I have some questions related to codenext, but along the lines of what council member -- [laughter] I'm having a tough day. [4:02:55 PM] Council member Casar was asking about. [Laughter] But did you want to ask your question first, mayor, or should I follow up on this? >> Mayor Adler: Either way. >> Kitchen: Okay, my question relates to, you know, you had talked about all these various ways to coordinate, but I'm also thinking in terms of codenext and land use. So we had a conversation with our district about land use around the corridors in the south, for example, who are our -- and what they might look like in the future, five to ten years or whatever, and so we've been talking in terms of is part of corridor planning, for example, along slaughter or William cannon, that we might also be thinking in terms of the land use along those areas, and which parts of that -- of those corridors are more appropriate or maybe more appropriate in the not too distant future for more multi-family housing, for example, the kinds of housing that lends itself to transit. So that's related to council member Casar's question, but I had been thinking in terms of the relationship with land use planning involves coordinating the corridor planning with the next steps of codenext -- or not codenext right now, but what happens next in terms of our small area plans and, you know, future land use planning along those corridors. So I'm just -- my question really is, does that make sense to you guys? I asked the same question of the codenext planning team, and they said yes. So my question for you all is, are you -- are you having any discussions or do you expect to have any discussions as you work through these corridors with our planning department with regard to land use plan? >> Absolutely. I think the codenext team is already linking in with Mike and his team and rob. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> One of the things that we need to clarify, especially for the corridor program, because that's our critical path for the eight-year, is we are absolutely wanting codenext and we need their input, but Mike's and rob's team won't be using land use planning. [4:04:58 PM] >> Kitchen: That's right. >> So if the codenext team gets a great opportunity and the 2016 mobility bond should do a bunch of land use planning, we can't do that. So we want to team with them and partner with the land use planners, give us that input and we'll put it in the stuff for you to consider. Coordination, absolutely, seek their input, absolutely, give us data, but we don't have land use planners on our team. >> Kitchen: That makes sense. I'm thinking more in line if we're planning improvements to a particular corridor and it makes sense as part of thinking about that corridor to also do the next level of planning for different segments of that corridor, then we would just want to be thinking in terms of our timing so that the -- so our planning teams could be thinking when a small area plan, for example, might be appropriate for a particular intersection, for example, or a particular segment of a road, so that we don't just go in and build our -- our road improvements, our sidewalk or bike improvements, without some consideration about what might be future land use. >> Absolutely. >> If I could just add one thing. You know, as we make these transportation investments as we've already talked about with the discussion of affordability, it will generate economic activity, and so especially if council is contemplating trying to capture some of that value, that might be a place to look as you do the land use plans. I know upzoning is a bad word here, but you will be able to increase the sensitivity at certain nodes as we make dramatic improvements and that's where I think you can capture that value if that's the desire of council to do some of these other things to support the corridors. >> Just to kind of build upon what rob is saying to saying the same thing in a different way, like affordable housing I think a lot will be look at the opportunity analysis that these mobility improvements make, so that's where we can look at what are the land uses and how might that change and that might be part of the opportunity analysis that goes with first and foremost these mobility improvements we're going to be making. [4:07:05 PM] The other thing I'll say is as we told council, full implementation of these corridor plans is more funding than we have so I think what you'll see out of the corridor construction program brought forward that would be part of the 1.0 first investment but that will be looking to what is the next set of investments longer term that some of these projects can help set up, including some of the future opportunities as well. So I think that's also where codenext and some of the land use planning will come into play. >> Kitchen: Okay. Mayor, did you have a -- >> Mayor Adler: I want to go back to the report with respect to the leveraging. When you talked about the criteria for picking projects, one of the other criteria, not so much in picking projects but associated with that, was always being -- doing everything we could to leverage the funds that we have. I think you've done a great job so far in leveraging the 360 money of over 200 and then the 2222 of him 620, more state money. Tomorrow we're voting on the ifas, the funding agreements, authorizing that. And I feel a little funny doing that because the deal hasn't been cut with the state yet, so there's the balance between, you know, walking in with the money on projects. You're going to have ballots, what would ordinarily be done without that or what meets that so to be strategic about the use of the money that you have. And then trying to further leverage that as you mentioned in here with other federal or state money. There was also a position that was created for the purpose of trying to -- to leverage funds and to be able to get the most out of this, and that could include the state -- the traditional state, federal, campo funds, but it could also include the kind of thing that Greg was talking about where you can leverage private development monies in order to perhaps change the priority calculations in where projects are done and not done, which gets me then to the opportunity analysis that you're doing, which -- which isn't just you saying, hey, we're going to do something here and it's going to create economic activity, how do we catch that activity, which is communication that flows this way, but also needs to flow back this way, where -- where the market people or the planners come to you and say, you know, rather than paying for 100% of this project and generating economic activity, there are some developments out there that might actually pay for half the cost of this project if you were to choose that segment of the project to do. [4:09:43 PM] And that might make a segment of the project move up higher in the prioritizationing than it would have been otherwise because someone else is going to be paying for half of it. And I was real encouraged six months ago to hear about the team that you all had formed that was kind of that interdisciplinary team, that had our finance people on it, canally, it had the development people on it that were saying here are the existing opportunities for developmenttivity that we're seeing in this area that you might want to take into account. So that interdisciplinary team, that communication needs to be going to you and from you both as you're trying to leverage that money. And I hope that we fill that staff position so that you -- so that you're not only going to hocka, who's doing tons of other things, or going to campo as you do, but you also have other things to do, but somebody who's waking up and going to sleep at night thinking about this project in terms of how can we leverage these opportunities to make it go farther and do more. >> Mayor, on that position you talked about that's in transportation. We actually have made the offer to a candidate this week, and so I expect to have a candidate on the board momentarily. We've also added some additional staffing with regards to mpo expertise, and so we're excited about that too in transportation. So we should be able to support you on a wide range of leveraging opportunities. >> Mayor Adler: Is that interdisciplinary group still working? >> Yes, it is, especially -- and you articulated it well. If we have segment a and segment B and they're essentially equal in many other ways except for the development community perhaps helping us on segment B, we're going to bring that priority to you. So that's all part of this. It's a challenging but exciting mix of all the data we're going to put into this mixing bowl and come up with some recommendations for you on the corridor construction program, but that is still part of it, absolutely. [4:11:49 PM] >> Mayor Adler: And then the last thing is, is that just the work that's been done in such a short period of time to move such a big project forward, I think everybody deserves a tremendous amount of credit for -- for doing that, and the fact that we're still pushing toward that eight-year deal and we're tracking to that is remarkable, but exactly what the community expects. [Laughter] >> I guess I'll thank you for that. I'm not sure. [Laughter] >> It's a marathon. Jimmy? >> Flannigan: On -- how are we -- this is a fairly detailed question. How are we handling when projects identified under multiple programs are the same project? For example, you have a corridor and then maybe it's always high priority sidewalk and it's a high priority bike lane and it's a safe route to school. So how -- how is that added up? If I'm a community member and I pull up all these planning maps, am I adding those numbers together and saying this is how much investment we're going to make on this corridor, or are we going to be more clever about that? >> No, we're -- we're -- I'm real excited and we're not quite ready to unveil this yet, but we're working on a web site that's going to pull all this together, so you, staff, the community, everybody can see how these programs are progressing. You'll be overwhelmed, blown away by -- it's really exciting, and it's more than we've ever done before, and so I'm really excited for that, and we're close. Brian long is coming over from the water utility to help us set up a project control system so we'll be able to track better than we've ever done in the past each specific dollar on how that works for every project. Working with Ed's team on the finance side. So we're doing different things than we've ever done to that end so that the community can see, I see that's my project, but boy, they're getting funding from four different sources to complete that project within my community. So it's an exciting program, and we're having some early-out -- not issues, early out we'll be waiting a few months to unveil that to the public and then build on some of the capability in the next few months after that but we hope to get something out fairly quickly that the community will be able to see. [4:14:05 PM] >> That's exieg. I agree, I'm -- exciting. I'm looking forward to that. To piggyback on the mayor's comments now the community is expecting it. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. >> Great. >> Kitchen: Other questions? Go ahead. >> Thank you, I wanted to just echo first of all my colleagues' appreciation for all the hard work but also the emphasis on the need to leverage opportunities and to coordinate with respect to land use. My next question, though, is how are you going to -- as we develop along these corridors and there are right-of- way opportunities, how are you going to make sure that we take advantage of that opportunity? So one of the things that I've been trying to understand for a long time is how a building got built at 38th and Lamar with no right turn lane. And I would hate to see that happen along our corridors if we have no mechanism to make that happen before a building is built. >> That's also part of the -- you're going to hear a conversation about the Austin strategic mobility plan. Part of that work is really to set up corridors and to set up right-of-way requirements, and so we're -- we're a ways away from that, and rob's team is going to update yet in the next item. Rob, do you want to comment on that? >> Exactly. So we're very aware that where we need right-of-way, that we will pursue it. To pursue right- of-way we really have to have a plan for how we're going to use it so that we can convince the courts that we really do need it. Type (audio gap) Lack of a right turn lane at 38th and Lamar, you know, when you make those traffic engineering decisions, you make it on the best information that you have available at the time. And sometimes we make mistakes. I can't speak one way or the other on that particular one, but then also the facts on the ground change counter to what you assumed would happen. And so sometimes the land uses grow in a way that you don't expect. [4:16:05 PM] So you kind of have to make the best decisions with the information you have and that's what we continuously do. I would argue that I think our traffic engineering department and our whole traffic -- approach to traffic design is really quite Progressive, especially in Texas, if not in the country, but even we make errors, or miss stuff at times, and we try to mitigate that as best we can. In other areas, many of these corridors we have fixed right-of-way, meaning that we really don't have an opportunity to grab more right-of-way to do more capacity or assignments, and that's just a fact of an older city that's -- that was laid out, platting, you know, 150 years ago, were fixed within those right-of-ways. We have the same right-of-ways that we did back then. So that's a challenge as we need to put more and more in these right-of-ways. But you're absolutely right. We try to do the best each time. We're very -- as we look at these corridors we have some tools and most of these corridors are transit priority corridors, which means we can require more setbacks of buildings to get the pedestrian amenities outside the right-of-way by ordinance, thank you to council that gave us that ability, and so that's how you see the much wider sidewalks on south Lamar, for instance, appearing. Those are occurring because of the development having to set back, and we allow them to go higher in order to get that greater setback for those pedestrian monies. But thank you for pointing that out. >> Alter: I think it would be useful if, you know, on your checklist of things that you're looking at, you know, if it's on a corridor that -- you know, where before we're okay building, we may have to buy that right away, but that we have that opportunity, particularly for those right turns, because there's one after another on Lamar where there are no right turns add but there are buildings built and that opportunity is completely lost. [4:18:06 PM] Some of those interchanges it seems it's obvious we should have them. Other ones it's probably debatable. But an example of where this land use coordination I think could be improved and we could move forward with that. I wanted to follow up a little bit on the mayor's comments about, you know, having developers contribute to the process, and I'm wondering, what is -- what is -- are there going to be priorities made as we're making choices of how to spend the impact fees and the pro ratas and what not to contribute towards the corridors? Or how is that system going to work kind of -- not when it's like a big, grand bargain but just on a regular basis? >> So as you know, historic relationships with developers along some of these corridors, we have mitigation funds that are dedicated to whether they be signals or improvements, that we were not able to collect enough money from that particular developer to deliver on it, but we now have part of the signals funded. And so these corridors, one of the things I want to do is absolutely make sure our inventory of those opportunities along each of these corridors is known as we go into the prioritization process. We actually do -- have been working on for over a year a gis-based comprehensive inventory of those, and so it should be fairly easy to look for those opportunities. That opportunity just came up with our signal funding this year. We have enough signal monies, for instance, to finish, I think, three signals in total, but we don't have enough left over after that in our budget to build another signal. But we happen to have two signals within the city that have enough developer funding that we can leverage and get two more signals out of the process. So we're very focused on doing that. >> So to build upon what rob saying too and more grand scale, is we're building inventories as we look at the different corridors and dust off the corridor plans, is we're getting building inventory of all the sources that are potentially leveraging opportunities, so from private develop,ers, site plans in the pipeline, we might be looking at initial design guidelines in place for the corridor so we can look at how best to capture those but also the other funding priorities, funding programs that might be doing work on the corridors, other funding sources, cap metro, we'll start building that inventory with this analysis that we're doing. [4:20:41 PM] >> Kitchen: Okay, I know we probably have a few more questions but we have a couple of speakers so I'd like to hear from them first. You guys don't need to go -- well, I guess they may need to sit here but don't go too far, because I know that I have at least -- I have two or three questions related to the sidewalks, and I'll ask those after we have our speakers. So we have three speakers, first David king, second Jennifer Macphail, and third hyrus Elliott. >> Thank you, chair, vice chair, I'm David king. I live in the zilker neighborhood, and I'm going to first go very detailed and with some concerns about when these corridor improvements are implemented, for example, on south Lamar. I'm not sure yet if -- which area these improvements are targeted for, but when they do get started, you know, I hope that part of the planning will include how we're going to mitigate cut-through traffic and -- into neighborhoods, detour routes so it's clear to everybody where to detour so we can minimize cut-through, and drivers will know where they can go to avoid the -- the construction. And also that we're considering the impact on small local businesses when these corridors are under construction. I think they're going to be vulnerable to disruption. And then make sure that we have plenty of opportunities to hire local, low income workers to -- for these jobs, paying living wages. And then one last point about curb cut policies. That's an issue in my neighborhood right now as redevelopment is going on along south Lamar, and one project is not -- they're trying to reduce curb cuts, and I understand that from a strategy of trying to make sure that we have a good corridor for traffic to move through, but we need to have a policy, and as we build these -- develop these corridors, I think that policy needs to be clearly communicated to the neighborhood so they understand why the concern I have is the development going on on south Lamar, one less curb cut, no curb cuts will be allowed or one less curb cut and more traffic will go into the neighborhood because now the traffic is being routed to the neighborhood street on that project instead of to the corridor. [4:23:13 PM] So -- and then now zooming back out to 30,000 feet, this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. We have codenext. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that we have to coordinate major improvements to our transportation infrastructure at the same time that we're looking at land use policies and decisions. And I look at imagine Austin growth concept map, and I don't see that we're really activating these activity centers, job centers and regional centers that are outside the urban core, and it seems like that really what we're -- we're sort of paying lip service to imagine Austin and saying that, well, no, we're not saying we want all the density in the urban core, yet when we act and establish policies and implement these projects, it seems like that it is all about putting the density in the urban core. And I think that's a policy discussion that's going to be important, that we need to have in this city. And as you well know, that's not something new to you all. You know that's a concern. Why do we want to put -- do we want to put all the density, or most of it, in the urban core? And if so, why? And that's a fair discussion that needs to be had. And I know the mayor has talked about protecting our urban core neighborhoods from losing their character, and -- so I think this is really important. My main message here is let's do what you said, chair, about let's make sure that we coordinate these land use decisions right now and these corridor improvements so we can activate some of these -- some of these activity centers and job centers outside the urban core. The mayor has taken a deliberate effort to help get an eastbound opened up in a food desert in east Austin. I think we need to have more deliberate strategies in place so we're proactively working on those activity centers outside the urban core. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Ms. Macphail? >> Let's try -- can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Okay. I'm Jennifer Macphail and I'm with the disability rights group adapt. [4:25:16 PM] Adapt Texas has been around about 30 years in the Austin area and for the 27 that I've been involved with adapt we've been working on sidewalk accessibility issues it's the issue that I cut my teeth on and it's very near and dear to my heart, as not just a community organizer but as a person who has to use the sidewalk network throughout the city. You've talked about several things. I want to make sure that you understand that there needs to be a coordinated relationship in every district between having new construction of projects to fill the gaps in the sidewalk network and repair. You can see in the sidewalk master plan that over 80% of the problems throughout the city that are Ada violations are repair- related. That's a problem. A lot of it is something simple like foliage, cutting back the foliage, which would prevent people from having to get in the street, which is a great thing. But there are a host of problems all throughout the site network in every -- sidewalk network in every district so there needs to be a coordination effort and implementation of both new construction and repair of existing sidewalks. Without a combination of the two you're going to send people into oncoming traffic, and people will die. Most of our core members of our group have been hit by cars, myself included, and it was a right turn on the intersection of Lamar and Lamar square. The guy just ran the red light on the right turn and took off once he hit me. So that happens every day. And you don't hear about it. It doesn't always make the news, and if I wasn't such a big mouth nobody would know about mine, because had I not -- had the other vehicle drivers not called ems, probably I wouldn't have been able to do so. They couldn't -- I didn't realize I was -- I was a little disoriented after the car hit me, so I didn't even realize that they were anywhere around, but the reason that I was in the crosswalk in the first place was that I was trying to deal with the fact that there was a gap in the sidewalk network. [4:27:31 PM] So I just want to emphasize that gaps in the sidewalk network happen with both repair and nonexistent pieces of sidewalks. So that I've covered enough of. You've also talked about urban trails and I want to emphasize to you that it's very important, I think, to designate butler trail as an urban trail, if you haven't done that already, because frankly, a lot of people are not just running down there and recreating, they're getting from one point to another, and that includes me and iowa and a lot of other people in our group. So if you designate it as an urban trail that would make people a lot safer because that would open up funding possibilities for that improvement -- improvements to the trail. The trail is very inaccessible. We have no -- no real commitment from parks and rec to actually get it fixed in a timely manner. There's a lawsuit settlement in place, and I'd hate to have to go back to court to get it dealt with. I don't want that to be the case, but it is where we are, and what they've done is they've done an inventory in the parks department. They found 900 pages of Ada violations. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> So much so that I couldn't even download it with my computer at work. I'm going to have to get an alternative format, but I just wanted to put that bug in your ear as well. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Kitchen: We'll follow up with you on that. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Kitchen: So -- okay. Hiowa? >> Hello. I'm iowa (indiscernible) And as Jennifer said we've been around actually 33 years this year, so -- and also sidewalks, as she again stated, are very important, not just new construction but existing construction. And here in the city of Austin we actually do pretty good as a city, but being that we are becoming increasingly more populated and too gentrified, the sidewalk network has to be dealt with directly, and maintenance is a big part of that. [4:29:51 PM] As Jennifer said, it could be something as simple as over growth of foliage and bushes and trees that makes the sidewalk accessible. In the area in downtown, eventually all this construction will be great, but just -- just come here. Jennifer and I had to move around because there are several sidewalks in the downtown area that are closed off because of construction. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Okay. We are running pretty late on time, but this is a really important issue so I wanted to ask a few questions related to sidewalks, and then ask my colleagues if they had more questions or if we were ready to move on to the next item. Let's ask a few questions related to sidewalks. So Robert, if you could first address the question related to -- with regard to this bond program, related to repair versus absent sidewalks. I think I understand that the interpretation is that this bond only applies to absent as opposed to repair, but help me understand what it is that we're reading, because that may be something that I missed when we were having our conversations about putting an item on the bond package. >> Sure. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> As you recall through the bond development process, we talked about the difference between capital renewal and mobility. Staff even brought forward what we called a blended alternative for the bond program, which had a mix of capital renewal, which would have been again, repair of sidewalks and street reconstruction, and mobility projects. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Council chose to go mobility only route, and so we interpreted that to mean that we don't -- that capital renewal is -- and as a matter of fact we were told that through the process. Capital renewal is really intended for the next funding cycle, which would be 2018. So rich will be bringing forward a request for a lot of street reconstruction and sidewalk repair in this next 2018 program as part of the capital renewal piece of the infrastructure that we will be obviously needing as we move forward. [4:32:03 PM] >> Kitchen: Well, one question related to that, and we don't have to answer it now, but I'm curious whether -- you know, the language that we put in the bond was of course -- and the ordinance, was of course our contract with the voters and we of course will be sticking with that, but I'm wondering is this -- do we need to go back and review that language and perhaps see if that, from a legal standpoint, if that's -- because I'm not certain -- I'm not certain when we voted on it if we were making that kind of distinction, you know, with regard to sidewalks. So I'll leave that to my fellow council members if that's - - I think it's first a legal question and second whether my fellow council members think it's something that we should discuss or not. Just for myself, I'm not remembering at that particular time making a distinction in my mind making repair of sidewalks and just new sidewalks, and that may just have been my miss. So I'll ask that question of legal and then we'll get a sense -- did you have a sense, mayor, about which we were -- were we really focusing on absent sidewalks as opposed to both repair and missing sidewalks, or do you have a thought on that? >> Mayor Adler: I don't think that we discussed that issue at all. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: What we did discuss was priority. >> Kitchen: Yeah, that's a different issue. >> Mayor Adler: But I would resolve this question that way. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Mayor Adler: , You know, if there was a sidewalk stretch that because of its location and its disrepair indicated that that was priority place, then I could see that falling within the ambit of what we've discussed. I mean, to me we said sidewalks. >> Kitchen: Right. >> Mayor Adler: Highest priority, and I'm not sure we had a conversation that wouldn't be on that. >> Kitchen: And my understanding right now, in terms of the projects that we have in front of us, the priorities that you all have gone through is for the absent sidewalks at this point. You haven't factored in repair as part of your prioritization. [4:34:06 PM] >> That's correct. >> Kitchen: Okay. Well, maybe we should just think about that some more. We'll follow up on that issue. So -- the related issue, and this is just -- this is an understanding issue for me and I'll follow up on it. I'm just bringing it up because I had two other council members ask me to bring it up, council member Garza, who couldn't be here, as well as council member troxclair, and that's just the prioritization matrix on page 20 indicates -- first let me just -- let me just say that there is no expectation on my part, and I don't think these other council members' either, that -- you know, that our districts would be anywhere near the level of need that some of these others are, but it's just difficult for me to understand why district 5 is only 2.6% of the need, and for council member Garza 3.8%, council member troxclair, .5%. So this is just -- we don't have to -- we're running out of time, we don't have to go into the detail right now. I'm just flagging it as something that we will be asking you some more details, so we can understand how the prioritization matrix ends up with that result. Not a -- this is not a request to change the use of the prioritization, it's just an understanding of how that applies on the ground. >> That question has come up enough, I think it might be worth us putting a memorandum together for council to explain how we came up with that in more detail, because it has come up quite a few times. >> Kitchen: I'm not talking about changing the matrix, just talking about why -- why it would have such a disparate impact across the city. >> Okay. >> Kitchen: All right. Just a few more questions but go ahead. >> I just need that because district 6 has a low percentage. >> Kitchen: Yeah, you may know why it is. >> So much of district of was recently constructed under rules that required more sidewalks. So even many of the sidewalks, especially in neighborhoods that are listed as missing, they're low priority and even many of the people who live there don't want them. [4:36:09 PM] So in some areas the recent nature of the build-out created sidewalks at a disproportionate rate to older neighborhoods. >> Kitchen: Well, that makes sense. For district 5, which I'm most familiar with, it's not quite the same. But anyway we'll have that conversation. So any other burning questions before we move on to the next item or -- I don't want to cut off the discussion if you all want to ask more questions. Thank you. Okay. Thank you all very much. This was very helpful. >> Sure. >> Kitchen: Pat? Okay. So our next item, and again we're going to move around a little bit because we're tight on time. I'd like to take up project connect next, which is item no. 6. So this is a briefing on project connect's phase 1 public involvement activities and corridor evaluation process. And let me just say that one of the reasons that I think it's important for the city to talk about this is because project connect is an evaluation for the capacity -- for the potential for high-capacity transit projects and is going -- is headed on a time frame that -- where decisions are going to be made moving from phase 1 to phase 2 in June by the cap metro board, and so there's been a lot of public input already, but I just want to make sure that our council members and our council has this on the radar screen in case there's any other ways that we need to be thinking about in terms of coordinating. So thank you for being here today, and give it to you. >> Ensure chairman kitchen, members of the committee, I'm (indiscernible) Long-range planning, capital metro. With me is Jackie, she's manager for community involvement. We're trying to respect your time. We know you are constrained, so I apologize if I go kind of fast, but please -- >> Kitchen: It's okay. >> -- Stop me anytime. A quick overview, what what are we doing? We're basically looking at project connect. [4:38:10 PM] Project connect is our regional vision plan. It was adopted in 2012 and as you can see in the chart, many, many different entities participated in the development of this plan. Today what are we doing? We are revisiting project connect. We are redefining our transit vision plan. Why? Because we still want to select new transit solutions for access into, out of and within central Austin. And so we have changed a little bit the strange that we had in the 2012 plan to better accommodate what the community has actually indicated they want to see in the plan. Some of the questions that we have had in the initial process with the community is they have questions about what is a high capacity transit, quickly, out of the fda definition transit, high capacity transit is an element that includes dedicated right-of-way, has high frequency, 50 minutes or less, and it is branded, and in this slide you have some images of some examples of successful high capacity transit in other cities. We are moving expeditiously because the community basically has lost their patience, and spending more -- >> Kitchen: Could I interrupt you for just a second? >> Absolutely. >> Kitchen: I wanted to announce that item no. 5 we're going to push to our June agenda so that our -- our staff on that -- that has to do with the transportation management center. So okay. Go back. >> As we were saying, our community has indicated that they are a little bit tired of all the planning that has been going on and they want to expedite the process. So this time we basically focus the process in compiling everything that has been done. Our process is basically simplified into three phases. Big ideas -- we are collecting all the information that other agencies have done. We ended with a large number of planning studies and corridor studies, and second phase is going to allow us to take the best corridor -- the best studies that we found during phase no. 1, to go more into detail, define the project, select the mode that is the right one for each one of those corridors, work with the community to be sure that we have their support on every step, and then phase no. 3 is really the biggest challenge that we see in the process, which is how do we pay for it. [4:40:36 PM] All of this is being done with a hefty public involvement process. We -- Jackie is going to talk a little bit more about everything that we have done so far. Phase no. 1, as I mentioned, we collected all that information and we ended with two buckets of studies: Projects, enhancement projects and investment corridors. And the investment of these two buckets we show in this slide. An investment corridor is basically an asset we already have, a roadway or corridor that can support high capacity transit, and normally they are high investments. It takes a little bit of time for them to be implemented, five to ten years, and the purpose is really based on the -- on the strategy that we define is that again, to take everything that everybody has done in the past, we went actually 25 years into the past and looked at all the corridors, and define what are the best solutions. Within the investment corridors we defined three categories based on everything that everybody has done. We found that there are commuter corridors, and those are the ones that you see on the (indiscernible) Line, and the background that we are using here is everything that has been done with connections 2025 and what is being proposed in our bus system, is a high high frequency bus system, and then the next category we found that there are connector corridors that are basically addressing the focal area of the region, and that is specifically the city of Austin, and then within the city of Austin we also found another type of movement, and we call those the connector corridors. All of these categories are high-investment opportunities for transit. Moving with the other bucket on all the other studies that we found, these are projects that were basically focused on improving existing services that capital metro has. Metro red line, metrorapid, metro express and mobility hubs, and there are several categories of those. [4:42:43 PM] I won't get into detail, but going back to the purpose is these are specific projects that will enhance how we today are providing the service to the community. The outcome of project connect is pretty clear. We want to have a set of projects under the commuter category. We want to have a set of projects on the connectors category, set of projects under the circulators, and the same thing for each one of the services that capital metro has. The rail, local commuters and local mobility hubs. The phase one evaluation process, we simplified this process because we know that the community wants to quickly understand what we are doing. They want transparency and they want to be sure that they feel comfortable how this process is being done. We have basically the ten column analysis, which is based on a lot of statistical data, a lot of analysis and a lot of opportunities based on each one of the corridors and then we have the qualitative analysis. What it is is trying to find the analysis between the technical data-driven process, which is very close to fta and what the community prefers. If you remember in 2014 proposition one based on the technical analysis the corridor that was being proposed was the best one based on fda criteria. However, the community is not necessarily in support of it. And that is one of the reasons that we think that proposition failed. So we want to be sure that the community understands this process. This equalizer chart has helped us to really educate the community how the evaluation process works. The technical team works on the evaluation process and basically defined three different tiers. Project doing very well on tier no. 1. Some of them are doing okay, tier no. 2 and some of them aren't doing so well on tier 3, but with -- on the -- the community has an opportunity to look at projects that they want to see and they feel very, very strong about these projects need to be part of the phase no. 2 development. [4:44:48 PM] They have the opportunity to move the bar and put them on tier no. 1 and actually it is happening. I don't want to get too much into detail, but our technical analysis is hefty on a lot of data and these are some of the criteria that we have. We are staying very close to that process, fta, so that we can actually move forward when the funding opportunity comes, and then owe the results we had of the technical analysis, quickly to give you an idea where we are, on the commuter corridors we have I 34 is scoring pretty high, followed by the red line basically completing the project. There is an airport line, a green line, and union pacific and as you can see two of them made it to the tier no. 1 and the other ones are following closely on tier no. 2 based on the technical analysis. On the connectors we have a longer list, almost 19 corridors were identified on all the previous studies, and as you can see we have almost, I think, nine corridors that actually are in tier no. 1, and the community has really looked at this very closely and they are working, and -- working in our engagement tool, Jackie is going to explain to you a little bit how we are getting the community input, some of the examples. Again, I mentioned the connector list is pretty hard. These are the second and third tier projects and again that doesn't mean these projects are being left behind. If the community wants to see them moving forward to the next phase we will have the opportunity to do that based on the results of the qualitative analysis. On the circulators we have four corridors, and two of them are in tier no. 1, that is downtown and red river circulator. We haven't designed the routes. We are just talking about kind of a spot in the grid, but those are the areas of the community we're pretty interested in having something that allowed for these type of trips. Political analysis quickly, we are looking on the community support, what is what they want. We want to have regional equity. [4:46:49 PM] What are the funding opportunities. Are there private sector opportunities, is there state or federal money available for these projects and then there are a lot of special considerations we are putting together and where the community has the opportunity to participate. Building consensus, councilwoman kitchen, you had this kitchen in one of our capital metro meetings. This is what we -- if we were to present a system map today with the results that we have, this would be the map, the solid lines are the tier 1 projects, but based on the qualitative analysis, the dotted lines that now appear in the process are all the projects that the community has the opportunity to revisit and give us more information, and they can move actually to tier no. 1. I'm going to talk -- I'm going to let Jackie talk a little bit about what we have done with public involvement. Very exciting process. >> Thank you, Javier. So many of you attended our event at the Bob bullock museum. First of all we've been fortunate enough to partner with the Austin strategic mobility plan, and it always helps when you combine efforts in public involvement, because people get so tired of coming out to public events and public meetings, not to mention they're not sure that there's a separation between this and that so we're very fortunate to be able to coordinate with the city on our public involvement efforts and we did so at our March 4 event, we called it traffic jam. Many of you were there. We had 230 people in attendance on a very rainy Saturday morning, which was great, but -- and we did have 29 zip codes represented, which is always important, geographic representation. However, you know, we recognize that that is just the tippy tip of the iceberg. The public event is just a very small portion of public involvement effort, and it, as you know, can be an ever evolving and very messy process to try to get input from people who are more difficult to reach. So we are using high touch and high tech to do that. [4:48:50 PM] The high touch is just very granular. We're going out to communities in the region. As you know, it's a regional approach so that means outlying communities. We're going to the district town halls. We had a very successful one at council member Flannigan's district. We're trying to reach out to hard to reach communities. That can be very challenging. They don't have a lot of time to be able to participate. Sometimes there is language barriers. To that end we have an on-line survey available, and we have over 2500 responses so far, and we still have another month, a little bit less than a month to go, so we feel pretty good about the response to that on-line survey. But additionally, we have to do more. So we're doing at stop -- we'll do some at top outreach. We're going to events where people are already gathered. We were at dragon boat festival last week. My team is literally three to four nights a week and every weekend going out hitting the pavement and trying to talk to people. The last thing we want is for people to feel like they were not asked, or were not involved. As you know, ultimately somebody will say that, there's no way that we can reach everybody, but we're doing our best to try and get all the voices heard. So I mentioned we have -- this is actually dated. We have at this time 1500 on-line service. We have over 2500 now. We've engaged probably closer to 2300 people now through more than 50 events in the region, and we're also continuing one-on-one meetings at the project connect office. Our technical team is wonderful. You don't always get technical people who are interested in public involvement. It's not necessarily their comfort zone. We're very lucky that our planning team is -- has an open-door policy at the office, and so anybody that has a question that needs further clarification or, you know, some of this is quite complex and requires a conversation one-on-one, and they're always willing to do that. I've been coordinating meetings since we started this process nine months ago, so that's been very helpful. [4:50:56 PM] >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Renteria: Following your request about how the team is -- would like to endorse each one of the decisions during the process, we developed this particular slide trying to present to you a preliminary approach. Last week actually we presented the results of both analysis, the (indiscernible) And the qualitative analysis were very close to the results of find of phase no. 1, moving forward to phase no. 2. We are excited about the results. I don't think there are any major surprises. I think there are big challenges in how we are going to be able to put all these corridors and all this infrastructure and how we're going to pay for it, but I think the community so far, you know, every time they have a question we've been able to sit down and work out the details and come up with good, good answers and good solutions and good plans for the future as far as new ideas and how to move forward. So we presented that information to the tac and to the community advisory group. We are answering questions. We are ready on next Friday, a week from Friday on the 12th to present the results to capital metro board. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Through the two committees that we have on Friday. And from that point we have basically a month in where we are going to be -- continue one-on-one meetings with whoever wants us to present the plan, receive comments. We are going to focus on the -- we're partners agencies, the ctr (indiscernible) City of Austin transportation department, to really present the results, go over all the information. I'm pretty excited about some of the questions on the previous presentation, because, in fact, we are working very hard with your bond program. We actually have now Mike involved in the advisory group. We are working with the Austin transportation mobility plan very closely, so there is a lot of coordination, and that is precisely a response to some of the biggest criticism that we are hear at the beginning of launching the process, that the community was not excited about all these agencies working on trying to achieve one goal. [4:53:14 PM] The criticism that we received is that it looked like we don't know how to work together. So we are actually paying a lot of attention. We want to show a plan that actually is well coordinated that has all the other information in place and that really reflects what the community wants to see at the end, not only just from the transit component but everything that the city is doing in regards to other investments that are related to transportation. After that month, our engagement tool will continue to be open. It will continued to be open until may 30, and then on June 22 we are looking for the endorsement from capital metro to move forward to phase no. 2. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> And I believe that is my last slide. >> Kitchen: Just to clarify on that June 22 meeting at cap metro meeting, moving forward to phase 2 would be which -- you know, which -- routes is not the right word, but, you know, which of these -- >> What corridors. >> Kitchen: Which corridors were moving forward to the next level of analysis. >> That is correct. >> Kitchen: Okay. So that's a key decision point in this whole process, and one at which we need to make sure that the public is engaged and is, you know, with us -- you know, with the program still in terms of moving forward with that. So do we have questions? Anyone have any questions? No? >> I just wanted to clarify in the slides that quantitative analysis is your analysis of -- from the quantitative -- >> The quantitative analysis -- >> It's not the community's rankings, correct? >> Correct. >> I did the survey the other day and I thought it was quite a different ranking for some of them. >> Okay. >> Alter: But I may be remembering it wrong. I just wanted to be sure that it wasn't both of them on the same sheet. >> The qualitative analysis has several components. >> Alter: Okay. >> One of them is community support, and the survey is targeted to look at how -- what is the desire of the community to work with the specific corridors. [4:55:19 PM] It's not the entire process with the community, but it's just one particular way that we can actually get specific answers on particular corridors from the community perspective. >> Alter: Great. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Okay. So has there been any kind of -- I mean, you're doing a lot of outreach, and 2500 responses is useful. I think that the problem that -- you know, I keep remembering the problem that we -- the city had in terms of not approving the last -- the last round for rail. So top of mind for me is how to make sure that we are, you know, hand in glove with what the community is interested in and will support. So I'm wondering if there's been any type of broader survey done across the community, like where, you know, you know, it's like a telephone survey or some kind of survey like that that would help inform the actions that are taken in terms of moving forward with particular corridors. >> Not at this time. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> That is something we could consider for the future phases as we get closer. The challenge in phase 1 has been that it's sort of this amorphous identifying of corridors is not exactly very tangible for people. >> Kitchen: That's true. >> And it's also a lot of corridors to consider. >> Kitchen: That's right. >> Not probably the best fodder for a telephone survey, but as we get closer to implementation, funding mode, certainly will be something that people will be excited to participate in that discussion. That's something we could definitely consider. >> Kitchen: Well, let me ask you this, then. In going from phase 1 to phase 2, the list of corridors for phase 2, will that list be further narrowed down as part of the later phases or is that the list of corridors that -- >> That is the list to initiate phase no. 2. Phase no. 2 will continue to redefine those corridors. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> And at the end, really the bottom line is going to be what is the appetite of the community to fund those corridors, and so the phase approach will be answered, but the answer is yes, the -- it will continue to be redefined. [4:57:36 PM] >> Kitchen: Well, I guess what I'm asking, the list that you start phase 2 with, is the thinking is that that list will be narrowed down or is that the list that will define what the -- what the program is, you'll still have to analyze what modes and that sort of thing, but is that the intent, is that that is the list? >> That is correct. That is the list, as the team is recommending to move forward for further analysis. >> Kitchen: Okay. Well then I would just like to think about -- I'm just throwing out a question right now. I'm just trying to think about, is there -- is there any additional effort that could be made right now over and above what you all have already done to help us understand that that -- that mapping is something that can be supported by the community? So it's just something that we can talk about further, but -- >> There's always more that we can do. >> Kitchen: I know, I mean, you've done a great deal of effort. >> I know, and we recognize -- we want to push the envelope and keep pushing it as far as we can to get as much input as we can, because we recognize that's going to be critical further down the line for us. >> Following with the answer, I think Friday when we present the results of phase no. 1. >>> Yeah. >> I think it's going to be very, very important in the next month before the June 22 board meeting, capital metro, to really communicate the results of phase 1 to the entire community. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> They will have a pretty good idea about what the system -- the system plan may look in the future. That's an opportunity for them to really give us input. >> Kitchen: Okay. Right. And I think it will be important for the city of Austin to weigh in and council members to weigh in in terms of what we're feeling like our -- our communities are interested in supporting. So -- okay. Go ahead. >> And just to add to that, I think it's important that we are having a system conversation and not a next project conversation. >> Absolutely. >> I think that's a lot of where I was frustrated in the 2014 process, is we only seemed to be talking about the next thing and no one could clearly communicate where the thing was going to go after that. [4:59:45 PM] >> Absolutely. >> So that's one of the primary things I'm looking for. >> Absolutely. >> To that end, I think it might be useful to think about when we do have the phase one results and what's going to go forward with cap metro, to have a briefing early in June for the council, either in work session or in council, so more people will be exposed to it at that point, and the media hopefully at that point will focus in as well. >> Kitchen: I think that's a good idea. I think that would be really important, because that will give the opportunity for all the council members to, you know -- for us to focus their attention, this is the map. So tell us what you think, tell us what your constituents think, reach out to your constituents. I think that might be a helpful feedback. >> Absolutely. >> Kitchen: Okay. Well, we'll work with you and the mayor's office to get that. >> Thank you very much. >> Kitchen: Okay. Any other questions on this? Okay. So, thank you very much. All right. So now, we are at our end time of 5:00, so I have to ask my fellow council members whether we want to postpone -- I think that we have -- we've already postponed item number 5, about the transportation management center. The only other thing we haven't dealt with, which is the -- has to do with the item related to -- it's item number 3, related to outcome metrics and targets. So, I know that our staff was going to be talking to us more in terms of timeline for that than actual metrics. So do you all have another ten, 15 minutes? Seven minutes. Okay. [5:01:47 PM] You've got seven minutes. >> We'll do our best. So, council members, the Austin communication administration is working on three projects that will revolve around developing metrics for evaluating mobility. We've clearly heard you. There's, of course, the 2016 bond, the Austin strategic mobility plan, and the mobility elements of the council's strategic plan. You might imagine that there might be different types of evaluation criteria at each level, but they'll all be coordinated as they go forward. So we think as part of these efforts, we anticipate redefining how we talk about mobility metrics and measuring mobility characteristics. I think it's really exciting that the U.S. Department of transportation has already led this way. They're leading toward much a much more safety oriented approach, and so we'll be following that. Annick is going to be talking about the coordination between those three efforts and the opportunity to look at metrics or evaluation criteria as we go forward. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Yeah. So starting with your council's strategic plan, we've been working with Ms. Olivares and the office of performance management. We're aware of your outcomes, one of which is mobility, for which metrics are being discussed and developed with regards to your outcomes. There's the 2016 bond and the Austin strategic mobility plan that are also developing metrics, and so this presentation is going to focus on the timeline for the development of coordinated mobility metrics to support these three initiatives. We're going to start with the Austin strategic mobility plan, focusing on -- and there's a lot going on on this slide, but the green is our project phasing. The blue on the top is public engagement that's going to occur with each phase, but the Orange box that shows when they're going to be ready to come to a touch point on council in August. [5:03:59 PM] Up at the top, you see a small star. You are here. We are still into public engagement right now. Many of you know that, you helped us develop our public engagement plan. We're focused right now on, as Jackie mentioned, historically underserved communities and hearing those voices to complement traffic jam and to complement mobility talks, which was the real launch, first early stages of the Austin strategic mobility plan. We're developing our metrics around these eight mobility considerations that will be used to evaluate our transportation scenarios that we move into when we start doing our modeling and scenario planning. When we come back in August, we'll be able to share the results of prioritization of these considerations with you, and draft associated metrics that support what we believe we should prioritize in our scenarios with regards to what we've been hearing in our own professional transportation planning judgment. It's important to note that the mobility considerations that we're working with right now with the public are aligned with the strategic outcomes in your council's strategic plan, which will allow for coordinated metrics that are meaningful to both processes. So that's good news as we are working through coordinating between the bond program office of performance management and the strategic mobility plan team. You just went through a 2016 bond overview, so I'm not going to spend too much time here, but they are also, of course, coordinating metrics that will have a touch point with council, so I'm going to move right to the timeline. Which is focused on what those touch points will be. So office of performance management is currently working through, that's what they're doing, working on metrics, so that's an ongoing process for the strategic mobility plan. We will have a touch point in August. We're right now working with our consultant team, getting all that engagement and figuring out what that means to what we want to measure. [5:06:05 PM] We'll be coming back to you. And then, of course, the bond program, we'll be coordinating with them and they'll be coming to you in October with their metrics. It's important to note as we end, how we're going about this process, that we are guided by imagine Austin. Imagine Austin has complete community indicators that we're using as a base. All three of these programs are looking to imagine Austin. It's our comprehensive plan as a starting point. As we consider what we need to be doing with regards to mobility. And that's it. >> Kitchen: Okay. Council member alter, before you have to leave, do you have any questions? >> Alter: I was just wondering what falls under sustainability. It looks like it's kind of capturing the environmental, but I was trying to understand what sort of metrics might fall under that? >> You know, I think our profession measures sustainability in a lot of different ways. Do people have a resiliency in the way they can travel or they, you know, sequester to a single mode of travel? But then also, what are the investments necessary to maintain those different modes of travel? You know, it's a common misperception that roads are free, but they come with a huge price tag that comes every ten to 20 years, and so -- they haven't developed the metrics yet, but that's what I think sustainability includes, not just environment, but also the sustainability of the investments that we make. >> Alter: Will it also include environment then? What you just said makes perfect sense. But I was trying to understand where -- >> The environment is part of this, absolutely, yes. >> Yeah, absolutely. We're considering the community climate plan and the other adopted policies as we're looking through the existing policies, and, of course, there's air quality metrics that already exist and other environmental metrics that we're considering at this point. [5:08:09 PM] >> Alter: Great. I'm looking forward to it. >> Kitchen: Do you have a question? >> Flannigan: The idea that we need to be coordinating our planning efforts with codenext and these other plans is very critical. It's something that my community is very frustrated about because I think many areas feel that these things have never happened at the same time, and they're all magically, all weirdly happening this year, so it is kind of an exciting time. Also I'm sure a scary time for staff, knowing that all these things are happening at the same time. What I think would be useful for the community is to start to see trickle into those presentations where the overlaps occur. I think the community would appreciate that when we talking about place making, that there's an element of planning involved in that, it's not just transportation laying down concrete or pavement, there's also a planning component to that. I think that would be a very useful exercise, and I think as we start -- as the council starts to develop metrics, it will daylight for everyone that a metric about X actually involves three or four departments doing the right thing, and that's going to be an interesting conversation as we go from indicator to metrics to program objectives. >> One of the ways we hope to do that is as we start to look for new metrics, I think we're applying new ground here, by the way, that cross over to multiple criteria. So, you know, there ought to be a health metric within transportation that's not just how many fatalities do we reduce. There's other types of health that we can think about. It makes it for a much more sophisticated discussion. I look forward to that because I think again mobility on behalf of the city is doing a good job, but we often get slammed with, well, why is traffic still bad? Because we're a really red-hot community in terms of economics, so we do need a new way to talk about this, so that's the opportunity here. [5:10:09 PM] >> Kitchen: I wanted to ask a question on -- let's see. The slide that has the different types of metrics. Commuter delay, affordability, innovation. So I wanted to make sure that we're aligning -- or just actually ask a question. You know, at the strategic retreat, what we did with mobility as our outcome area, we also as a council came up with a couple of different indicator areas. Not that -- those are not cast in stone at the moment, but I just want to make sure that we're thinking of the same things. We either need to perhaps reword the indicators that are under mobility for the strategic plan to align more with the asmp ones, because what we have under the strategic plan at that retreat, we talked about indicators under mobility falling into a couple of categories. One of them means system efficiency and congestion. The second one being transportation cost. The third one, accessibility to inequity of transportation options. The fourth one safety. And the fifth one, condition of infrastructure. Now, my guess is that all of those things are already included, but just perhaps called something else. Would that be safe to say? >> Yeah, we're considering all of those things as we're looking at the universe of metrics that makes sense with the strategic mobility plan, and we'll be coordinating with Ms. Olivares as we move forward. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> And so there will be a feedback loop before any of this is finalized. >> Kitchen: Okay. Well, those were the buckets that we came out of the retreat with. It may be that those buckets need some changes as you think about your metrics for the asmp and the bond and that sort of thing. I think that there was particular emphasis -- well, throughout, when we talked about equity a lot, that we wanted to make sure that equity was addressed throughout all of our [5:12:13 PM] -- you know, all of our outcomes. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Kitchen: All right. So I think I'm understanding that the timeframe is maybe August is the next touch point. Did I understand that right? >> Yes. The Austin strategic mobility plan will be sometime in August. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Yes. >> Kitchen: So does it make sense -- those are your metrics for the asmp, and then metrics for the bond. I'm sure you're involved with the council strategic planning process. So do you know how all of these timelines relate to that in terms of looking at metrics? Maybe Robert does. >> Annick is being too humble. She's on that team. >> Kitchen: Okay. She is that team, right? >> Yes. So this is the commonality you see in all three of those. We're going to ensure that those metrics don't just say something differently. They're going to say the same thing. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> So we want to make sure that all three of those efforts. The corridor plan, you've given us some different metrics with the voters, but we can make those mesh with the ones that will develop in the strategic outcomes that you all have developed and for the corridor program, and for the smp. So perfect storm, like you said, but it's a wonderful opportunity to make sure these all coordinate and we're rolling in the same direction. So we're going to ensure that that happens. The first touch point is August in asmp. I think that really should be the thing that drives everything else anyway. This is a mini imagine Austin for mobility. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> So we should be doing that before we do strategic outcomes and before we do the corridor program, and luckily, our coincidentally, that comes out first. So everything will be driven by that, the asmp, and we'll make sure all those will line up that way. >> Kitchen: Okay. So somewhere in that timeline, it will be a good time for us to have a conversation with you guys about the metrics then. [5:14:14 PM] Okay. That sounds good. All right. That was fast. That's very helpful. >> They've been at it for a while. [ Laughter ] >> Kitchen: Okay. >> You haven't known the strategic outcome as long as they've been at it. >> Kitchen: That's right. You have. All right. Do you have any more questions? Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Kitchen: So, I think we're ready to adjourn, unless there's anything else you have. All right. Thank you all.