Mobility Committee Meeting Transcript – 2/13/2020 Title: City of Austin Channel: 6 - COAUS Recorded On: 2/13/2020 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 2/13/2020 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [1:01:06 PM] >> Kitchen: Good afternoon, everyone, I'm Ann kitchen and have my hat on as chair of the mobility committee. I know we'll have others coming, but we'll get started. I'm pleased to welcome to this meeting our friends from cap metro. Do you want to call the cap metro. >> Today is February the 13th and our time is 12:00 and I'll call this meeting -- 1:02 and I'll call this meeting of the cap metro board to open. I will say publicly that I've been to the dent activity so if I start slobbering, if someone will let me know. Thank you. >> Kitchen: So I think we first have -- we'll wait on the approval of minutes. [1:02:07 PM] Let's see, we have -- yeah, I guess we can go ahead and approve the minutes. Can I get a motion to approve the minutes? Mayor pro tem. Second? Councilmember Ellis. Okay. Minutes are approved. I'm going to go to citizens communication. I'll go to Michael Schneider first. And this is the general citizens communication as -- we have a couple of folks that will be speaking on specific items later. But Michael Schneider, do you want to go first? I'm sorry, come on up. >> I apologize, my first time. >> That's all right. You can sit right there. >> Hello. Thanks for having me. >> Ellis: You may need to turn that microphone on. >> Is it on? Hello. Thanks for having me. My name is Michael Schneider. I live and work in rosedale. This may be a relatively [1:03:09 PM] small item, but nonetheless I wanted to be an advocate for my community. I have a question about particularly the pedestrian walk signal at 40th and north Lamar. I cross that intersection a whole lot going over to central market. And the pedestrian walk signal doesn't show the walk signal unless the button is pressed on the pole there. Unfortunately, this often times leads to people crossing the street against the walk signal. And I've noticed the intersections downtown are not like this. They show the pedestrian walk signal regardless of whether the button is pushed. I'm assuming this is because of traffic studies that were done at some point in time examining the flow of pedestrian traffic and intersections. And I'm curious if whatever [1:04:14 PM] studies or whatnot that were done, I'm curious if they're out of date. The rosedale and that area is -- seems like the population is going up a whole lot. There's a lot of pedestrian traffic, particularly on that intersection. See, I was just curious why and if that would be able to be changed. >> Kitchen: Okay. Did you want to speak? >> Alter: Yes. Thank you for coming down. My name is councilmember alter and I represent that area or -- >> What was your name? >> Alter: I'm Alison alter and I represent district 10, so probably your representative. I'll be happy to connect you up with one of the traffic engineers. I think it is a left turn light and so if they leave it on then they can't turn left fanned there's no one there they want to make the flow of traffic go would be my guess of what's going on. But if you call my office we can connect you up on the traffic engineer and we can see if there are other ways to address your concerns [1:05:15 PM] there for being able to cross. I know it does take a long time at that light if you wait. >> Kitchen: Thank you for coming. >> Next we have Mike Burnette. >> Always a pleasure to appear before the I am mobility committee otherwise known as the group gridlock guarantee. Keeping with normal I'll ask two questions this morning that I would like attendances to. The first one is obviously why should we raise our taxes to raise our homes? Didn't bother to go to the earlier meeting because I believe it's a foregone conclusion that, what's her name -- anyway, our latest code Rex is going to come through and pretty much demolish our communities to the south. The little one is a little more important question and [1:06:18 PM] that being that Ms. Kitchen, eight years ago you and I had a conversation at wheatsville co-op and Lamar and the topic of conversation of what was to do with the heroin problem in the area. And unfortunately it took two murders before APD finally decided they would intercede and deal with the problem. Obviously Johnson elementary there right there has been a subject of concern for a substantial period of time. We've heard all sorts of various commitments to clean up some of the problems down there. In the past couple of months I've had three medical appointments there at pack saddle. The first one was interrupted by a heroin save. That one was just a minor delay. The second one was interrupted by a heroin save where the individual was a bit miffed about being saved and decided to throw chairs around the waiting room at the elderly. And no we know there's a problem down there and we know it's getting worse. We know you've made it [1:07:19 PM] worse. And obviously with the city's -- facilities sitting right there at that corner, the elementary school and the sunrise church, what we'd like to know is what are you going to do to clean the mess up? >> Kitchen: Mr. Burnet, this is the mobility kitchen and -- >> I understand,, and I understand you want to spend billions of dollars. This is my floor, dear. Thank you for the standing. With all due respect. You're asking us to spend billions upon billions of dollars to transfer and move this material all over town. So I'd like to know what you're going to do to try to get that undercontrol before you come back in, tear down our homes and decide that it's acceptable to spread heroin throughout our community. Thank you for your time this morning. I am really not looking for redirect and I yield the floor. >> Kitchen: I'll be happy to talk with you afterwards if you would like to talk to my staff. >> Microphone microphone. [1:08:21 PM] >> [Inaudible]. >> What I'd like to do now is talk with the project connect item. We understand that there are folks here to speak with us that are on a time schedule. So we'll go ahead and take the project connect peer review report first and then we'll go back to our regular schedule with the mobility bond corridor, construction and the transportation needs. So I do have two speakers related to the project connect connect item. The first one is Paula Kaufmann and then Sarah Campbell after that. >> Garza: Chair, it's my understanding that the presentation is about an hour? I actually have to leave at about 2:05. And then I'm just wondering if we want staff sitting around for an hour and we might not even get to those two items. >> Kitchen: We have to get to all three items. [1:09:21 PM] We've asked the presentation to be limited so that we can get to all three items. So we planned to be able to address all three items. >> Garza: Okay. Well, I may make a motion to postpone those once councilmember Flannigan gets there. >> Kitchen: Well, the reason for having all three items is because of the connection between -- we wanted to spend this time talking about the transportation system as a whole and how it works together between -- we've had a lot of conversation about the importance of the project connect pieces of this, but we've also talked about in order for our community as a whole to address transportation we need to be understanding how we're addressing all of the community. And so that's why we wanted to have this conversation today so that people could start to understand that when we talk about project connect we're also talking about park and rides and sidewalks and other kinds of things. >> Garza: I understand all that. I understand all that. We have an hour window here [1:10:22 PM] and I was trying to not have staff sitting here for an hour if we weren't able to get to their item. >> Kitchen: Well, you can make a motion if you like. I wish you had talked to me about that ahead of time. Okay. So let's go ahead with project connect. First, Paula, did you want to speak? >> Is it working? I serve as mobility chair of the south river city citizens of about 5,000 households, as well as chair of the land development code revision ad hoc committee. We pose our owe bodies based on walk act and when we choose to drive we won't be isolated. This threatens it by making walk act less safe, removing heritage trees and access to transit, which is no longer useful. Our neighbors who work downtown can no longer take a bus because the great increase in housing capacity allowed before and increase in transit capacity was functioning. The city cannot allow developers to harm the living standards of those of us in the urban core. [1:11:23 PM] The developers should invest in transit upgrades needed to accommodate their increased capacity. However, by allowing by-right greater capacity in the proposed code, the city loses its bargaining power to require community benefits in exchange for allowing more units, thus more profit. For example, if endeavor wants to build 600 units, but only 200 are allowed by code they must contribute towards the five billion dollar project connect sufficiently to accommodate three times the car trips. Endeavor benefits as well, people pay more rent for apartments with greater transit. I've watched the video of cap metro's recent meeting with council. I saw the gleam in councilmember Flannigan's eye as a subway was proposed. I too advocate subways. You can accurately estimate the amount of time it takes to get across time and we'll have to build them one day anyway. If the oil and gas industry can build a pipeline from west Texas to the coast to the lng terminals, they can [1:12:26 PM] dig a subway for the Orange line. However, it's not ethical to charge all residents through bonds for upgrades that benefit the developers. I've seen the program for Rainey street where the developers pay for transit benefits. I know it can be done. But until a better transit is functioning, the city must provide affordable parking options for the workforce. They are forced to park in our neighborhood because of greedy parking stations and meters which cost our taxpayers $10,000 each. A parking enforcement officer costs about $40,000 a year, plus fringes. Go ahead and enforce the 2 hour parking laws in place but don't spend the money for meters and push the workforce further south. Show compassion to our lower income workforce and show that those who profit from their toil pay for the transit options needed to improve their quality of life. I lived in seven years in [1:13:27 PM] Austria without a car. It's not the distance, it's the heat. Don't expect us to walk far in July. Even Spencer cronk said one of his biggest regrets was asking his husband to walk seven blocks in July in Austin. Subways will keep you out of the sun. >> Thank you. Our last speaker is Sarah Campbell. Is Sarah here? No? Then we will start with our presentation. >> Employ afternoon, chair kitchen, chair cooper, city councilmembers and members of the cap metro board of directors. [1:14:27 PM] We're fortunate in our industry to go ahead and have an association, afta, that provides a service through expertise from individuals from around the country on other systems to come into a peer review. We've been able to go ahead and have that sponsored and conducted over the last few weeks to be able to get that outside look from the experts. It has been a completely transparent process. We've gone through providing all the documentation, the reports, the simulations for them to go ahead and take a look at . To come back with what they believe is a look at the way that we have the program set up, the way that we've put together the reports, the simulations. So that we've got a way that they've looked at the ridership, the capital, the operating. So that we've got something that is that transparent, that review and done by the industry experts. Seated second over from my right is Jeff Hyatt. Jeff is the vice-president for technical services and [1:15:30 PM] innovation with afta. I'd like for him to take the next portion of this with apta and the members of the committee. >> Good afternoon, thank you for allowing us to come and talk to you all and on behalf of apta, I'm happy to be here to just quickly tell you about the peer review process so you have an understanding of what it is. What a peer review is is a well established process that is a service that apta provides our members, capital metro is a member of apta, and what that allows us to do is bring in industry peers who are able to come in and take a look at in this particular case an end overview of project connect. [1:16:30 PM] The panelists that come in as you can see on the screen come from different transit agencies and I'll briefly give you the background of the panelists who are not here to you do have an understanding of their experience and what they do in their daily roles. The first panelist, Wolfe grott is the director of capital and service director for valley metro in Phoenix. And responsible for for rail and bus facility planning, construction, and he oversees their transit service plan and he has been in the industry for over 23 years. Another panelist that came in for this review is Mr. Tim Mackay, who is with Dallas area rapid transit up the road in Dallas. He heads the growth and regional development project and oversees many different [1:17:30 PM] areas. Street car systems, engineering, capital program support, which also includes safety security certification. So his job is very narrow, as you can see. But he also brings to the industry over 30 years of experience, and at Dallas and dart he has let four billion dollars in capital projects, including one billion dollars in their light rail project for that agency. Another annualest, Adam Strutynski is an engineer in Washington. He has been in the industry for over 35 years where he has managed controls for agencies and organizations throughout the industry. And in just a moment I will have our final panelist, Roberto Trevino, introduce himself and give you his experience. But there's a combined experience of over 130 years between these analysts to come in and take a look at [1:18:33 PM] this project. Just -- real quickly, the overview of what the scope of the project was to look at ridership projections, cost estimates, operating and maintenance estimates. We did this by reviewing the methodology that capital metro has used in developing this project plan. So looking at the entire system with the use of focus in those areas. Before I pass it over to Mr. Trevino, I would like to say that there's one portion about the tunnel aspect of this project. And Mr. Mackay and Mr. Strutynski, who are not here, are the tunnel experts. Both of them having developed or in construction for tunnels in both of their organizations. So Mr. Trevino will quickly go over that, but I want you to be aware that their experience and overview in looking at the unit costs were able to provide some recommendations in the [1:19:34 PM] tunneling as well. The final outcome of a peer review process is a report, and I believe you will be given access to that report after this. I'm going to pass it over to Mr. Trevino with respect to time and he will give a little bit more of the project. >> Hello, I'm Roberto Trevino, executive vice-president from Houston, Texas. I have rail experience. Lrt construction closeout experience in 2015. In 2016 or late 2015 also I led the implementation phase of the new bus New York, which was the first large scale redesign of bus routes, which led to tremendous ridership growth that is a trend in the industry now. And recently we -- I led the planning effort, which led to a successful referendum this past November with 68% of the voters approving a $7.5 billion plan over the [1:20:34 PM] next 20 years. So we just recently went through a process similar to what cap metro is going through right now. With that I'll start off with the opening comments. And I speak for the panel, not just for myself, in saying that we were very impressed as a technical panel with the -- with the preparedness, the expertise that cap metro had on staff. The documentation that was given to us was given in an orderly manner. Everything was technically prepared and it was done in a very, very professional manner. The transparency is going to lead a lot going forward with the transparency to the panel. We saw that same self of transparency to the public. With having that project connect office right off a major thoroughfare in Austin and having all that public input coming in and all that traffic coming through is only going help as you progress through this process. And build trust going forward. [1:21:37 PM] What the panel also saw was a great plan with the system plan. It's not just the high capacity transit corridors that you deliver. You really deliver a toolbox of transit that meets several needs and project connect has that. The few panel felt comfortable that it included a wide variety of mix to address a wide variety of needs through the capital metro region. One thing we also as a group agreed upon is that the analysis was very thorough. We had very technically qualified team members on staff and technically qualified firms on staff helping the staff succeed and the plan was very thorough and done very well. Everything we met, everything that we went through, operation, maintenance costs, ridership, capital costs, was done in line with industry standards. There was nothing that did not comply or did not follow industry standard. And more importantly, not only did it follow industry standard, but it fell closely in line with the fta process that will only be [1:22:37 PM] beneficial going forward as you start formulating these projects. There will be a partner, a funding partner in this, and the federal transit administration as we saw in documentation is because staff is so well experienced they packaged it in line with that process where it's headed. So the panel was very impressed with methodology which everything was put together. So -- for this level of design, as we toured the lines and we heard from feedback from staff, it seemed that because of the transparency there had been really good communication with -- especially with the city of Austin, but with other major stakeholders as you progress with this program, that communication is going to be very key in a successful implementation of a program. As we mentioned before as far as lining up with some of the documentation the panel received, the cost estimates were provided to [1:23:38 PM] the panel in the fta's approved standard categories for cost estimation. So what that means is all the cost estimation that was done by the team is already in line to get federal funding. It's already in that methodology. It's not something that you estimated and you have to change in future. It's already in that structure. National transit database data was used, which is -- every transit agency has to submit the ridership data to fta. That was used for a lot of benchmarks in the estimation, which is really sound and what most people, almost all the industry does. And then the utilization of multiple consultants is really good. Not only was the team qualified and technically qualify, but they surrounded themselves with three very good firms. As we looked at the roster of firms helping in this program, they were probably -- some of the top five engineering firms, you have three here helping with project connect. So not only do you have talent internal, but you [1:24:38 PM] have external talent supporting that, which only builds a really firm, solid foundation for the program. So as we go to -- the first thing we looked at was ridership. So the ridership was developed using a stops program that is -- that was developed for fta, so that way it can compare project. Project connect or any project that comes out of project connect if it goes for federal funds it's going to be rated against other projects in the country. Stops is a program that determines ridership. What we as a panel felt is the ridership estimations to do should be considered as a minimum ridership. Stops, while it is developed for fta and is used, it has some limitations and the limitations are it has trouble quantifying special trip generators. As Austin or the greater regional Austin has, a lot of special events. South by southwest is a big [1:25:38 PM] event that will generate tremendous ridership. There are football games here that gain tremendous ridership. The ridership projections that the panel reviewed, we strongly felt that that was a minimum. So what we do want to ensure that going forward as you increase ridership you have to be cognizant, and at that level of design it's fine, just going forward you have to prepare for the special generators. As your rides increases your capital costs for these special events may also increase, but that is for detailed design as you go forward. Those plans will come to clarity, but at this level we think that the ridership projections are sound, they should be considered a minimum and should plan to increase. The only thing the panel noted is the data that goes into the model is based on [1:26:40 PM] campo 2040 models and I think next month or in a couple of months with the tremendous growth that the Austin region has, new data is going to come back from campo. That would only increase your ridership going forward forward. So yes the ridership is found, but it needs to be viewed as a minimum and it will only increase with the project connect. >> The next thing looked at was the maintenance costs. It one thing to look at the capital aspects, but it's really important as you phase the projects in that you have the maintenance costs that go with it. As the panel looked at how the team determined operations and maintenance costs, the panel was overall very impressed. It's very easy at this level of design just to say we have so many vehicles, we have to go this far and just allocate them miles per hour [1:27:41 PM] and generalizations. What we noted as a panel is with the genital lent and third-party support there was quite a bit of advanced design -- not advanced design, but advanced conceptual design to really come close to what we think the operation and maintenance estimates are going to be. So they took into consideration potential alignments, what you could do at a traffic signal, how long a a vehicle is going to be stopped at a platform, all those went into -- all those affect your operation and maintenance costs. All those factors were considered when determining your operation and maintenance costs, which is a relatively deep dive at this level to determine your operations and maintenance costs. Which is a great thing. This is really critical. It can really affect your long-term costs. It affects your capital costs also. But the panel did feel that it was a comprehensive operational plan. That operational plan and the operations costs that was included in the data that the annual received is in line with industry standard. We will note that -- as we [1:28:42 PM] see in this meeting today and in some of the discussions with the panel, I think this collaborative process between capital metro and the city of Houston -- I'm sorry, I'm in Houston. I came from Houston, I apologize. With the city of Austin, it's a very collaborative process and I think every panelist agreed because there are challenges in every different region that as this very collaborative process proceeds it's only going to benefit the program. Transit signal priority is a big thing that needs to be discussed when you're introducing transit to an environment. That is a -- that's something that when you have to work with the government entity and with this collaborative process, I think there's tremendous opportunity for the operation and maintenance costs to be reduced. With these traffic signal priorities and working collaboratively with capital metro and the city's traffic engineers as we go forward. But just to finish off, praises and maintenance costs were in line. The panelists will reach back to their home agencies. All the operations and maintenance costs that were [1:29:44 PM] the plan are in line with what we are experiencing at our own agencies. Capital cost. The capital cost methodology was just in line with industry standard, very appropriate for this level of planning. They took into consideration different data sources. There was unit pricing for each element of the capital cost. Again, all this was put in the fec categories for fta. Soft costs is a component of your capital costs. It's your project management costs, your design costs, your legal fees, things of that nature. They are associated with delivering a copy project, so they are to be included in our capital cost. Those were included in the projected costs, which the panel felt was appropriate. 35% was very reasonable for those type of costs for the level of design we are now. And most importantly as you start delivering these projects, the inflation rate [1:30:45 PM] plays a big factor. When these capital projects are getting delivered you have to make sure that you're capturing inflation and future costs. Capital metro did a great job of capturing these capital costs at the year of implementation of these projects. So they're not assuming that the costs today are going to be the cost in the future. They're inflated the cost for a year of implementation and those are the costs that were shared with the panel, which is the appropriate thing to do. The panel did talk about contingency and at this level of planning we think that the 30% that was in the project connect plan was appropriate, however, we want to make sure that going forward has Austin grows, as Austin grows and the surrounding area grows, panelists from Seattle and Phoenix have experienced some increases in labor costs and delivery costs. They wanted to make sure clear 30% is adequate now, [1:31:46 PM] however as the plan progresses forward, we want to make sure that you monitor what that contingency cost is and make sure you have adequate contingency going forward. Additional right-of-way costs -- capital costs considered was right-of-way. This is another significant cost to any capital project. As you're introducing transit, coming up with capital cost of transit is very easy. It's the introduction of that transit into an environment which makes it difficult to quantify. Right-of-way is one of those aspects. And the way quantity was calculated we think there's a sufficient amount of money in the project budget to accommodate any right-of-way needs for capital connect. And when it came to utilities -- project connect. When it came to utilities, this is another aspect similar to transit signal prioritization, that the close collaboration between capital metro and the board [1:32:49 PM] can really reduce your transit cost. As you introduce transit to any corridor it's really a street rebuild at some aspects of it. There's roadway that needs to be redone and utilities relocated. This transition area project -- the panel felt that this collaborative process could really reduce your utility costs, but the number that's currently in project connect for utilities is in line with what we've experience understand our jurisdictions and our transit agencies and how the industry quantifies it. So when it comes to right- of-way utilities, the panel had no issues with the way -- the methodology, the manner in which it was quantified nor -- and we also identified opportunities to even lower the capital cost. The tunnel, as Jeff mentioned, was done -- living in Houston we do very few tunnels, but there is -- but two members have done tunnels, tech Mackay in Dallas at dart are doing a tunnel right now. Adam from sound transit, they're building a number of [1:33:51 PM] tunnels. Tunnel boring machines, when looking at them, they felt very comfortable with the tunnel numbers. They went back to their own agencies and looked at unit costs. They felt very comfortable with what was in the estimates. System elementments, as was talked about earlier in committee. When we talked about a program, it's about the entire envelopes of projects because they all compliment themselves. Each are different and each area has different needs. Global discussion on system elements, the panel felt comfortable with the Neal of projects. You had the high capacity transit corridors, you had the metro rap mid that really fed into that high capacity transit, so you had one feeding into another, you have neighborhood connector, which really meets another need where a fixed route may be too [1:34:51 PM] expensive you introduced this type of service. So as we looked at all the types of service in project connect, they really all leveraged the existing network. They leveraged the existing network, they leveraged proposed projects and they were all in a network basis, which is what you want. Every transit trip starts with a first step or a role. How do you get someone from their front door into the broader network. Project connect had it in this plan with this system of projects, other system elements. Other comments that the panel had as far as recommendations is recognize this is a phased project so as projects go online you have to make sure that the inflation rates are quantified, contingency quantified because everything changes as you go forward. The next step -- right now you have a very firm -- the panel had no issues with the operation and maintenance costs. It was actually quite impressed with how everything is put, the operation and maintenance [1:35:52 PM] costs, ridership and maintenance costs. What the panel wanted to express to capital metro is the fact that that has to be supplemented with a financial plan so that way as the finances come in, it supports the projects because as you can tell with the inflation rates that you have and with your o&m costs, that may change with the different type of service, it may jeopardize the finances of a project. So I think that's the next critical step is to merging this very sound technical project connect foundation with a financial analysis is what the panel really wanted to stress. And the panel did see it now and going forward is only going to be a trust going forward with the public. There was a very transparent process to date and the panel felt it was important to note to capital metro that that transparent process needs to proceed going forward. And we also wanted to note to capital metro is that [1:36:54 PM] innovation, transit is always innovating. And as you plan projects to make sure that there's envelopes to take into consideration, future innovations, to lower your operation and maintenance costs or to lower your capital costs. And then the last one is a fare system. I guess in Houston we are now going to a regional fair system, fare structure. As you're getting project connect off the ground the panel felt that having an packet based fare system will really benefit the program going forward. So in closing, as I mentioned, the panel which consisted over 100 years of transit experience, very opinionated transit experience, I will say that we were very impressed with the way everything was put together. Everything was exactly in line with what we have practiced and what the industry practices. That speaks to the talent that capital metro has and [1:37:55 PM] the talent that they brought in. To the ridership, operation, maintenance costs, capital costs, were all in line with the direction you want to go in. The tunnel costs were a conceptual level. Those -- with a little bit more design clarity could advance. The importance of tying in the financial plan is something we wanted to stress on. And then we really wanted to complement the plan on the system elements that support the high capacity, the high capacity rapid transit projects. A lot of times you just -- you put those in place, but you forget how to connect people to the high capacity transit. Project connect does that with all the other envelope of projects that are included. And with that, the panel wants to say thank you very much for letting us come in and share our thoughts with your program. We're very impressed with the openness of capital metro. And any question that was asked, information was -- we were allowed to come in, formulate our own opinions on how it should be very, very transparent process. [1:38:55 PM] So we're very impressed. So I speak for the entire panel that I think where you are today is a very sound place and I think with the structures you have in place you only have success ahead of you. >> Kitchen: Thank you very much. Do we have more to present? So we will go ahead and take some questions. We have some time for that. And then, of course, I know some of you may be able to stick around and some of you may not. That's okay. But we'll go ahead and take a few questions and then we'll move on to talking about the other parts of the system. One of the things that we wanted to do today was also be able to talk to -- to hear from our corridor folks and from our transportation folks because as you said, what's really important -- what we're talking about is transformation of the overall system. So we need to think of someone leaving their door [1:39:56 PM] to getting to where they need to be. And that means we are coordinating with some investments that we've already made as a city and investments that we'll be making in the future related to sidewalks. And all those things that help someone get from their door to the various aspects of the transit system. So that's why we have on the agenda today to hear from our corridor folks and also from our transportation folks. But let's go ahead and ask these guys some questions if anybody has any questions they want to ask. Terry. >> This is somewhat of a loaded question. What I saw in your past, all of you are in growing -- [inaudible]. How best is it for us to plan to take maximum advantage of the system like project connect that's being implemented? Does that make sense what I'm saying? Is there a coordination between the planning efforts and the transportation plan so that you -- what advice [1:40:59 PM] do you have for us in that regard? >> I think with the collateral process, I think capital metro and the city of Austin is very clear to the panel that there was a very close collaboration. I think that continued collaboration is only going to benefit. I think one thing we didn't touch on during the presentation, which I should have, is the right-of-way cost. With this close collaboration of of what to do, to maximize the public right-of-way for transit and for all the other mows is something that you -- modes is something that you can leverage rate review. It's how the planning comes in with project connect. >> We're a city much like Houston. We're growing every year. So advice to us about we're adding 50 to thousand new people every year in our region. Where do we need to put them -- how do we do that to take advantage of a plan? >> Yeah. So I will -- we came in for a very specific role to do technical. I think that is beyond [1:41:00 PM] something that -- I think you have very qualified people at capital metro that can probably answer that better than I can. >> Kitchen: It's a good question. We do need more conversation about planning that with the land use. So other questions? Other things that anybody would like to -- do you want to go ahead? >> Just quickly, not a chair. First to chair kitchen, thank you for permitting capital metro to take up time here with this presentation. And secondly, we really owe a debt of gratitude to apta for facilitating this review and for each of the panelists who are volunteers who come from cities who have really done great things. And frequently in Dallas and Houston. And admire what each of those cities have accomplished, particularly Houston, and if you'll [1:42:01 PM] recall Houston was the model for cap recap. They were the first to realign their bus system and a lot of what they did we were able to go to town on and it was a foundation for our own cap remap. So very pleased to have you here in particular. I've been watching your success and copied off your examples and appreciate that. >> Thank you very much. >> The third quick comment I'll just say is hopefully the greater public recognizes this continuing effort to be transparent and to put our planning out for third-parties to come have a look at. And I know I'm grateful to have the specific results and it's gratifying to see the combination of what our team has put together, but I think it's really important for our community to recognize that we're not just reading our own press here. We're allowing for the -- [1:43:01 PM] four or five of the fast growing building transit systems in the country to come have a look at what we're doing and compare with our own experience. Thank you. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Councilmember alter? >> Alter: Thank you. I want to thank the panel and apta for coming out and doing this and on the recommendation of cap metro doing this is really important as we move forward to transparency and for having that check on the technical details. I also agree with your conclusion that we need to beef up our financial model and hopefully we will begin to do that more in the coming weeks. I do have a couple of technical questions. I serve on campo, our metropolitan planning organization. And we have been having conversations about our 2040 plan and our transportation demand model and some of us have been raising questions about the accuracy of that model and so far as one region, not us, is being [1:44:03 PM] given additional weight in that model. When we say that we're using those models as the basis for our data, are we using the parts of the models that only apply within our system or does what happened in the whole region feed into how we generate the data that's relative for pulling down the federal funding. >> So I don't know exactly how campo is structured. I do know that the population growth is a factor that goes into the stops model. When you talk about a growing region, I don't know exactly where the limits are but census data is one of the metrics that goes into the model. It's difficult for me to answer. I don't know the technical boundaries of it. But census are part of the model that should be captured. >> I don't think I answered the question. >> One of the things that -- [1:45:04 PM] I think this is an important conclusion that they came to is that we're currently using the 2040 data and with the growth that is going on in the region with the projection of doubling by 2040 and even the 2045 data that will come out is not going to take into account some of the projects that are currently being planned. The number of hi-rises that will go up in the Rainey street neighborhood, those are not expected to be in that 2045 number. So there are pieces that as Roberto said, this is looked as a a a minimum number. As we go forward with the program the intent would be to use the 2045 numbers to take a further look as we get into the engineering phase a at what a projection would be using in the 2045 model. The thing with stops is the way it's been put together and what fta does is they try to temporarier it across -- temper it across the different cities in the country so you have something leveled off. [1:46:05 PM] It doesn't deal specifically with the individual locations where the different mpo's come up with the numbers, but that's basically -- it's an interpolation of what's there and it goes into the algorithm that's been developed by fta. >> Alter: So maybe we can take this offline and someone can explain to me what we need to worry about with respect to the campo model and its implications for this. What I hear is that they are at the minimum that we can expect and even with the numbers going into the campo plan that will be increasing what I'm trying to understand is if there's any skew in those numbers towards other regions, whether that affects our modeling for this. I think we'll just take that offline in the interest of time. When you looked at the projections in terms of labor costs, you mentioned the need to take into [1:47:06 PM] consideration the local what's going on on the ground. Self several major projects and a booming economy in terms of construction. To what extent is that already factored into the model? We have a mobility bond, we have two arenas that are being built. We have -- that's taken a care of in the two locations. It's taken care of in your allocated contingency and the slide we referenced about the 30 that's in the plan now, the 40, the panel. , That's where you're capturing that increased labor cost. It's in the contingency and it's in the plan. >> >> It's something to keep an eye on. And that fluctuates region to region, year to year. >> Alter: And my last point is really a comment more for capital metro and our staff. I've been talking with the corridor group about incorporating broadband into our mobility plans. I just want to make sure [1:48:08 PM] that we are building any of that infrastructure along the project connect corridors and how we're thinking about that moving forward with the instruct so we can take care of some of those broadband needs while we have the roads open. Thank you. >> Flannigan: I'm impressed by this and kudos to the staff for doing the good work. I'm interested in how the work between the city and capital metro, how that compares with other agencies? >> I think -- that varies from agency to agency. Some transit agencies R. County based, some agencies are part of the city -- so that really varies. But the one constant is that a transit is introduced into a roadway that is operated and maintained by a jurisdiction. The opportunity there is like we talked about maximizing the public right-of-way, utility costs, [1:49:09 PM] the transit single priority. So you can lower your capital cost, lower your operations and maintenance cost and really with that collaborative process, really lower both items and really reduce overall project, which eventually will lower your contingency cost. When you quantify that 30 to 40% contingency with some of the things you take into consideration is stakeholder risk. Here at cap metro they've done a really good job at collaborating with the city of Austin and with other major stakeholders, but that 30% is just industry-wide so with that great collaboration of maximizing the right-of-way, limiting as much utility relocation as possible, leveraging any franchise agreement that the city may have with the private utility company, which is another project risk, all those things really lower your project cost which your - - your capital cost which lower your contingency and with this good collaboration there is this lowering of your costs program wide. And it really is a good-- at the end of the day a better customer experience, [1:50:09 PM] reliable travel time is really critical. As a transit agency coordinates with a jurisdiction, if the signals are coordinated you get there faster, it's a better experience and your ridership goes up. It's all intertwined, it all works together. >> Flannigan: I'm really excited about the unique opportunity we have in Austin having both municipality owned electric and water utilities. And the transportation and all of the -- roughly all of the infrastructure being city owned right-of-way. Almost all of it certainly in the non-dotted lines on the map. So that's really exciting and what it sounds like possibly unique situation compared to projects in other parts of the country where the partnership between the city and capital metro combined with basically those are the two main partners to the entire system really gives the right set of incentives for behavior to really leverage the taxpayer dollars as much as we possibly can. But what I'm also hearing is none of those assumptions are in the plan. >> That is correct. >> So it's all upside. [1:51:09 PM] >> That is correct. >> All of the special advantages of our relationship with cap metro and how we move forward is upside to what is being planned and I think that is important to remember. >> Correct. That's why the panel of wanted to stress our relationship and the transparency. There are only positives that will come out of that. There's positive ramifications throughout the program. >> I also think if I could add to that, this is the first time ever seeing that I've been in the transit industry where there has been a partnership where the peer review was done where there was participation with the city. That's something that is unique and Jeff could possibly speak to that better than I can with respect to other apta peer reviews. >> I was going to mention that, Dave. You stole my thunder. I would like to recognize that just with the -- the types of reviews and working with different projects and different agencies across the country that the amount of openness at this stage of the project is pretty unique. A lot of times I think a lot [1:52:12 PM] of agencies, and especially those who -- who have elected board members, they defer to the elected board members to do a lot of the communication with those jurisdictions. And having the city at the table and involved at the very beginning, and part of the conversation, is unique and definitely is I believe the panel recognizes that and which is why this is such a strong plan that's in place that really is setting you up to be successful as you move this forward within this community. >> Kitchen: Thank you. Councilmember Renteria? I can't tell who is -- >> The mayor was first. >> Mayor Adler: I wanted to say I appreciate this work and the reassurance for having the members validated. If we take this to the community to vote on in the fall, past experience will tell us what the community asks is can we rely on the [1:53:14 PM] numbers? Are the numbers real. And a lot of times we spend real valuable time arguing over whether the numbers are real instead of arguing over the merits of the proposal themselves. So I'm encouraged that we're getting a true up on the numbers really early in the process. I'm happy that the numbers have come out validated so that we can focus the conversation on the merits of the proposal itself. Okay. Councilmember Renteria? >> Just quickly to the mayor's point, one of the things that you mentioned that I have wondered about and maybe you can elaborate on. You mentioned special trip generators. And with respect to the campo 2040 numbers we know that the next iteration of that will be higher, but I've been concerned about the impact of the growth at our airport, which is currently serving 17, 18 million people, expected [1:54:14 PM] to double in the traffic through there in the next 20 plus or minus years. In your sort of professional opinion with the airport and its growth, would it be adequately captured in the capital model or the stops model rather. I guess it's the stops model with the table of data. Or is that something that we should look at? I'll add to that you did mention football games, but we have formula 1 and we have festivals here every weekend. If you could elaborate on those. >> A traveler is not captured into the stops model. So that is another one -- another category where it needs to be captured and that's why we say it is a minimum ridership threshold. Connecting to airport is a great thing. The stops model does not capture those trips. That will have to be quantified separately and that will increase your ridership number especially with the growth that you're seeing. >> If we looked at a particular line, the blue [1:55:15 PM] line in this case, we have the stops model in the campo data feeding the stops model, but how should we look at the growth of the airport with the blue line, for example? >> I think that's going to be a case-by-case basis on how that's quantified, that the agency is comfortable with. I'm hesitant to say this is the way you ought to do it. I think that's something that you can rely on the staff that you have, with consultants that you have, to say can you give me something that's a number that can be relied upon with those trips. I really can't answer that question. >> Kitchen: Okay. We're going to move on now. Councilmember Renteria, do you want to say something? You can do that first and then we'll move on. We'll ask both of our next two speakers to come up and sit up here and then we'll take the corridor first and then atd. But go ahead. >> Renteria: I want to say thank y'all for coming over here. There was -- what the mayor said, there was a lot of [1:56:17 PM] questions that have been asked like that in the past and we haven't been able to have the opportunity to answer those questions where if people can say, well, how can you verify it. So I really appreciate for y'all coming up to Austin and taking the time -- taking time off to -- I know you have a busy schedule in your metro systems. I want to say thank you. >> You're very much welcome. >> Kitchen: Thank y'all very much. I also want to say in talking with our next two speakers we're now at the point that the investments we've made in the past and the council all got behind and we can thank the mayor in particular for the 2016 bond with the corridor, with the corridors, all of this is coming together to support a system, a system that can help us with project connect, help us transform the whole community. So we're wanting to have some conversation now so we can get the big picture and understand how this all [1:57:17 PM] works together. And also we can remind our community that we've already been working on its lo of pieces -- on lots of pieces of improving transportation and lots of parts of our system that works together. And we really are poised at a point right now that's really transformational for us so Thate can start to benefit from our investments of the past and tie it all together with what we're proposing for project connect. So Mr. Trimble, if you will go first. >> Sure. Good afternoon. Mike Trimble, director of the quarter program office. >> Garza: Councilmember, can I make a motion to postpone these two items? Chair? >> Kitchen: Well, you're welcome to make a motion. Our staff has prepared for this. We have another half an hour of our time. We have people here from cap metro that we've invited with the board. So I really don't think it's appropriate to postpone it. If the group wants to postpone it, fine, but I [1:58:17 PM] intend to sit here and listen to them. It's an informational item and we're not voting on anything. Anything. Is there a second? Mr. Flannigan, I'm surprised because we put this on together. I'll take a vote and we're going to continue regardless of the vote. So is there -- all in favor of postponing these two items for our mobility committee. Okay. All opposed? 3-2. We will now adjourn the mobility committee. We're going to continue to hear these folks and we have cap metro here too. So if you will proceed. >> Can I ask for clarification. If we're still going to hear the presentation, will we be hearing it again when the mayor pro tem can be in attendance for this conversation? >> Kitchen: We'll talk to her about that. There's more we can hear again. I'm going to go ahead and hear this because we're prepared and this is news to [1:59:20 PM] me that -- and we can, we can hear it again also if we would like to. There's plenty to talk about. So if you will go ahead, Mr. Trimble. >> Garza: I have a 2:00 stop and I have a child care issue and that's why I was asking for the postponement. But I understand you have to continue. >> Kitchen: I appreciate that, I wasn't aware of that. No one told me that ahead of time and we didn't plan for it. So go ahead. >> Good afternoon, Mike Trimble. I have a quick update on the corridor construction program of the mobility committee. So just a quick overview of our time line, we are pretty much where we thought we would be at this point ever since council approved us moving forward to full design implementation. Now we are actually going to be entering in 2020 on bid and construction phase on several projects which I'll talk more about in a second. We have several projects [2:00:21 PM] that we've already completed. As you are aware, we completed in partnership with transportation department and capital metro. The contraflow lane on Guadalupe corridor. We've started to work on and complete some of the intersection improvements, critical safety improvements, on north Lamar. We have several projects already moving forward and then we have the beginning of some of our larger projects that will be moving forward into bid and construction phase in 2020. Again, this is actually ahead of where we thought we would be at this point in time. But we do have ten larger projects that we're moving forward in 2020. Namely the south Lamar project from Riverside to Barton springs, which is a full complete streets improvement including hind the curb bicycle improvements and improved intersection improvement as well. This will be a substantial project moving forward in 2020. We'll also be moving forward a campo-funded project, so we've already returned some [2:01:21 PM] money to the program through grants. This grant-funded project on slaughter lane between mopac and Brodie lane will include roadway expansion project. We'll be expanding the lanes from four to six-lane configuration from Missouri back to the Brodie -- mopac to Brodie lane. We have work we'll be doing what's an I.D. Iq contract, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity, which allows us to get out quickly some sidewalk, shared use path and intersection improvements as well, and we'll be moving some of this work forward in the spring, in the next month or two. So we'll start there for 2020, but we'll also quickly start moving into getting some of our larger projects out to bid. So you'll start to see some of our larger intersection improvements, namely burnet and Braker lane and south Lamar as well as the campo funded projects on slaughter [2:02:21 PM] lane. We have a campo-funded project on William canyon as well. These are some of our larger projects moving forward in 2020. And here is the -- here is our gant column. Overall we have about 30 construction packages not counting the ideq work. This is our plan to get that work done within our eight-year goal by the end of 2024. It is a lot of work over a relatively short amount of time and I don't want to under state the disruption it may cause, but we're working with our transportation department and other partners to try to minimize that, minimize obstruction. And the actual refining of the time line and we are using several methods to try to both shorten the construction time lines but have good phasing and [2:03:22 PM] traffic control and traffic management as well. We'll be working through that. Our general implementation approach, for each corridor we generally will be looking at larger projects moving forward, but then also supplementing that with some of the smaller scale work that I mentioned at intersections, sidewalk, bike improvements through our ideq projects that will also be moving concurrently. We're going to be filling in that template of improvements through these larger projects intermingled with some of the smaller ideq projects as well. That also includes partnership projects that we might be doing with public works, for example, for sidewalk connections to corridors. Also signal improvements that transportation department may be doing as well. We will be coordinating with a lot of our partners to get that work done. We do keep our outcomes in front of us and so we are developing a robust performance management plan to see how we can best assess the improvements [2:04:22 PM] we're making in achieving the mobility priorities the council outlined. We mentioned that we're looking at reduction of vehicular delay, we're also looking at mode shift, 10 to 15% from vehicles to other modes of transportation which supports our goals. We are developing a robust management plan to do that in partnership with atd and U.S. Center for transportation research. So how do these improvements support sustainability, equity, affordability, and several of the outcomes council outlined in the contract with voters. We are enhancing some of our programs to create a corridors for complete program. Beyond place making is to really look for partnerships with our other internal departments as well as external partners to see how we can achieve these outcomes and leverage these improvements we're doing for the infrastructure to support community outcomes that council outlined in the report with voters. [2:05:24 PM] Of course our program has several transit supported improvements, one of our key outcomes as well. We've done a lot of coordination with capital metro thus if you are and we will continue to do so. And we have developed a good implementation phasing for our projects. We have a lot of our larger projects on those contemplated Orange and blue line corridors so we can allow for alignment and coordination need to do work with capital metro as well. And then just to wrap up, there's -- it's going to take a lot of keys to success. These are just a few to make this work. I can't under estimate the amount of great work that needs to happy with great folks on my team and the great partnerships with our partner agencies touch as txdot and capital metro and watershed and other departments as well. We've had great success so far in looking at how we can accelerate processes and develop resource teams around utility coordination, real estate, and permitting, and we'll continue to do so and definitely this year we want to work more on [2:06:24 PM] integrating all of our co-located team into a one team one goal approach. We all share the big mission that we have and make sure everybody is collaborating well and coordinating well to achieve that one goal. That we have, which is to get these improvements on the ground successfully to the benefit of the taxpayers by the end of 2024. With that, I'm done. >> Kitchen: Thank you. In the interest of time, I'm going to have atd speak now on their programs and then we'll have questions. Let's be sure that we leave about ten minutes at the end for questions, if we can. So and I know we have two people that wanted to speak and so we'll take them at the end. So if you guys want to go ahead. >> I have a presentation. Good afternoon, councilmembers. Robert spillar, director of transportation for the city of Austin. I'm joined by Richard [2:07:25 PM] Mendoza, director of public works. We're going to make this presentation together. Our goals speak at a pretty high level about the mobility projects we've been doing the last ten years and the plan for at least the next four years, four or so years of how we will continue to deliver a mobility system. Mike, of course, has provided a more detailed presentation on the corridors and cap metro on project connect. We'll mention those only in terms of putting them in context with the other work that we're doing in the area. You know, Austin began taking a more focused approach towards transportation beginning in 2008 when council at that time decided to get back in the business of providing mobility improvements throughout our region and taking a much more focused look. Council formed the Austin transportation department in partnership with public works and asked public works to set pretty aggressive goals in terms of quality of our transportation surfaces, roadways and facilities, and [2:08:26 PM] then they asked transportation department to take a pretty aggressive role in making sure we were expanding transportation. Together with public works and the city manager's office, we brought to you and presented to the voters mobility bonds in 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2018, almost every two years. That's pretty unusual. We're usually in a six or seven-year cycle so going back for funding every two years shows we took your direction pretty seriously and moved on it in terms of improving transportation. That culminated in 2010 when we took all of the different advice and direction you all had given us and encapsulated it in the Austin strategic mobility plan which you adopted not just the 20% goal but a 50% diversion from the private automobile and that's really important. The graphic before you today is really our active [2:09:26 PM] transportation network that we've been deploying since 2010. The reason this is important is because this is really important to transit. You know, if you use transit, you probably use an active transportation mode to get there whether you drive to a park and ride and walk to the station or walk to transit, it's pretty important to see the amount of investment we've been putting in. Richard and I are going to deconstruct this a little bit to show you exactly what we've been doing, then we're going to talk about the partner projects. What you will see is the city over the last decade has been investing about 1.2 billion in mobility projects here. That's been leveraged by tens of billions of more from our partner agencies, txdot, ktrma or capital metro as we go forward -- ctrma. >> Thank you, Richard Mendoza. I'm going to continue starting with the sidewalk investments that the city has made since 2011. Since 2011 to present we have constructed 142 miles [2:10:28 PM] of new sidewalks. However, to place this into context, the 2016 comprehensive sidewalk plan identified approximately 2,500 miles of missing sidewalks within our network. And of that 2,500 miles, 250 miles have been identified as high and very high priority locations, meaning they provide access to some very high pedestrian areas adjacent to our parks, adjacent to schools, adjacent to shopping areas, and, of course, adjacent to transit stops. So we have been progressing on constructing and building out in accordance with that comprehensive plan. Currently we have sidewalk funding from the 2012, 2016, and most recently the 2018 bonds to address structurally deficient sidewalks of our existing network that we have [2:11:28 PM] programmed through 2024. So just to place that into context, the 2016 program we anticipate constructing 40 to 60 miles of new sidewalks, and we are currently of that $37.5 million program we're at 134% of our plan spend. So we are ahead of schedule on that. There are other funding and programs that the sidewalk team supports, namely say for Austin school, some of the vision zero improvements, and our team is counting that in the inventory of sidewalks that we are constructing each year. That's been on the order of around 14 miles per year. >> So Austin -- >> Alter: Can I clarify that's 40 to 60 miles additional that's planned by when and where is that 14 miles a year additional to that 46? >> The 14 miles per year is part of that program and it's through 2024. >> Alter: Okay. Thank you. [2:12:29 PM] >> Austin is the new bike city usa, that's what I would claim, at least. Over the past ten years, we've added about 148 miles of facility route miles. Remember most of our routes are two-way so you can double that in terms of actual miles of protected bikeway that you can ride on. We're currently deploying our all ages and abilities network. One of the major projects we just opened another two miles is on shoal creek boulevard extending both the off-street trail as well as on-street facilities for critical another two miles. Thank you to councilmember pool for her support on that. We're currently constructing new projects using a combination of program funds as well as bond funds. We're using 2016 bonds pretty much right now and we are just starting to program the 2018 funds as we move out. I will tell you that the pace of delivery of these facilities is slowing a little bit only because we're taking on harder [2:13:29 PM] links. We've done all the easy stuff thanks to Richard's resurfacing program, we've been able to follow him, but now we're getting to the requiring considerable more public engagement and outreach in planning with other projects. That program remains strong. Other cities continue to look to us for the new example how to deploy bike facilities in a southwestern, warm environment and people are using those. We're currently funding program projects through 2024 with the funds that we have related to that. Austin also has a really strong pedestrian hybrid beacon or phb program. Just ten years ago these devices were not legal in Texas. The city of Austin with help from our congressional delegation here in central Texas went to the legislature and were able to demand adoption in the Texas municipal uniform traffic control manual. That allows us to build these quite often now in [2:14:29 PM] terms of improving pedestrian crossing, but also serving transit. These devices are often part of larger projects. We partner with other jurisdictions such as Williamson county on Pearson ranch boulevard with capital metro to link both sides of busy corridors so that people can travel between one side of the street and the transit stop on the other side. Again, we're continuing to deploy $2,016 as well as program dollars and we have dollars in the 2018. I know these devices will be part of project connect as we build out these corridors, we'll need to probably build some of these as part of that project deployment along those busy corridors as we move forward. >> We are also constructing critical urban trails that link our community to key kegs nations and provide opportunities for improved healthy outcomes as well as access to transit. [2:15:30 PM] Since 2010 to present we have constructed 27 miles of new urban trails and currently have ten miles of urban trails under design. The urban trails are critical in that not everyone feels comfortable in an alternative active mode of transportation mixing with vehicular traffic. These assets provide that separation between vehicular traffic and active modes of transportation. The current urban trail comprehensive plan is slated to get updated. The full buildout for the vision for the trail system is 400 total miles. We currently have about 60 miles constructed, and, of course, with the 2016 bond we were funded to continue final design and construction on an additional 10 to 15 miles of urban trails. Some of the marquee trails included the northern walnut creek trail as well as [2:16:30 PM] violet crown trail and lady bird lake boardwalk. We've also been successful recently in leveraging some grant funding through campo, namely for the Austin to manor correction, the violet crown trail as well as the Bergstrom spur study. >> So I've already mentioned the Austin strategic mobility plan moving our goal from just a 20% diversion up to 50% diversion by 2039. But this is really important because it builds on a direction we routinely receive from council that as an agency and a city we wanted to partner with the regional transportation providers whether they be highway or transit providers to make sure that missing links in our network were completed. You know, simply stated, transit want run if there's not a link to run on in many causes and so we -- cases so we make sure when we partner that transit prioritization or the ability to provide transit is a folk of of those investments. [2:17:37 PM] The 50/50 split is important because by 2040 as we double in population we're focused on keeping the number of vehicles on the street consistent with today and as we grow that needs more and more people have to be on transit, walking, biking in order to make that a possibility. >> Other significant investments since 2010 include the oak hill Y project. This resulted in continuous flow intersection that is in place today and this part of our community given breathing room while we fully consider the proposed interchange is now moving towards construction and partnership with the Texas department of transportation. Also we invested seed monies in the ih-35 improvements that are currently under construction north and south. Also the Texas department of transportation. And then also with the 2010 funding, we established the region's first transit priority lanes downtown Austin along Guadalupe and [2:18:38 PM] lavaca corridors. >> What Richard and I are working our way through here and it will be pretty quick is the roadway and partnership projects that we've worked with other agencies to deliver so that you really get a picture of our total mobility program that's going on. In 2012, that was really our first big funding of major corridor projects. The I-35 improvements that you see along the corridor we developed the concept that's now resulted in some of the major intersections. What's shown here is one of the first round-abouts on system facilities. This is at 51st street. But also other projects, of course, were the mopac north where we worked closely with ctrma to make sure access points and sound walls were in place to protect our neighborhood, but also that bike facilities throughout the corridor were developed. >> As recently at 2016, the mobility bond is well underway and this is just an outline of the three major [2:19:40 PM] programs that we have are applying this reinvestment in both corridor mobility program, as Mike presented earlier, the regional mobility and partnership with some of the other agencies in the region, as well as the local mobility which provide a lot of the last mile connectivity which is important to access to transit. Funding also allowed us to expand and construct previously preliminary engineering done on airport boulevard, south Lamar, William cannon and slaughter lane while also developing our corridor programs for the future. >> We have two other slides. Bond monies and our own money is not the only source of funding for capital projects. In 2017 and '18, we're deploying campo grants that we received in 2017. We were very successful thank you to our leadership that participates at campo in receiving about 120 million in grants for a variety of projects. [2:20:41 PM] In 2018, again we went to the voters, and this time we focused on street reconstruction. We funded the reconstruction of the red bud trail bridge that public works is working on, but we also focused on vision zero and safety projects, again sidewalk rehabilitation, signals, technology and urban trails. Again giving just a little more money to some of the projects that are very important to our region. You know, when we put it all together as you can see here, it looks pretty busy and that's why we started with the active transportation deconstructed and reconstructed it. You can see we've been investing all over the region. Not all of these projects are just city of Austin projects. You know, when you add in the partnerships from our other agencies, whether they be txdot or ctrma or capital metro, there's literally tens of billions leveraged by our 1.2 billion. It's a good argument with why the city needs to participate in regional transportation discussions [2:21:41 PM] and be a leader in coming to the table. I remind people that on many of these projects whether it be I- 35 or portions of mopac north would not have been possible if we had not gone to our regional partners and said, you know, we want to move again. And that's what this is about. I won't pretend to tell you that we can fix congestion. I don't know that we can do that anymore. I don't know any big city that's got an unemployment rate of 2.3% or less than 3% and is booming like we are can promise that. But we can promise improved mobility whether it be on transit or some of these highway projects or roadway projects. I certainly think that there's an opportunity for us to continue doing well. We have money to spend right now and we are continuing to do that for you. >> Kitchen: Let me say this. Thank you very much, both of you, this is -- this presentation is an excellent review of what we've been working on and a preview of [2:22:43 PM] what we are continuing to do so that we can see as a region, and I know we've talked about this at cap metro about the importance that what we do with project connect, we have to get the person from their front door to transit. So this is very helpful. Now, I want to take -- we have two speakers, I want to ask you to be very short. You all can -- >> We'll move out of the way. >> Or let the speaker come right there. So -- because we may have a few minutes for questions at the end, I'm not sure, but if our speakers can just take a few minutes. Julio, if you want to come first. >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Kitchen: Okay. Well then Sara, did you want to speak this time? >> No, thank you. >> Kitchen: Great. >> [Inaudible - no mic on] >> Kitchen: Okay. Great. Questions. We have a few minutes. >> Just for the record, general counsel at capital metro would want me to adjourn our board meeting. We're adjourned, our time is [2:23:43 PM] 2:25. >> Kitchen: Do we have questions -- we've got about five minutes. Do we have questions for these guys? >> Alter: Do cap metro folks have questions? >> Kitchen: Do you want to ask questions? >> Alter: I have a comment more than a question. This is really a very impressive set of projects across a lot of modes deploying a lot of different resources, and I think the combination of them as they unfold over time and get implemented will help mobility dramatically in our community, and I appreciate the way these are all moving forward and how we are learning as a city to collaborate better with our regional partners. I believe that we're also beginning to do that with some of our local partners with the safe routes to school and finding some additional ways to leverage those dollars. I got to be the first one out of the gate for safe [2:24:43 PM] routes to school and we finally have projects that are being built and they are going to be transformative for the folks trying to get their kids to school. And I'm pleased to see that and I think we have begun to get to the point that we're really leveraging the dollars across the different places and I want to encourage you to continue pushing on some of those relationships particularly with our school districts. We had some sidewalks also that got pulled into the safe routes to school that were being funded by cap metro and I think the more we are open and able to build those relationships the better connected our city will be. So thank you. >> Kitchen: And I would add also that -- that as we begin to talk about what we put on the ballot in November in project connect, it will be important for us to remind the -- and talk to the community in terms of the bigger picture about how we are connecting all parts of the city, so we're [2:25:43 PM] building on the investments we've made in the past. We're recognizing that to the extent that there are additional investments we need to, you know, to identify gaps in that system, that we've got funding streams, we've got programs, we've got mechanisms to do that. We will need to all drill down more as we continue with this conversation, and we continue the conversation with the community so that we can understand that -- that we're coming at this in a truly transformational way, which is we have to look at the whole system. And I think that's going to be important because as we have this conversation more and more, people are asking, well, yes, this is project connect, but what about the sidewalk in my neighborhood? I can't even get to the bus stop. Or what about the bike route that I need in order to get further into town? Or what about I may just have a local bus route that I need help getting to. There's a whole range of [2:26:43 PM] things and I think we'll be more successful as a community in moving forward with project connect if we think in terms of equity, in terms of all parts of town. If we think in terms of really connecting all the dots for all the things we've been working on to really make this a system for everyone. And I think we have a really -- a real opportunity to knit together, I mean we have been doing this, but even more so to help people understand that we have been knitting together this system and we're going to continue to do that. So thank you all. I think this is very helpful to us. I wanted to go ahead and do this today and we'll do it again so that my colleagues can have the conversation too, but, you know, it is -- it's February already and November is coming up pretty fast. So we need to start having these conversations. So again, thank you all. Thanks for being here. [2:27:43 PM]