Mobility Committee (MOBC) Meeting Transcript – 2022/09/08 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 6 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 9/8/2022 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 9/8/2022 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. [1:06:43 PM] >> Good afternoon, everybody. It is September 8th, 2022 and this is the mobility committee. I am the chair, Paige Ellis. I am here in Austin city hall. It is 1:06 P.M. And we are going to kick off this meeting. I have joining remotely councilmember kitchen and councilmember harper-madison. And if she's able to, mayor pro tem Al ter is going to join remotely and vice chair Kelly is unavailable. With three people we've got quorum and we're going to get this started. We do have one public speaker. >> Spencer shoe- maker. >> Ellis: Welcome. Go for it. >> All right. My name is Spencer -- in Austin my entire life. I'm a member of the bicycle advisory council. We were working on a recommendation about the bike plan program. [1:07:43 PM] I've got data I thought might be useful. I have it in this handout for you that should have been distributed. I'm going to run through it quickly. So, the bike lanes category was added by 311 in December, 2019, but the open data sources don't allow us to see which traffic has been tagged under that. But we're able to get data by using the 311 website search function, with the municipal court data. Since that category was added in January 2020, there have been 1,974 bike plan blockage complaints. In the same time, there have only been 507 unique citations issued. If we assume that every citation is coming from a 311 report, which they're not, at best 25% of these reports are leading to a citation. I have some information about how the citations are progressing. There's been a dramatic increase in the last couple of months. October 2021, 9 citations. [1:08:45 PM] August 2022, we saw 58. I wouldn't take that to mean that the current system is working. By taking the last 200 complaints listed on the website, which goes about six weeks ago, only 21% of those 200 complaints led to an issued citation. 67.5% were marked no problem found, which usually means the vehicle had left before an officer could get there. Anecdotally, pretty much every delivery person knows this. So they'll even tell me when I tell them they're parked in the bike lane, as long as they're there under an hour there's no way they're going to get a ticket, which is why there's a a big disconnect. There's a big geographical issue. I plotted the citations against the map. Unprotected bike lanes are where the citations are being issued. Protected bike lanes rarely have the same level of enforcement. Congress avenue, 216 complaints, [1:09:45 PM] 29 citations. Shoal creek, only 10 citations. The reason is because oftentimes, parking enforcement officers need to drive to where they're going, harder to find parking along protecting bike lanes and there's less likely to be meters, they're less likely to stumble upon it in their daily duties. What ended up happening is that protecting bike lanes have become more dangerous than unprotected bike lanes because of these parking violations. I'll tend telling you the story of a 3-year-old killed in Chicago this summer riding on the back of her mother's bike when a city truck blocked the bike lane and led them into the path of a semi truck that dragged her 20 feet down the street. We don't have data on crashes in Austin that aren't lethal, but I'm hoping the council can -- [ buzzer sounding ] >> Ellis: Thank you very much for joining us today. We appreciate it. And I've got extra handouts if any of my colleagues don't have [1:10:47 PM] access to that. Item number 1 is approve the minutes of the mobility committee meeting on August 4th, 2022. I have a motion by councilmember harper-madison. Those in favor? The three of us in attendance have approved those minutes. The first briefing that we have is going to be an update from the chair of the urban transportation commission. I see Mario champion is here. Welcome. >> Hi. Thank you for having me, councilmembers, committee member. Members. I want to thank Spencer for showing up and telling an important story. I do want to give a little bit of update of what we did in our last utc meeting. We had the I-35 central Texas expressway plan update that you're about to have as well. We had several really good questions. I know there hasn't been time yet for there to be results, but some questions that are worth following up on, what does it [1:11:48 PM] mean to have a really quick finding of no significant impact. Commissioner Burke asked a question about managed lanes in coordination with cap metro. Is there a cap metro plan to use those managed lanes? That is one of the aspects being solved. There were other questions about how much into the future this 35 expansion will solve things 15 years from now after it takes 5 years to build, what are we looking at 10 years after that. That was a pretty good discussion. I'm looking forward to the responses from that team back to utc eventually. But I would like to talk about the bike plan blockage bounty program. So, if you read the recommendation, it passed utc unanimously. It addresses key concerns brought up just a minute ago. I want to reiterate some of them. Most importantly to me, bike lanes have a function in this city infrastructure. [1:12:49 PM] And bike lanes are not protected in the way that other things are protected. There's a lot of reasons why. One of the main ones is manpower. A little story I would add is if you imagine a sidewalk being completely blocked, on a street like burnet or manchac or Lamar where it's a rapid street and the -- in this case, the sidewalk is the only way to go -- it wouldn't stand for a minute to say a U-Haul needs to park on the sidewalk and might be there for three hours and people is are to -- have to walk into the street. We settle for that for bike lanes. That's a really problem, not just with someone being killed, but it deflates people who desire to ride their bikes and that is a real problem. So, this recommendation that came from utc has widespread support. Twitter is not a scientific source, but if you look up bike lane bounty, you'll see thousands of tweets with a [1:13:50 PM] thousand re-tweets and 5,000 likes and hundreds of quote tweets. If you read through the messaging you'll see what's very interesting, people from all over the world literally tagging their councilmembers in Atlanta, Denton, London, and Canada, and Calgary, etc., saying why can't we have this, this seems like a really good plan. I think the final thing I want to say about this is that it is a chance, honestly, from city council to say that bicycle infrastructure really does matter. We have a problem being able to keep our infrastructure in the way it was intended. Other cities have done similar programs and we can be the first to lead and see how it happens. If it doesn't work, we can try something else. But trying something now is better than trying nothing. And with that, are there any questions or discussion? >> Ellis: Committee members? [1:14:50 PM] Sorry, they're changing the screen. Councilmember kitchen, and then councilmember harper-madison. >> Kitchen: Yes, I wanted to give you an opportunity to just describe again -- you know, we've seen the recommendation and I think the public has seen it, but it would be helpful to just hear you again describe how you think this might work, the recommendation that the utc made. >> Sure. Thank you for the opportunity. So, 311 exists and as was pointed out, people make complaints, but it is very difficult to enforce the ordinance. This isn't a change in the ordinance. It is a change in enforcement leads. The city of Austin still makes the final call. The city of Austin and 311 and the officers, whatever that mechanism becomes decides is this a citable offense. If they have the ability to cite it doesn't require them to cite it. In discussing with Mr. Redfern from atd, he pointed out that, [1:15:51 PM] for example, delivery trucks downtown can apply for a permit to block driving lanes during certain times of the day. It would be totally fine for the city to say your first two offenses you're going to get an application for this permit instead of getting a citation. This doesn't enforce anybody to write a ticket automatically. But it uses the 311 mechanism we already have and provides an additional source of enforcement potential. And then the last bit I want to say is modeling it after the truck program in New York City, which is listed, I don't know if you read the article, but it has led to millions of dollars in revenue for New York City for an ordinance they already had. And while this isn't primarily about the money in my desire, it's about making bike lanes comfortable for people to use, it's not to be -- not to give it a short shrift, because there are real dollars at stake and real lives, too. >> Kitchen: So if I am, you [1:16:53 PM] know, riding a bike or if I'm just walking by a bike lane and I see a car parked in it, what would I do under this program? >> I would use the 311 app just like you could do right now. You would be able to attach a photo. That photo would serve as the evidence. And it would be geo tagged and time tagged. Just the way they look now to decide to send or not send somebody, they could decide it's a violation, we'll still send somebody or not, or just write the citation. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Ellis: Councilmember harper-madison. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, chair. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mario, for coming in and offering this information. You know, a personal pet peeve that I've wondered what the path forward on is when people in order to bypass the left turning [1:17:54 PM] vehicle veer into the bike plan to go around -- lane to go around them, when they use the bike lane as a passing lane. I do know why. And so that said, I often wonder, short of law enforcement, what are your options? I guess the other option is really something that needs to happen in general as we look at mobility and transit, and urban mobility. I heard somebody use that term today. I really like that. Culture shift kind of a thing. Don't use the bike lane to go around cars that are turning. It's like the school Zones. You know to slow down in a school zone. There's some culture shift that needs to happen. But just short of law enforcement, what are the options around getting people to really, sort of, shift mindset around observation of safety and maintenance of bike lanes? Even just watching people blow all their yard trash into the [1:18:55 PM] bike lane, and my closest, you know, to date accident on the bike was I skid on some debris that had -- I watched it happen, too. But it was just the way I was juxtaposed with the traffic here to my left and the person blowing the trash into the bike lane, I couldn't slow down enough and I couldn't get over enough. And sure enough, I slid on that debris. So what are y'all's suggestions around what we as a body can do to help, sort of, inspire that culture shift? >> MMM. That's a great question. Two things come to my mind. The first is protected bike lanes. You can't swerve into a bike lane if there's a curb. Or even if there are ballards you can, but the big button ones act as a deterrent and go a long way. First, physically protecting the infrastructure. The second one I think is chicken and egg. When there is more enforcement, people understand it because if it doesn't happen to them, it starts to happen to a friend. [1:19:55 PM] They see it in the news, on Twitter, that this is starting to be a thing. If I look at school Zones, that's a really good example. My wife and daughter's school, we pass two other schools. And 75% of the cars are not going in the school zone speed. And then a bunch of parents will call, police will come out for a week and you'll see them constantly writing tickets. And then you'll see it changes because people see it happen to others. I think the enforcement -- this is why there's the crowdsources enforcement lead, because I can't give you a ticket for being in the bike lane, but the crowdsourced leads to law enforcement go a long way. It doesn't -- I would say, I don't think we need police officers to spend a lot of time chasing down leads, because it's kind of a dead end. People are gone pretty quickly. They may be stopping for five minutes, for 30 minutes. But it's going to be difficult for law enforcement to get there in time. I don't think we need to do [1:20:57 PM] that. >> Harper-madison: That's not what I was asking. I think the assessment that I was trying to make was entirely clear. I don't think that's an appropriate use of that resource, that tool. But this would, from an enforcement perspective, be a part of the larger conversation about what civilians can enforce. This strikes me as the type of infraction that can be enforced by civilians real-time who have been deputized. I don't know what that variable is, to do what. And so that just brings me back to I think in a lot of ways this is the city pulling levers around public communication and really shifting behavior by way of how we communicate the issue. So, I really look forward to following up. This is definitely something that's been on the mind for me, so I appreciate the presentation today and I look forward to following up. Thank you. >> Ellis: Thank you for those questions. I think my question would start [1:21:58 PM] with does this need additional council direction and if so, what is it that we could do to be helpful? I think these are important recommendations and want to help get this type of enforcement happening. >> Is that a question for me? >> Ellis: Yes. >> Okay. I think within the recommendations itself, there is a, sort of, blocking status now. As it says in the recommendation, the current ordinances essentially allow parking in bike lanes unless forbidden. We need to flip the status, bike lane parking is not allowed unless explicitly allowed. You know. So, I think that needs to be a flip. And I used to be a bike commuter on the shoal creek bike lane and that goes through a neighborhood. For years people have been able to either park or share in the [1:22:58 PM] way the bike lane was structured. It was not always super clear. There is this cultural understanding which needs to shift that bike lane parking is not allowed rather than it's allowed unless they say you cant. That's the first part the city council needs to address and then we can start the cultural shift. That will generate news, stories, maybe education. You used to be able to do this but you can't anymore because it's not safe. The money that gets spent on bike lane infrastructure is thrown down the drain. It doesn't allow us to do the mode shift desires at asmp, which is a visionary document -- it doesn't talk at length about bike mode share, but it talks about mode share generally and if we want that desired outcome, this is one tactic that will lead us that way. >> Ellis: I completely agree. With the buildout of project connect and the safe and activity ability bonds from 2020, both of those are going to get us a really long way. [1:23:59 PM] I appreciate the call-out here saying that for the millions of dollars allocated for bike lanes, if they are blocked then they are completely useless. And we all know that a cyclist having to leave a bike lane that's designated for them, entering a space where a car is not expecting them is probably one of the most dangerous ways that bicyclists are trying to have to navigate in the city when we've already built the bike lane. And I think there also is -- I'm a little foggy on the language, but when we were doing the sd23 mobility outcome in January of 2019, I think we added in a metric specifically about debris being cleared out of the bike lanes. So I'll have to look at that language again to see what specifically was called out, but I feel like debris and parking equally disadvantage the folks who need to use the bike lane. Yes, it's a lot about bicycling, but it's also about wheelchairs, strollers, walkers and other forms of mobility that people need to be able to use in our [1:25:00 PM] public space. Are there any other questions? I really appreciate the presentation. >> I appreciate the questions. Good discussion. >> Ellis: Thank you for joining us, Mario. It's good to see you. >> Thank you. >> Ellis: Our next update is going to be on the I-35 capital express and its environmental study. And I will point out I think the backup that's been provided in here is going to be updated again right after the meeting. If you're looking at that link, it may not be this presentation, but this one will be posted this backup shortly after the meeting. [1:26:14 PM] >> Ellis: There we go. >> Good afternoon, first, I'd like to thank the committee for the invitation to come and speak. My -- next slide, please. My name is Tommy with the Austin txdot and I'm the mobility 35 program manager. And for the second half I'll be inviting Sonya up to speak as well. >> Thank you. >> Next slide, please. A little bit of background about myself, I am born and raised austinite myself. I grew up in north Austin and now live in south Austin. I have driven up and down 35 my whole life. And this is a picture of me and my son at the Dell match play. I'm really excited about this project, about building a project that enhances mobility and safety one day for him to use. Next slide, please. Just a quick overview on the capex central project, which [1:27:15 PM] starts at 290 east down to sh71, Ben white boulevard. We are proposing two non-tolled lanes, managed lanes that are HOV lanes, high-occupancy vehicle. We also plan to enhance bicycle and pedestrian paths and accommodate transit routes. The estimated construction cost for the project is 4.9 billion with an anticipated start of 2025. Next slide, please. This is just a brief overview of our public outreach up to this date. [ Clearing throat ] The 18,000 that you see there is from various outreach events that we have held up and down with involvement with the corridor. Most recently, two Saturdays ago, we actually attended with the downtown Austin alliance and city of Austin and their event. And we received a lot of great [1:28:17 PM] input from the community on the project. Next slide, please. This is just a quick overview, again, up to this date of specific events that we have held, such as meeting with the north large transit center -- Lamar transit center, the farmer's market and the festival. At that same event two Saturdays ago I heard a gentleman peek and speak and I couldn't agree more. He talked about intentionality. Being intentional and who we reach out to and going to the community and speaking to the community. Next slide, please. This is just explaining when we reach out to the community how we are working on implementing those changes into the project. Some of you have heard about our alternatives. When we talked about alternative two and three we heard from the [1:29:18 PM] community that they were very similar. Hence, what we have now with the modified alternative three in the project. Next slide, please. This is an overview of various things that we have heard from the community on the project. More bicycle and pedestrian enhancements, encourage transit, urban feel downtown. Again, you know, for example on the modified alternative three that boulevard section that we show proposed in the schematic through the downtown area. Next slide, please. Another focus of our project is east-west connectivity. And ways that we are doing that is eight new bike/ped bridges shown in both alternative two and modified alternative three and 14 new widened bridges, shown both in alternative two and modified alternative three. [1:30:19 PM] I'd like to talk a little bit about specific widened bridge on our project on mlk boulevard. We're proposed to do a widened bridge in that area and also build a pedestrian bridge. We're thinking of ways on how we could break out and build that in advance. So in essence, during the construction of 35 central we would be able to allow pedestrians in traveling public to safely move east and west during the construction of the project. Next slide, please. And now I'll pass it on to Sonya, who's going to speak more about our environmental process. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, my name is Sonya Hernandez, environmental program manager for the mobility 35 central capital express central project. And I was invited to talk a little bit about our [1:31:21 PM] environmental process. Next slide. So, our project has federal funding behind it which means that we are in compliance with federal regulations. The primary regulation that we are following that dictates our process is the national environmental policy act. It requires agencies to coordinate with other agencies with the public, and the tenets are transparency and informed decision-making and giving the public a voice in the process. Under Nepa, our agency is preparing an environmental impact statement. You'll hear people refer to this as an Eis, an analysis done to determine what potential environmental impacts might result from a proposed project. This level of analysis is usually done for large undertakings when substantial or significant impacts are anticipated. The process includes input from the public as well as from [1:32:22 PM] federal and state agencies. Next slide. At the beginning of our environmental process, we engaged in the public and agencies through a process called scoping. In scoping we gathered information from the community and agencies on the purpose and need of the project, the alternatives being considered, and the general scope of the studies to be included in the Eis. We used that input to determine what alternatives to carry forward into the draft Eis for further analysis and comparison to the no build. We are currently in the technical studies phase where most studies have been completed and are currently being reviewed. The results of the analysis, public engagement, and coordination with agencies to date will be documented in our draft and a preferred alternative will be identified. The document will be released for public and agency review during the public hearing process this winter. Txdot will consider public and agency input during that public [1:33:23 PM] hearing phase in preparation of the final environmental impact statement and the record of decision, the environmental decision. Next slide. So, this slide shows a lot of the topics that are typically covered in an environmental impact statement. That includes water and biological resources, cultural resources including potential historical and architecture, landscape, and historical site impacts and archaeological sites. The potential to encounter hazardous materials within the project limits, air quality, traffic noise, community impacts, potential impacts to protected land such as parks, historical sites, and archaeological sites, indirect and cumulative impacts associated with the project, and then beyond the usual scope of an Eis, txdot, based on community input during scoping, decided to do some additional analysis regarding climate change and communities. [1:34:24 PM] Issues of particular public concern that came up during scoping and during our public outreach since scoping include community impacts, protected lands, air quality, traffic noise, and I think that might be it. So, next slide. So I'm going to talk in a little more detail about some of those issues of particular public concern. So, one of the things that was brought up a lot during scoping and during our voice meetings since scoping is community impacts. People are interested in what we do when we analyze potential impacts to the community. We collect data to develop a community profile. We identify the study area, describe the existing land use and community character, and for that we look at things like demographics, density and distribution of development, and we identify community facilities. We use that to evaluate the [1:35:25 PM] existing land use patterns within the community study area. We identify environmental justice populations, which are populations that are predominantly minority or low-income. We identify any populations with limited English proficiency. We look at any other potentially vulnerable populations, geographically dispersed, transient persons, elderly persons, children, folks with disabilities or impairments, etc. So, then we move on to look at to potential project-induced things, we focus on displacement, access and travel pattern changes, and community cohesion. We also consider public input and public feedback in this process in determining our potential impacts. Tommy talked and showed a slide about some of the directed public engagement that we've [1:36:25 PM] done with potentially vulnerable communities. So, with all that information considered, we determined what our potential impacts are to the community and what we can do to mitigate those. Next slide. So, when we look at protected land, there are a couple of things we look at. There are a few regulations listed up here that you might hear environmental scientists talk about. And section 4f and 6f are regulations that offer some protection to public recreational land, wildlife and water fowl refuges. Section 6f mainly applies to parks and recreation lands that were purchased or developed with land and water conservation act funding. We do have a couple of those properties on the north side of lady bird lake. Section 4f has a little bit of overlap with the national historic preservation act and the antiquities code of Texas. Both of these regulations are focused on the protection of cultural resources, including historic architecture, historic [1:37:26 PM] places and landscapes, and archaeological sites. So if we determine that there's an adverse impact to those cultural resources under those regulations we include them in the evaluation of section 4f as well. We have been working and coordinating very closely with the city of Austin parks department, as well as the city of Austin historic reservation preservation office on our assessment of impacts for these resources. Next slide. So, another thing that is usually an issue of concern with the public is -- and the community is traffic noise. The major objectives of traffic noise is to identify noise-sensitive areas along the project corridor. When we do a traffic noise analysis, you know, we collect the data about the existing and proposed roadway. We look at existing and predicted traffic, vehicle mix, speed limits, existing road [1:38:27 PM] design and the proposed road design, and adjacent land use and identify those noise-sensitive receivers. We'll collect sound level measurements, identify noise-sensitive areas and build and run a model using modeling software to predict traffic noise levels. Those predictions are used to identify areas that might be impacted by traffic noise as a result of the proposed project. And then noise abatement measures are evaluated. Next slide. So, the last issue of concern that is generally raised by the public is air quality. As you can see, txdot evaluate the potential effects caused by the project on air quality in compliance with the clean air act. There are a few things that the EPA identifies as pollutants of concern and you'll hear especially these acronyms thrown about, sat, mobile source air [1:39:30 PM] toxics, carbon monoxide and the national ambeiant air quality standards developed by the EPA for these pollutants. And they are identified in the clean air act. They are established for the protection of human health. And there are secondary ones that are established for the protection of the environment. And we look at these in our analysis. So, msats in particular are considered air toxics by the EPA. They are associated with mobile sources. So, transportation is a big factor in that and that's why we model it. The model that we use calculates sat commissions according to facility type, speed, vehicle miles traveled, and then looks a at the line opening day of when traffic is expected to be able to use the full facility and our [1:40:33 PM] design year. So, based on anticipated traffic volumes and the scope of the proposed improvements, we are looking at carbon monoxide for our traffic air quality analysis. And those are the primary issues that are -- have been raised by the public, but, of course, as I mentioned before with that previous slide, we look at all of those subject areas in our analysis. So, next slide. I think really, we can just take some questions now. >> Ellis: Thank you for that presentation. I'll open it up for questions. Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: Hello. Thank you very much for the presentation. I have a couple of questions. My first question relates to the lanes. It's really on slide 4. And it relates to the capital express scope of the project. So, is this just -- does this [1:41:35 PM] just have to do with the central part of I-35? Because I'm curious about the potential for these express lanes going further south than 290. >> Thank you, councilmember kitchen. I was in the presentation speaking specifically about central, but we also have HOV managed lanes in the capex south project, which continues from -- can y'all still hear me? >> Kitchen: Mhmm. >> Sh71, Ben white boulevard, all the way to sh45 right before you get to the butte area. That's for the south area. Additionally, on the other end we have our capex north project that also is including the HOV managed lanes starting at 290 east and going all the way to the other sh45 north. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you for clarifying that. [1:42:37 PM] My second question has to do with the air quality monitoring. I'm just curious about where the monitoring occurs geographically. In other words, how far away and what geographic area do you study? >> So, the air quality monitoring network is actually established by the EPA and the state agency that works on these issues. For us, that would be tceq. And they have their map of their air quality monitoring network available on their website in a gis mapping tool. But it will show you where the existing monitoring stations are. >> Kitchen: Okay. My question really is for purposes of an Eis and for air quality, what counts? Do you have to be within a certain distance from the project, or is it all over the city? That's what I'm trying to understand is the scope of the analysis from an Eis standpoint. [1:43:37 PM] >> Right, so we use the local air monitoring network to establish the level of analysis that we need. The Austin area is what the EPA refers to as in attainment, which means that it is under the national standards that have been established for the primary pollutants. So we do look at that in our analysis. Currently our plan is to do modeling on a qualitative level for our draft Eis. Once a preferred alternative is identified, in the final Eis we will do a quantitative analysis, modeling on the preferred alternative. So we will be actually taking a hard look at the modeling numbers specific to the project. >> Kitchen: For where? Are you saying a mile from the I-35 corridor, two miles, five miles? >> The model is based on the [1:44:38 PM] mpo's link system. And so it's more regional than that. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> But it uses campo's model to figure out where the traffic links are that are pulled into the analysis. >> Kitchen: The reason I'm asking - - this is a different kind of project, but I do remember when we were talking about the airport and potential air quality monitoring, it only occurred on-site. Transportation is different than that, but I was just curious if there were geographic boundaries to where you would impact -- you would analyze the impact, but it sounds like there aren't. It's the whole region? >> It is a little more regional because we are looking at what's considered mobile air toxics instead of point source. >> Kitchen: Okay. Thank you. >> Ellis: Those were great questions. At the clean air coalition, which councilmember kitchen formerly served on and now I am the first vice chair of that committee, we talk a lot about [1:45:39 PM] where the monitoring applications go and exactly what types of things are monitored. I know there's usually a standard of we need to be talking about the ambient air quality and understand regional impacts, but folks may be more concerned about the immediate impacts of the construction because that is going to be pretty acute for time that the construction's going on. But with the monitoring system, you tend to want things that are not going to see high spikes year to year. You're going to want to see something that gives you a general understanding of if the air quality is being affected in an ongoing way long-term. I will toss is over to councilmember harper-madison before I finish with my questions. Go ahead. >> Harper-madison: Thank you, chair. I appreciate it. Can you all tell me whether or not the new mlk bridge -- once it's complete, will it retain the name jj Seabrook? >> Thank you, councilmember harper-madison. That's a really good question. [1:46:39 PM] I do have my mobility 35 team here to note that question. I unfortunately do not know the answer.>> Harper-madison: Councilmemb er harper-madison for the win. I stumped somebody. [ Laughing ] So, I appreciate the followup on that. Thank you for your candor. The other question I have is we get a lot of fluctuation, as you can imagine, because of supply chain issues. So I want to know how confident is txdot that $4.9 billion price tag is going to hold out and that -- then I'm curious also to know what happens if there are some sudden increases as we move through the process. >> That's a good question. Part of what goes into our [1:47:41 PM] construction estimate is the materials. As you mentioned, we break down the construction. We're looking at the structures. We're looking at the roadway. We're looking at the shared use path and what it takes to build that. We do have in more detail, we'd be happy to provide how we came up with the $4.9 billion. Right now we are in what you would call a pre-procurement process for a design build project, so we are also seeking from industry their input as well. >> Harper-madison: I appreciate that. Not to put you on the spot, what I was hoping to extract there is, you know, what happens if the price goes way up, you know. I think that's a legitimate question that a lot of folks are [1:48:41 PM] wondering. Our office, we get all sorts of communication from people at various stages of construction projects. And they're not this scale of construction project, but there have been some catastrophic occurrences by way of exponential increase. And the scope and project cost, I really would like to know what happens if things go completely haywire. And maybe that's another -- maybe we follow up. Maybe that's another briefing. But I'd really like to know that. And totally not to put you on the spot, but I'm trying to gauge for myself, I should back it up. For context, lay people having these conversations I think we try our best to try to compare it to something. Anecdotally I can follow along on the conversation on something this massive. But I am really curious on a scale of 1 to 10 how confident do y'all feel there won't be [1:49:43 PM] that red button emergency critical -- I understand how pro Forma documentation works, but, question number 2 which might be a followup, what happens if the red button has to get pushed? And what are - - what do those plans look like if things go really sour? >> Thank you for the question, councilmember. >> Harper-madison: Thank you. >> I think for our team, we are very confident in the project. And we are confident that we are going to deliver at the schedule that we currently presented with the costs that we currently presented. I do understand that things are dynamic and change along in the process, so I'd be happy to follow up and share with you specifically what our contingency plans are should something like that come up. But we are confident in the project. >> Harper-madison: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. [1:50:45 PM] >> Ellis: Those were great questions. There's a lot of projects happening locally that are having to reconfigure their implementation and their timeline and just understanding how many dollars are in play. But I know four of five committee members here serve on campo and it's no secret that the conversation, if it were to need more money, would kind of be a tough conversation to have at the campo level just because there's mixed feelings about who the highway project is really for. And is it for the people in Austin, or for commuters. And so that's something that we've had a lot of conversations with regionally, just understanding the balance of the campo board and some of the projects and commitments that we have to make there. Those covered a lot of what I would have wanted to know as well, but I did make a note. On the next session for public input, do you have a set date on when you expect the 60-day comment period to open, or is that still in flux a little bit? [1:51:45 PM] >> As of right now, we anticipate that that will happen early to mid-december. We would make all the documents available for public review with maybe 45 days built in prior to public hearing event and then a couple of weeks after the event to close up the comment period. >> Ellis: That's helpful. You'll do the virtual workshops like you've done in the past. Those have been helpful to not make everyone come to the same building to get the same information. It helps for people to digest the presentations in their own time. >> Yeah, that's the plan. >> Ellis: Okay. That is great. If there is no other questions, I think we are settled. Thanks for joining us. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate it. >> Ellis: Item number 4 is the update on safety mobility autonomy research and testing, S.M.A.R.T. Track. [1:52:51 PM] >> Ellis: Welcome. >> Hi, good afternoon. I'm Mike Arellano, deputy district engineer for Austin, and I have the privilege of leading this charge of the new shiny thing in transportation. With that, I also have my cohort, Jason jonmichael and Heidi Ross from the center for transportation research. Next slide. So, you have to be under a rock to know that we have all this emerging transportation technology coming to the forefront in the market such as autonomous vehicles, electric power vehicles, and all the data that this creates. And it's new transportation atmosphere. We don't realize how fast the penetration rate is into our market. The private sector has done a great job innovating these things and bringing them to market. As a public agency we're still catching up. So long ago I gave up the [1:53:52 PM] conception that the public sector was determining the transportation future. The private sector has done a great job innovating. This technology is a great opportunity for everyone. Vehicles today and roadway design standards are the safest they've ever been built to history, yet we still continue to see fatalities, a high rate of crashes. So this type of technology helps us bring forth benefits of autonomy and connected vehicles. So, with that, in central Texas we have a really good problem. We have silica hills, all these oems locally available to us, and all of our public transportation agencies have been leveraged to bring forth these solutions. The problem is, as a public transportation agency, individually we receive all these solicitations and ideas to launch and deploy this technology, but there's a couple issues and challenges. How do we do that transparently [1:54:53 PM] to gain the public trust that what we're doing is safe? Secondly, that we're not, kind of, doing independent efforts. Are we really achieving some type of operaablety, whether on a city or state road. We need some means to vet these technologies to assure to the public that we bring the best, fresh products for market onto the roadway. So, the concept was we got together with our campo partners at txdot and say we need a unified approach to this. That way our central Texas region, we implement all these and standardize it and have this collective approach to it. That way we can optimize all the different benefits of all these technology and innovations and gain the best products for the public to put it out onto the roadway. Next. What this does, we have a very -- we are uniquely positioned in central Texas [1:55:53 PM] given the huge technology ecosystem we do have. We have been studying this and feel that even though the public sector is a little behind, we're in a good position to not only be a partner with our private partners, but lead in this way. With this collective approach we can share data, we can have this inter-discipline cooperation, and most importantly, we can demonstrate to the public that not all of these innovations -- operable, but they're going to provide all these benefits to the community. Next. So, that vetting system is what we've been partnering with the university of Texas and I say we, these are who's involved in the public side, txdot, campo, university of Texas, the rma, and all of our campo partners. And so the concept was to come [1:56:54 PM] up with S.M.A.R.T. Track, repurposing the pickle center on burnet and breaker to be a proving center. There's plenty of proving centers around the world. And txdot kind of took the lead and put forth funding to do the engineering services and feasibility study on developing this concept. Next. So, as you can see, there's going to be three different tiers. And I'll explain a little bit more. Tier one is an enclosed closed system test bed which we can really test any of these type of technologies that come forward in a very safe, closed atmosphere. Tier two is somewhat still closed but a little more open into the campus of the pickle center. And tier three is what makes us unique. We're going to make an open-bed, public roadway testing loop between those state roadways. Next. This is kind of a neat little rendering of what tier one would look on campus. [1:57:54 PM] It would address all those different use cases that you see there. One thing that makes it unique, unlike any other proving center we've seen is we're going to combine, it's going to be like a Hollywood set. It's going to be flexible, unlike most proving centers that are hardwired into one use case. We're envisioning where we can have different sets, different intersection, different configurations to fit different scenarios that not only we're interested in but also our private partners will be utilizing this facility also. Next. Again, this is another feature out there that would -- you see the curve. So we also have some campo partners in rural counties wondering, this is great. This is uniquely positioned in an urban dense area, we get it. The worst torture test. But we have rural areas. You see curves and features you would regularly find on an fm road. We're able to simulate those [1:58:55 PM] also. Next. Some more pretty pictures, renderings of what this cold could look like. These are common -- we were talking earlier about cars using bike lanes as passing routes. You can simulate that and how these technologies can help interrupt those type of conflict points. Next. Kind of an aerial. This is kind of the features that you would see out there. We would actually have vulnerable user evaluation as you see, whether it's pedestrians or bikes and we can simulate that along with soft dummy, soft vehicles to ensure that these technologies really prove out to where they can actually help the driver make better decisions. Next. This is some comparisons around proving centers around the country. There's several of them. Some are very involved. [1:59:56 PM] Most of them are really involved around the vehicle. Our center is actually focused around the transportation system. As we said earlier, our tier three system, which is an open test bed which you don't see on here makes us unique in our ability not just to evaluate something but go to implementation quickly. Next. So, we have a great business plan. This is the kind of things we've been pushing funding for on our capital -- we've tried to assess how much this will cost. The initial cost will be $18 million of mixed public/private funds to construct tier one and tier two systems. We've evaluated that. Actually, we had about 30% of our funding from private sector. It can pretty much be sustainable as far as operation and maintenance in the long term. So we expect not only that, but it creates great research [2:00:56 PM] opportunities and a great breeding ground for research through the university of Texas. And so we can have a greater partner in the university to have a robust research system to take up any interrupter, any type of trend that we know what's going to happen in ten years. And most importantly it's going to produce a different type of transportation engineer. Transportation engineering is multidisciplinary. I was talking to someone yesterday. Their staff has 20% non-civil engineers in the civil engineering program. It's indicative of what the market looks likes today. Next. So, this compares us to other proving centers and how effective this place could be and how it could be a world trend-setter. As you can see, the dots indicate, if you're to the far right upper corner, that's the optimal place to be. So, from an interdisciplinary partner, local industry, we've got that in spades. [2:01:57 PM] We have all these oems and technology partners here privately in central Texas and we have a great diversity of disciplines locally. From a mobility standpoint, we have great ability to -- I forgot my glasses. We have a great ability to basically have a variety of capability. Like I said, we're advocating a very flexable design to where we can morph and evolve to different use cases that we haven't ever envisioned in the future, so it's very flexible. Physically you would see that we're a little bit smaller. But when you start expanding to tier two and three we're comparable to other testing centers. Next. This is kind of where we're at at this point. We've got the idea, the selection location. University of Texas has given us [2:02:58 PM] permission to utilize this campus. I'm sure once it's successful we'll be able to renew it. We're at the conceptual design standpoint and we're done pretty much with that. We're up to basically the main part of raising money. So we have been talking to campo. And we're talking about partnering along with the city, if they choose to do so, and leveraging S.M.A.R.T. Grants coming out soon through the federal government. And doing those grant applications to possibly pay for this concept. Next. So there's our contact information. I think Texas S.M.A.R.T. Track is not only essential to us deploying technology well and effective, but it will relevance this above and -- advance us above and beyond as world-class leaders to doing that. Any questions? >> Ellis: I'm sure there's probably a few. Do you want to start us off, councilmember kitchen? [2:03:59 PM] >> Kitchen: Yeah. Just maybe give us some examples of what you might test there that we might at some point, you know, see on our roads. I'm sure that automated vehicles is one of the things. But can you just -- so, you know, I'm just thinking of folks that may be watching so it can be something that they can understand more specifically, you know, what might be tested? >> I'll give a state use and I'll let Jason talk about city use. From a state use, you know, freight is always, you know, one of your biggest use cases. Today there's several self-driving freight companies out there using our state roadways. So one thing we're doing right now is procuring services to deploy technology on 130 as a technology corridor. We want to know and start learning how once those are connected to our infrastructure how we can help guide that safely. I always compare it to an orchestra. [2:04:59 PM] Every oem, whether it's Tesla, kodiak, all these oems have their own individual instrument and think they can play by themselves, but on the roadway you have to play together. As a public agency we have to have the standard way we're going to operate together. And we have to be the conductor. And so what this center will help us do is establish the requirements. The vehicles will be on there. But the roadside units and sensors we need to do communication between us and the cars and help conduct operations is something that we'll be able to test out there. We also looked -- procured the first machine learning, artificial intelligence data platform lately that would help us aggregate this data. We're going to have data coming out of our ears, but what do we do with it. This will help us manage traffic and on the back end do a lot of [2:06:00 PM] optimization on timing, looking at safety conflict points and be able to design our roadways safer or communicate the cars on typical situations on the roadway if they're on some level of autonomy to avoid some things. It's very safety-driven on the outcomes. But any operational improvement is going to have some type of safety outcome. All that can be simulated first at this center. There's going to be ten people in line saying theirs is the best. It will test -- we'll try out all ten, come out with five and say these are approved for this type of roadside technology. >> Kitchen: Okay. Mhmm. >> Thank you, Mike. Jason jonmichael, assistant director, transportation department, S.M.A.R.T. Mobility. So from the -- first I'll say that we've been in conversation with txdot and U.T. For the betterment of about a year of a [2:07:00 PM] half over this particular initiative. Y'all know that I have participated in a lot of tests around the country with this stuff. What I find very interesting about this is it will probably be the best world-class facility in the world for new mobility, new urban mobility testing to be specific. So, as I look at that facility from our needs at the city, I see a unique, very close to us -- remember that the only other testing facility we have access to right now is at College Station. This gives us the ability -- that was built for predominantly highway testing and some other things. As Mike mentioned, most of the test facilities in the united States that have been built in the last ten years specific to help adopt all these new things have been built for specific challenges, specific engineering challenges that need to be solved. Believe it or not some of them came down to we need an autonomous vehicle to be in a tunnel and have the sun shine directly into the tunnel so we [2:08:01 PM] understand how that can happen. That's one in Michigan, for instance, acm. What we find interesting about this is we have this unique opportunity to take all of the learnings over the last five years and specifically what we as a community, as a region have learned here related to other micromobility, other low-speed mobility devices, the interaction and intersection of mobility and health, the intersection and interaction of mobility between vulnerable road users as Mike was talking about and others. The facility is extremely configurable to allow us to test any type of new thing we need to. As we look towards, as Mario was mentioning, new types of policies and policies that we need to change, we can go and try those out and see what those look like with our partners, with our private sector partners that are providing these solutions. It will help us determine how to [2:09:01 PM] use intelligent infrastructure to build out our infrastructure of our city that will -- should as Mike and I always say, and I took it from Mike and use it, as Mike says to all his staff, build me a road that's still useful in 2075. Same thing we need to do here. In fact, in our facilities, the amount of electrification, of communication, that Mike's team and my team are now taking on is also going to build a lot of workforce. And so the last I'll say is this is directly associated with how Austin continues to build its regional workforce as well. >> Ellis: I appreciate that. Is there any focus on things like robot delivery? We had a discussion at our last meeting about that kind of autonomous vehicle. And as txdot continues to implement shared use path spaces into their projects, I'm curious -- we can talk about the car aspect, but if you've got a delivery vehicle that's -- and they're both autonomous, how is [2:10:04 PM] that factoring in? >> That's what we get the ability to test and actually throw them into a collision course with one another. Actually modify the environment. The facility has some very unique capabilities -- the ability to create water running across so we can look at water sheeting, traction, and those type of things. As y'all know we're moving forward with astm and a national conversation with the feds around building out a standard for the two-wheel standup scooter. In the near future, those new standards will need to be tested. Those tests could be to be right in our own backyard. Thereby, we learn from them right away. So, you know, things like road users, the interaction, being able to configure the environment. Say for instance we wanted to take part of the environment and [2:11:05 PM] treat it like 6th street and apply our all ages all abilities ordinance to that and maybe apply the scooter or the active transportation dismount application to that as well to better understand that. We can use this facility to better understand how we enforce our policies while giving our private sector partners an opportunity to learn in this environment that we're creating. It will be a central Texas environment. So they're getting a lot of the same kind of things like heat and those kind of things. And most of these devices are electric. So what we're beginning to notice with some of the bots, for instance, since they have smaller batteries, is how is the Texas heat hurting, mitigating their range, for instance. So those are a couple of examples of how that would be used. I would also state that with most of those technologies, they're using some level of [2:12:06 PM] communications. Usually over the air cellular communications. So we have the opportunity to then create interference and create other environmental conditions that would maybe lessen the strength, signal strength. And what happens when those devices aren't able to communicate at the level that they need to, go through those kind of safety scenarios as well. >> Ellis: That's great. Are there any other types of technology that are coming in here? You talked about signage, you talked about cars, you talked about other smaller forms of mobility. Are there other technologies that are being tested here that are not necessarily the vehicular aspect of transportation? >> We're focused on the transportation system itself. Everything is going to be -- the road bot delivering food, we talked earlier about people parking on the shared use path and blocking that out. We can simulate all that and how is it going to interpret that. [2:13:08 PM] And have people on a bike trying to use the same shared use path. But some other things -- I always talk from a state perspective. Some things we're talking about doing is installing precast concrete pavement. And we're talking about using than I-35, the new construction projects. The great opportunity with that, when you fabricate those panels is you can embed all kinds of sensors. That is enabled to have the connective ability with the cars on it. We're trying to reimagine an HOV managed plan, how -- lane how connected it can be and how capital metro will be connected in the future. It can optimize the operations of transit in that managed lane. We're looking at an intelligent barrier that has all this technology embedded in it with the ability to run conduit and fiber. It has an L.E.D. System like when you see the rose red. It will illuminate the roadway [2:14:09 PM] and have visual cues. So if you're in an unconnected not so intelligent car, at least visual cues. We're looking at high-definition dms boards to be our guide signs instead of our static green signs you see out there. We'll have that image everybody is familiar with but also a bunch of information that can be communicated to anybody even though it's a 1964 Chevy. We'll have apps, visual cues, those boards to communicate the same information for our traffic management system whether they're connected or not. >> Ellis: That's really important, because we've got the folks in transportation that help with the signal timing. If there's an emergency vehicle that needs to get through, there are people that can push the right buttons to say we need to stop traffic over here so we can let the first responders get through and then open it back up later. Being able to be flexible between the txdot roads, county roads, city roads, you know, being able to divert traffic if there is a situation. [2:15:09 PM] We've talked about one of the options we have for future meetings is the idea of why why -- wildfire evacuation. When you exit your neighborhood, it would be nice if there was a sign that said you need to go right and not left. >> That's the exciting thing about that new machine learning, artificial intelligence platform we're talking about. Everybody will be connected. We're all in one big room, our people are watching a million TVs trying to respond and looking at cameras today trying to pick out accidents and incidents and citation that out through dms boards or other applications. This can basically not only use that information, but it uses all the sensors we're talking about, but it can also conduct the information from the cars themselves through their sensors on your car today. Today's car has $100 worth of chips in it. The future is going to be $700 [2:16:15 PM] with sensors. When you aggregate that information and give logic to it it can communicate instantaneously not just to first responders, but everybody using the system whether you're on a city road or a state road and give consistent messaging and consistent -- we will be our own waze. We'll tell you go this way not that way or prompt people through an app on our phone or in their care. >> Ellis: Fascinating. Are there any further questions? Maybe I'll just ask. We have a representative from U.T. Here. Do you want a few minutes to talk about u.t.'s involvement? Obviously we've gotten a lot of the rundown, but I would hate to have you come all the way here and not get to hear from you. >> Sure. Heidi Ross, university of Texas center for transportation research. Just a couple points. Jason was just mentioning -- I guess you were mentioning, Mike, about how to handle all this data and how to handle everybody [2:17:17 PM] communicating so that we can inform users of the network about what's going on and how to make better decisions. I think one of the things when you do is develop the workforce to be able to understand and analyze all that data. We see this as a huge opportunity to develop student programs around S.M.A.R.T. Technology and change the face of what a transportation engineer learn when is they're in school. That's one opportunity we see. The other side is research. All of these things that they've been talking about, there needs to be research. For example, as automated vehicles are put on the road, the wheel paths -- right now wheels -- cars drive down the road and the wheel path varies by the person driving. But in the future, if that's automated, all the wheels might go on the same exact place on the pavement. We need to understand what impact that has and how we need [2:18:18 PM] to change pavement design to accommodate these new types of vehicles that are on the facilities. And then drones, for example. We've had a lot of discussion about using drones in this facility to look at how we interact for emergency response and how they can help and test different scenarios of improving response and dealing with all the new technologies and automated vehicles that are on the road. So, we see it as a great opportunity. >> I'm sorry. [ Off mic ] >> Yeah. [ Off mic ] [ Laughing ] >> And just -- I guess in concert with ai good systems. >> I'm sorry. I'm jump in. I'm sorry. So, I just wanted to remind everyone that through the innovation office we have the ai good systems contract with U.T. So that's where all departments and all of the city of Austin has access to that for uses of [2:19:21 PM] finding ways to connect and do research around how ai can be used for good. So, thinking about how we interact with Heidi all the time with the center of transportation research and how this new contract's coming in gives us a unique ability to start leaning into intelligent infrastructure and artificial intelligence and how that coordination needs to happen between the two. So I just wanted to mention the city has a methodology to become a very meaningful partner in this initiative. Sorry. >> Ellis: That's great. Councilmember kitchen? >> Kitchen: I just wanted to ask a little bit about the fleet electrification. There's been various things talked about before about the ability to electrify, like, the [2:20:23 PM] light rail lines. There's various options for how those maybe electric vehicles in the future. If we're talking about potentially working towards a bus for example being able to drive over, you know, something to be -- and have that, you know, operate like a charging station. Anyway, any of those various aspects that have been talked about, is that something that you would be testing for, or no? >> Part of the facility evaluating those type of technologies. Going back to the concrete pavement panel idea where you can fabricate it off-site and put all kinds of sensors and embed things, one thing we're looking at is basically smart pavements. So there's a sensor side, but we're going to evaluate inductive charging and put those type of high-power resources in there and capability and coils [2:21:25 PM] to look at the feasibility of inductive charging. The big question is can you do it as highway speed. At lower speeds, static, it's feasible. Right now we're looking at the feasibility at high-speed applications and we do have some private projects we're looking at. One thing I can do -- I probably should have offered this earlier. We have a white paper of all the initiatives. >> Kitchen: That would be interesting. >> That explain those things. >> Kitchen: Okay. >> Ellis: That would be great. We can share that with the mobility committee folks and maybe post it into backup as well for folks that are curious about that. Any further questions on this item? I think that covers it. Thank you so much for sharing that information with us. And our next briefing is going to be on the safe routes to school program. And welcome back to school, for everybody who's still getting used to the new school year. [2:22:29 PM] [ Chuckling ] >> Good afternoon. My name is Colleen Gentles, infrastructure manager of the safe routes to school program. I have in the back to the program manager, amir and also alsointerim director of public works, James. Next slide, please. The mission of the program is to increase the number of students walking and biking to school by creator a safer, healthier, more equitable environment that fosters human-powered transportation. Our vision is to engage with the community to create a safer, healthier, and more equitable environment that fosters human-powered transportation as a first choice for city of Austin students. Our safe routes to school program is composed of four components. Crossing guards is at the top. We -- the city of Austin employees over 200 crossing guards and crossing guard supervisors at 97 elementary schools within aid and six other school districts also. [2:23:30 PM] Our next component is the education team. We have a team of six folks that go out into the elementary schools and do education for walking and biking safely. We also work with daycare centers and pre-k as well and have often done education sessions for ptas in the evening. Other programs that we do include the bike on Wednesday, walk on Wednesday program, which is also headed by our education team. The nexttnt is engagement. That's the team that goes out and gets students excited about walking and biking. We work directly with the principals and teachers in the classrooms. We'll do competitions, who walks or bikes the most to school. We'll do the park a block and walk campaign. Those kinds of initiatives to get folks using the infrastructure. And then the last branch is infrastructure. And that's the part I'll talk [2:24:31 PM] about next. I'm the head of the infrastructure team. Next slide. Thank you. So, the infrastructure program was born out of the 2016 bond. So, in 2016, voters approved $27.5 divided equally among the districts to allow the city of Austin to address safe routes to school. As a partnership with local school districts across the city, we addressed safety concerns and encouraged children and families to bike or walk to school. The 2016 bond allows us to create an infrastructure report which identified needs that would create these safer environments, including things like sidewalks, traffic calming device, bicycle facilities, and urban trails. The approach to our report is as follows. We did initial ask of concerns in 2017. We did walk audits and community meetings in 2018 and 2019. We did an internal review, [2:25:31 PM] meeting with the area engineer and internal staff to look at what other barriers to walking and biking they were coming up with from their feedback. We released a draft infrastructure report at the end of 2019. We did a three-week comment period and published the final report early 2020, just in time for the pandemic to shut everything down. Next slide, please. So, the results of the infrastructure report revealed 137 schools within city of Austin and -- including seven school districts. Here is a table of those 137 schools. As you can see here, council districts 1, 2, and 6 have the most public elementary and middle schools and districts 9 and 5 have the least amount. Next slide. And this report also revealed the number of barriers identified per council district. Altogether there's over 4600 [2:26:33 PM] barriers to allowing students to safely walk and bike to school. As you can see here, the highest number of barriers was in district 1 and 3 and the lowest number were in districts 8 and 9. Next slide. And this is the estimated cost of barriers per council district. All together, the 4600 barriers to school resulted in over $825 million in cost to address those barriers. So here you can see the highest cost would be in districts 1 and 7 if all the barriers were addressed, and the lowest number of cost is in districts 6 and 9. Next slide, so this table kind of summarizes the previous bar charts with the number of projects and their costs, so we broke down the different types of barriers into eight and had another category, too, which includes [2:27:35 PM] mostly vegetation, maintenance and parking on school campuses as well as adding bike racks. You can see the number of projects and the estimated costs. Next slide. And this pie chart here shows the recommendations broken down by their percentage. This looks at the total number of recommendations, barriers per school, and you can see the largest part of the pie chart Ares the -- asking for new or rehabilitated sidewalks on the left and on the right is asking for new curb extensions or crosswalks. Those were the highest number of recommendation ins the 4600 from the report and the lowest categories of recommendations were the over and under passes and neighborhood bikeways and traffic calming. Next slide. Looking even further at the data we found from the report, we saw that the total cost for [2:28:37 PM] the recommendations was the new and rebuilt sidewalks. As I mentioned previously, but also side paths which are shared-use paths. Those are recommendations on streets that did not have streets on -- those were the highest percentage of the chart of costs tanned lowest percentage are the neighborhood bikeways and traffic calming. Next slide. How did the report break down in terms of the data? This is a break down of the components for the rankings of the projects. We looked at four different parks -- demand, safety, equity, stakeholder input. Demand -- we looked at walking to school within a half mile and biking within two miles and we also used gis to come up with the range of where [2:29:37 PM] recommendations should be in relation to the school. With regards to safety we looked at the number of bicycle and pedestrian classes. We looked at the functional class score which is the ranking of the street and we used engineering judgment on safety regarding things like drainage concerns or utilities in the right of way -- things like that that would impact whether or not the project was viable to move forward. We listed equity -- 20 per cent. Eligibility rate as well as students attending and the poverty rate pulling from sen tus tracts to see what that was around each school. Stakeholder -- we looked at Wik maps comment -- we had a public map up and anyone could go in and add their comments there. We did inperson comments where we had community meetings, like I mentioned earlier. We went to places outside the [2:30:39 PM] schools or rec centers. We went to supermarkets, churches, different places just to gather more diverse public comment. We incorporated all those into the wiki map as a total of maps for the comment. The results of the data was the infrastructure report break down. Here is a snapshot of one page of the report. It has the background of the safe route to school program and how we got to where we are in the bond. It uncovers the process. The data analysis I talked about that's explained in the reports, and it covers up with overall benefit -- the two columns on the far right. So we have all of the recommendations -- all 4600 of them have a unique I.D. We listed which schools they were closest to. Many had overlapping catchment areas. Often times it would benefits [2:31:40 PM] one or the other. We captured that as well. We captured the issues identify Ed. It's a five-tiered scoring system. So the total cost of the project versus what the actual recommendation was and so those are the two categories on the far right. Next slide, please. And so some guide B principles on how projects are chosen. We definitely have a huge cost, right? $825 million over 46 barriers to school. There's no way to capture every single barrier that was identified. So how did we choose which projects move forward to construction? We looked at those running to high or high as an overall benefit or a very high or high cost estimated benefit. Tackling those most critical [2:32:41 PM] recommendations was one of the guiding principles to moving projects forward to construction. The second principle was making meaningful walking and bicycle improvements near as many schools as possible. I mentioned the catchment area included many middle and elementary schools. We used that as a Guiden principle to move to construction. The 2016 mobility bond funding looked at funding equally for all 10 council districts. As you saw earlier the number of schools and barriers and the cost for each barrier differed by council district. We had to be strategic about using the same dollar amount divided by council district over the number of schools in each district. The ways we managed to get a lot of projects done which we'll talk about later on is leveraging other sources of funding. We partnered with multiple [2:33:41 PM] programs, multiple departments as well as external departments and it's been a huge benefit to moving the projects forward. Next slide, please. So here is a snapshot of our total spending through -- thank you. Quarter three, June 30th of this year. We're at 16.4 million, 89 per cent of goal. We'll wrap up the fiscal year in a couple of weeks. Once we have the data inputs in we're anticipating hitting in the low 90s. Next slide, please. And here are the printerships that I mentioned earlier. We partnered with multiple entities within public works including neighborhood trails, sidewalks, stream bridge. We partnered with our friends in the transportation department, signal, speed management, vision zero, as [2:34:42 PM] well as the partners in the corridor program. I mentioned the seven school districts we work in. Those include partners with Austin, Round Rock, pfluggerville, et cetera. One of the things we've been working with them are our Ila agreements. We're going through their plans and recommending review. We work with cap metro external partners. Often times they want to relocate bus stops. We coordinate with them which is another way to leverage dollars to get projects going. Lastly quarter sent funding. It's be instrumental in getting projects on the ground. We're grateful to partner with those programs and entities. Next slide, please. Looking at some P totals of [2:35:43 PM] where we are. We've done improvements -- 71 per cent of all the schools. We're excited we've made great progress. We've done over 300 projects as of July 1st of this year. We have another 251 projects planned. In construction, in design, scoping for assignment to a contract as well. Next slide please. And then this brings us to 2020. So exciting news. We got more money in 2020 to build out more -- more projects in our infrastructure reports. We are allocating $20 million again with focus on high benefit/cost benefit projects. We're looking at critical needs throughout the city based off the report. The other thing that's particular about the 2020 bond funding -- it does not have to [2:36:44 PM] be split equally. We're able to focus more on equity, which we didn't have the ability to with the 2016 funding. Next slide, please. Future planning -- what's next for us and our program. Right now we have captured elementary and middle schools in the infrastructure report because they have a defined catchment area. One of the things we're looking forward to do is allocating 1 million towards that. One of the things that's interesting about charter schools is they don't have a defined catchment area which is why they wouldn't captured in the 2016 bond and report earlier. But a lot of the schools have benefitted from our improvements because they're close to a lot of elementary and public middle schools. I've done preliminary research on that, pulling a list of 30 charter schools to review and [2:37:45 PM] we're hoping to move forward later this year and early next year with a plan to get charter schools addressed. I believe -- next slide. Yes. That is the end of the presentation I had. That's an overview of the safe routes to school program, where we are today. There's my contact information if you have questions for me. I wanted to overview to the committee. >> Thank you. Council member kitchen? >> Kitchen: I think you mentioned it. I'm not finding it right here. Where do we go to look for the list of schools and projects planned. >> Yes. You can find that on our website. If you go to austintx.gov/saferoutes. We have a map there. If you want to see the schools that are active under construction that would be on the mobility annual plan. That's the planning process we do annually. That shows which projects are [2:38:46 PM] moving forward toward construction in that calendar year. >> Kitchen: What years do we show now? Would we show 2023. >> We're -- that's a good question. We're in the process of starting the 2023 map. That -- data collection will start end of this month. Website austintx.gov/mobilityplan will have the 2022 data. >> Kitchen: Maybe I should have been more specific. Does T follow the calendar year? We started the budget for our 2022/2023. >> Yes. >> Kitchen: Those projects are already figured out, right? And listed. >> Those will be in the report. There's a table at the end of the PFD report. >> Kitchen: You're starting the process for the following year. >> Correct. >> Anymore questions? Council member harper- madison? [2:39:47 PM] >> Harper-madison: Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you for the presentation. I really appreciate there's a smiling photograph of you and your contact information. It's fantastic. Thank you. I would like to -- I'm having a difficult time figuing out how to articulate the questions I have. I kept seeing that massive, you know, d-1 column on the graph there. So I don't know how to articulate the question beyond sort of saying, you know, with that much of an obvious, enormous, glaring gap, you know, I guess it's going to -- it will be helpful moving forward to have advice from public works and other folks working on the safe- route initiatives to help us figure out when it's time to have these conversations with our colleagues -- there's only three of us. When it's time to have these [2:40:48 PM] conversations with our colleagues, to say when and if there's a massive imbalance, it's because we're making up for such a giant gap. I wonder if those are conversations that you're prepared to answer when we bring those up before the dais. >> That's a great question. One of the things we have studied with is the inequitable distribution and our bounds from the 2016 bond money. We struggled with how to do the best projects. I mentioned that leveraging has been great. Sometimes we'll do one intersection at a school. But if bikeways and sidewalks partners we can do more. That's been an incremental way to get more projects done. The 2021 bond money was not bound by council district division. We're able to focus more on [2:41:50 PM] equity. The districts with higher barriers were able to focus more with a 2020 bond. That spending will ramp up over the next six years as well. >> Harper-madison: You know, this may be a longer question -- or response to my question, in which case I'm happy to follow up. I don't know that we've had the opportunity to meet in person. I would like to understand how to codify that equity component. You know? I get the impression there have been the opportunity for humans to sort of weigh in to date about allocation, in which case I wonder if there's a way to build in an equity gauge that's based on data, you know, and there's no human discretion component related to it. Is that a possibility moving forward, just to sort of build in some consistency around equity. >> That's a really good question. [2:42:52 PM] I know public works and transportation are working on the walk/bike rule. I don't have the details on that. I'm not part of that plan, but I do know they have strongly focused on equity in terms of the consultant doing the initiative on that. So I believe -- I want to say that the city is moving towards that in the plans going forward as well to make sure it's captured systematically equity concerns but not anecdotal like you're saying too. I know we're addressing it. I don't have a solution of when, but I do know what walk/bike rule -- that was the ask of that, to -- you have to address equity and I know the consultant has been doing that. >> Harper-madison: We'll follow up with you. Hopefully we'll hear from you soon. >> Yeah. >> Harper-madison: Thank you for the presentation. >> Chair: Thank you for those questions. I have a couple. I'm glad you brought up the mobility annual plan. [2:43:53 PM] I love that concise way of identifying the projects happening. It's safe routes to school but also bicycle infrastructure, sidewalks not part of bike routes to school. There's a lot of information in there that's broken down by district and project name. It gives an understanding of what's taken place. I know it's difficult to keep track of the programs. But I love being able to access that and sharing that the project is on the list. It's planned to be developed this year. I have a question about the two different bond funding. Did the 2016 bond have a certain year spend? Was it an eight-year spend? I'm trying to figure out when the 2020 bonds will kick off. >> I believe it is eight years. I'm get thing nods. It's eight years for the 2016 bond. >> Chair: It's good to know there is more coming from the safe and active mobility bond. There's a lot of ground to make [2:44:54 PM] up and a lot of projects that need to happen. We love the bonds, love when the voters approve these projects and help us make that -- those good projects happen in everybody's districts, but I think someone -- I can't remember who, so I won't say it's a direct quote. It was like the sidewalks will never be 100 per cent perfect and complete. As soon as you get one online there's one that's decades old or needs repairs or there's trees growing through them. I hope bonds in the future keep this program going because it's so important. I don't want to miss a moment to day light. There is a big graphic on your website that says "Become a crossing guard." Do you know how many crossing guards you still need for the school year. >> That's a good question. 30. About 30? >> If I may, I think my staff might have some insight on [2:45:54 PM] that. That's something we were working on too. >> 30. Sorry. In the back -- we hired 20 and we're looking for 30 more. >> Chair: Is there a place where people can look to see which schools need crossing guards. >> I'm going to have amir come talk about it. I'm going to pass the mic real quick. >> Good afternoon. We're working on putting that together. We'll go on next door and do more of a targeted approach. We're compiling that information currently. >> That's perfect. I know there are probably folks who don't know there's one near them that needs a crossing guard. Council member harper-madison was a great crossing guard. >> She did great. >> Chair: Anyone out there at home who may have availability to do that, look that up or [2:46:55 PM] share with a friend that there are schools that need a crossing guard. Council member harper-madison? >> Harper-madison: I'm so glad you daylighted this. It made me remember something I thought about yesterday at the public health committee. She talked about people remaining active. People, you know - - loneliness. That came up. Then I heard an NPR report about how England and other places with social medicine put a lot of emphasis on preventing and treating loneliness. I wanted to -- I thought about it at the time to make sure to get in touch with the folks behind the crossing guard programs to make sure you work with organizations like aging is cool and family elder care and some places like that to keep older adults active. [2:47:57 PM] Thank you for reminding me of that. >> Thank you for the suggestions. Those are great. Thank you. >> I agree with that. Any last questions? Looks like we're all out of questions. Thank you so much for the presentation and for the good work. >> Thank you. >> Chair: Now our last item -- second to last item is the update from assistant city manager. We have April fedro here to present this. >> I have a few projects we want to highlight that are on going this month. The rehabilitation project -- phase one is underway. This is a three-phase project and will be completed hopefully by next fall. We're looking at safety improvements. Under way for 7th and 8th street -- primarily focusing on [2:49:00 PM] safety crossing for pedestrians and bicyclists at the intersections with upgraded signal infrastructure. We're trying to make those as safe as possible. Over at the airport they have received their final environmental assessment, and the staff will be here next month to discuss the up coming projects for the expansion, the timeline and the roll-out of those projects. We're also proud to report our partnership with cap metro and their metro bike program is expanding. We are now up to 79 stations with 500 pedal bikes. We're hoping to expand our e-bike fleet as soon as possible. And one last thing we'd like to highlight is over at the airport as well is we are having a job fair September [2:50:00 PM] 20th. For individuals interested in finding a job at the airport we have lots of options available and we encourage folks to come out and find a place at the airport. Are there any questions? >> Chair: Questions? I can't see the screen, so if anyone has their hand up, just shout. Doesn't look like it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Chair: You're off the hook. Those are great projects. We have future items to identify if we would like. Some of the things include wild fire evacuation planning, south congress parking district, and potentially the Austin berg Strom international airport expansion -- an update on that. We may bring up micromobility and scooters again. A few years back seems like every meeting had something with that topic. I think now that people are out [2:51:02 PM] and about more it's probably good to bring that item back. Are there any other topics people want to add right now? Council member harper-madison? >> Harper-madison: I don't know if it's adding so much as I would love to have andate about our -- an update about our trail system. The more I'm watching this trail system connect itself -- it's like wow, we could have a completely connected trail system. If we could get an update that would be great and any information on what we might be able to do in our independent districts to, you know, really fast track that trail system. I heard somebody say urban mobility twice today. I don't know if it's what's intended to apply but I see this robust, comprehensive multimodal system. [2:52:02 PM] When they say that that's what I'm seeing. I got excited. I was F thinking we should probably get an update on the trail system connectivity and long-range plans to be a really connected city. >> Chair: I agree and I was thinking in this meeting it would probably be helpful if there's gaps in the networks. Sometimes we think of that as being big, half mile, quarter mile. A lot of the neighborhoods do have bike lanes and they may not be connected to the violet crown trail or being able to access other shared-use path ins the district. There are a lot of neighborhoods internally connected but there might be some gaps as far as helping people run errands more commonly especially by e-bike that isn't necessary to have an e-bike but makes the commute better, especially in the heat. I'm also curious about getting [2:53:03 PM] an update on the trail connections. I think that would be a good thing to take up. >> Harper-madison: There was one other thing. I forgot about this one. It was -- I guess this might come back to public works. But the frequency with which I receive constituent concerns about overgrown paths or paths that have overgrown onto the sidewalk, trees that have overgrown onto the sidewalk into the bike lane. Not sure how to articulate that topic. That's a -- foilage control, landscaping. It would be nice to have -- to get a better idea of generally who's responsible for what. What are the best ways for our constituents to identify what's, you know, property that the city should be maintaining. It -- generally speaking, we'll do a request for you but I'm not sure who owns that without [2:54:04 PM] having to go through the whole thing. I think it would be great to talk about how to have a system in place to address that problem as it presents challenges with mobility. Last night -- I tried to jump it out of the car and get it out of the road. There was a downed tree in the middle of mlk. In addition to overgrowth and that sort of nuisance kind of landscaping problem -- just how do -- what's the most sort of comprehensive bullet by bullet for constituents to address foilage related concerns. >> I know there's places where we have weeds growing up through the road. It's hard to tell who's responsible. Some of them are in the public right of way. I got a question probably two years ago where it was the hoa's responsibility in their documentation to maintain some of the shrub trimming and they [2:55:05 PM] weren't doing it, so we had to try to figure out a way to help them. They were needing to take their partner on a walk each day. Those things are growing on the sidewalks in the bike lane they're inaccessible at that point. Council member kitchen. >> Kitchen: I think that's a good topic. Thank you, council member harper-madison. I had a case -- situation where we're dealing with right now, we were able to locate the right person on staff that's responsible. This is a case where the foilage is overhanging an difficulties for the bicycle to go under it. They're having challenges like we're having -- they're understaffed. And, you know, this particular area was sufficient -- of sufficient concern that they can put it on their list. It's just that getting to it because they're down by the number of crews -- I think they [2:56:06 PM] said they're down by half or so. That will be good to talk about also. >> Chair: I think that sounds great. Any other topics? Council member harper-madison? >> Harper-madison: This might have to be an executive session topic but what happens when that landslide happened near shoal creek trail. Would be great to get an update on that. >> Chair: I agree with you on that and I want to be mindful of who is on mobility committee. It might be a topic of interest with the full council. >> Harper-madison: I seesaying. >> Chair: I'll check with council. Just knowing that none of us represent the airport area, I want to make sure we're not creating a situation where a council member is required to [2:57:06 PM] attend a committee they're not on -- being put on a committee just because that topic pertains to their district more specifically than anyone else. We'll sort that out. I'm curious about it too and I think that's a good topic. If there's no other topics we want to add to the list at this point, I'll go ahead and adjourn at 2:57. Thank you for attending, presenting, and following along.