https://otter.ai/s/QfOCTQoTT1qY0pYByh2QZQ
0:04
Nice to start our meetings on time and hope the end time early if possible. So why don’t we get coffee? September transportation Advisory Board Meeting to order and start off with a roll call?
0:19
Feel free Murray.
0:21
President. Courtney Michelle,
0:24
President Jackson Easton,
0:28
here.
0:29
Sandra Stewart, prison. Liz Osborne, here.
0:41
Did you not hear me? I’m here?
0:42
Yes. I’m sorry. I’m Joe long.
0:48
David Roche.
0:51
Council Member pack.
0:58
All right. Thank you very much. So we’ll start off with approving the meeting minutes. Any comments from
1:10
and the meeting minutes as we go forward?
1:22
All right. There was actually just one very minor comment I had there. And this is so minor there. But there was a misspelling of my first name. In the meeting minutes. NDA L is the correct spelling there. So not a big deal. But
1:41
other than that, I thought they were pretty good.
1:45
Sandy.
1:48
Well, now that you said that my last name was spelled incorrectly one and one of the spots say the word instead of Stuart. So no big deal, but I was gonna let it ride by pointing that out. So. Okay, that’s a big deal.
2:09
Part of the official record, so nice for us to do our part to make it accurate as possible. Thanks.
2:16
Any other tweaks on that one?
2:22
All right, it’s we have a motion to approve the minutes with those two up.
2:34
All right. Sandy, want to make a motion?
2:36
I move that we approve the minutes from the tab meeting minutes from August. I don’t remember August 10 2020.
2:46
I second. That.
2:49
Sounds good. And I Sandy, just to confirm does that motion include the the two updates there that were previously for mentioned?
2:58
Yes. With the two corrections with Neil spelling and Stuart’s last name spelling?
3:04
Yes. Okay. Thank you.
3:06
Any motion there? Liz with the second.
3:11
any last comments?
3:14
All right. All in favor, raise your hand.
3:19
The opposing and since we have Courtney on the phone there, Courtney, are you in favor of approving the minutes?
3:27
Yes, I am in favor.
3:29
Okay. Sounds good. Anybody opposing?
3:34
All right. Consider the minutes approved.
3:39
I’m only going to communication from staff.
3:45
Alright, I’m going to hand it over to Jim Jim’s got some ccip updates for you guys. So Jim.
3:53
Thank you, Tyler.
3:57
Well, I just wanted to provide the board with some quick updates on what we are currently working on on ccip.
4:09
Chairman Laurie board members.
4:12
We had talked last week about our CIT for next year. But and last year we talked about this year. So I just want to with some new board members give you some quick updates regarding some of the projects that are currently underway. And some of the ones we’ve we’ve accomplished earlier this year, I think the biggest one we saw was in install the signal traffic signal at Mountain View and Alpine, which was critical to have done before the start of school and lo and behold, kids aren’t out there walking every day but but we did meet our goal for that. One of the projects also that we’ve recently completed and while it’s not necessarily a transportation project is transportation related. We had recently completed a project on 17th. That was a drainage project ran from part of 17th and then up Main Street. It also got confused with a calor c project that installed some medians on Main Street that was completed earlier in the summer. Currently, projects currently underway are pike road involves widening to add additional buffered bike lanes, a traffic signal at Kauffman and goes from sunset to Main Street in conjunction with a C dot project that is adding another lane North North bound for a left turn. That project is about 80% complete. So we’re wrapping that up, we should be done in a few more months, we’ll see the signal be in operation in about 30 days. So that’s kind of a that’s moving along. We also I have been working on as part of our our pavement management program this year on some improvements on ninth Avenue from hoever. To airport. Those the the ninth Avenue Road in that section was pretty pretty bad pretty beat up. So we took the opportunity as part of our pavement management program to widen that road out a little bit more add bike lanes in portions that were buffered, but that is that is wrap it up as well. I think it’s open now but there’s still some striping work that’s underway. The last project I just want to provide a quick update that we started about 30 days ago is county line road. Lot is running from where the existing spring Gulch to project just north of ninth is where you see those big box culverts. And it moves north to just north of 17th we widen out for third lane, adding in bike lanes and adding in some some multimodal improvements and sidewalk that is just getting started. So that we’re moving along probably mostly into next year, we had to relocate a waterline just recently. So that is moving along. That’s kind of our transportation stuff for the year. One other thing to add, we have been working on spring gulps number two, which involves some drainage improvements and a trail including an underpass under county line road. So that is wrapping up. They will be done hopefully by the end of this year, with most of the major improvements, and then it’ll just finalize it in the spring with some planting to catch up on a landscaping. So I just want to provide you a quick update, you know, so you’re aware of what’s going on around around the city. Those are our big, big, big projects we have going that are transportation related.
7:37
So if you have any questions, that’s the meeting. So I’ll turn it back over to Tyler.
7:43
There’s one other thing I’ll talk about. And I think you’ve probably had a chance to say to this point, but on Main Street we’ve had for a while and trying to support some of the local businesses down there on Main Street with additional CD area that they can sell product on. And mixed most mostly positive feedback on that. I think largely that was the what we heard was that it was a positive impact on those businesses. Right now we’re expecting that those barricades would be picked up and moved out by about the end of this month, October 5 is really the day we’re looking at having those barricades picked up. So if you want to get out there and check it out before it’s gone. While we’re still down to one lane on Main Street, I encourage you all to pick it out there and try and check it out at this point.
8:31
That’s all I have to add on. That.
8:33
Sounds good. Sandy?
8:39
Is there any way that you would find out or know that perhaps they might extend that period of time for the restaurants outdoors, because they still tell us that it’s not good to dine inside, and whether it could be good through the month of October.
8:58
So we’ve had a lot of those discussions with LD to try and get the pulse on that. That’s something that ltda and the downtown restaurants are wanting to pursue. Based on what we’ve heard so far. That’s not something that to continue with at this point. We will still be able to use the avenues for example, I think the business on the southeast corner of sixth and main the the pumphouse Red Zone, they’re going to continue using that part, the south side of six that’s in the right away. They’ll be available and then we’re also talking about more utilization of the alleys to provide some of that space that for the or seating. Okay. Thank you.
9:41
Great. Any other follow up questions from any board members?
9:46
Yeah, jack.
9:48
Yeah, just want to say that that signal at Mountain View and Alpine works like a champ works great. And even though the kids aren’t in school, I just wanted to pass on that I have heard several positive comments from school staff that are very happy that it’s there. So I just wanted to pass it on that it’s being appreciated.
10:10
Awesome. Thanks. And Courtney look like you had an extra comment as well.
10:15
But you’re on mute there, Courtney.
10:22
Better.
10:24
Okay. Back to the barriers of next week starts Restaurant Week in conjunction with the chamber and local restaurants and LDA. So, along with Tyler, I encourage you to go out and support those restaurants downtown, when while they’re still available to have the outside seating. They’re
10:44
awesome, thanks.
10:47
Any other comments?
10:52
Only thing that I will add is, I think it’s been fantastic being able to do this, this pilot this test of Main Street to see you know, how we can support some of the local businesses during this very, very challenging time for, for the whole community. So huge thanks for the creative collaboration and be able to make that possible. And I think Tyler, when last we spoke, I think you mentioned that the transportation impacts were pretty modest in the grand scope of things there with an additional month of under your belt. Is that indeed still the case? Or have you seen big changes since last we spoke?
11:32
So Neil, still still some work to do on the the quantification of all the changes we saw, I think the initial shock that first week was probably the biggest, biggest change, I thought right off the bat people going okay, I need to find a new route, it seems that people adjusted relatively quickly, and that we didn’t continue saying major issues on Main Street, I don’t think over the duration of this, we saw any that one of the biggest areas we saw backups was northbound, made at Third Avenue, near the pm peak. I don’t think that got any worse as the duration went on. And I think I don’t know that it got any better. But it definitely did not continue to grow or get worse throughout the duration. I think that what we saw initially, in that first couple of weeks, in terms of additional time added to the between on Main Street from first tonight stayed about the same, we weren’t seeing a whole lot of additional delay or travel time that section, we were able to troubleshoot a couple of signal issues we were seeing. And so we actually made some improvements, I think on our throughput on on Main Street North South as well along with you know, one of the things that we did in the past with the, when we switched from traditional signals of signals, we sort of lost the ability to what we call float the walk where you can parallel main the walkway, it would just stay on and it would stay on indefinitely, you wouldn’t have to push the button. Initially, when we installed the adaptive we weren’t able to do that. But that’s something that we’ve really been working on to bring that back. And if you’ve noticed it is working really well. on Main Street between third and ninth Avenue, we’re able to do that. So one of the things that for one reason or another, we were able to see some issues with this particular configuration, and then troubleshoot them and make a couple of things work better. Great.
13:19
Well done. Thank you.
13:21
Awesome. We’ll go to the next section there for public inviting to be invited to be here. Do we have any members of the public who wish to be heard at this moment?
13:35
Hearing none, we will move forward to our action items 2020 model traffic codes, Tyler, it’s all yours.
13:43
All right, thanks. So as Neil mentioned, apologize for the size of this packet, it is a very large one. It’s all of the model traffic code as unamended provided to you guys for reference model traffic code is developed by Colorado Department of Transportation, it is the real goal and purpose of that is to ensure uniformity throughout the state as we drive around. And in general, the rules and regulations are relatively consistent, so that we all have a pretty good expectation of as drivers, bicyclists walkers, what the expectations are of us. And ultimately, the goal is that that is the same as promote safety that we all kind of understand the rules. We’re all playing by the same rules. We know how to react to these different traffic control devices and regulations. The current version that we’re on was adopted in 2010. There have been a handful of changes since 2010. That see that rolled out the 2020 traffic code this year to capture any state laws that have changed. In the meantime, it is largely the same as 2010. There’s a handful of text updates for clarification and a couple of new sections. I think one thing to point out is, as we were going through this, we may We did not at this point we did not specifically exclude the scooters from operating on the street. Right now we don’t have scooters operating in Longmont, there is a potential for them to come to Longmont. I think that ultimately they may end up a lot of several municipalities have written code to allow them and more or less require them to operate on the street such as a bicycle would and not on the sidewalks. I think that if and when we see that type of vehicle come to Longmont, we need to be ready to react to it. And we can do that a couple of ways. One, we can do it through the traffic code or to get us through individual licenses with the scooter companies who come to town. But I think the key with a lot of traffic code was that we didn’t include the use of that in the street was one of the big takeaways. Municipal municipalities have the ability to delete sections that are not clickable. And if you read through the proposed deletions that we’ve made in there, there’s sections regarding to full road violations or mountain driving just a handful of sections that don’t necessarily to apply to Longmont, so we scratch those, which is consistent with changes amendments we’ve made in the past. We have some additional requirements on parking. And some clarifications on left turns are some of the big ones. I think one of the ones that still surprises me is that the Colorado model traffic code doesn’t have a clear definition of what you’re supposed to do with a flashing yellow arrow. So that is one thing that we that our code does clarify right, provide some additional clarification on that. With that said, this is something that means municipalities need to adopt by ordinance or we intend to adopt by ordinance. So this will be going to council with recommended changes as before you tonight if you wish to discuss and recommend any additional changes, we can definitely see if we can, what we can do with those changes, but ultimately it will go to Council for an ordinance. Any Any other questions on that I have much more to talk about in that if you have specific questions, I’m happy to actually ask your question.
17:19
I think Sandy was first there Sandy go.
17:21
I just had one question in that, um, do aware, do we have any parking meters in Longmont? I didn’t know we had any.
17:32
Sandy right now we don’t currently have any parking. There has been some discussion off and on about potentially having parking meters in the downtown area. There’s no plans for them. Point. But they could still be applicable within the lifetime of this code. We can choose to split it at this point and amend the code to do it in the future. Or we can leave it as is and we can it will be ready for it if it happens.
18:00
We’ll see I saw. Thank you. I found it to be interesting that it started. What in 1952, when they started this state started doing this. And then it looked like it did it every five years. And then there was a big, you know, space, maybe 10 years. And the last time was updated showed it was 2018 even though we’re still by the 2010 code. So what causes them to update document.
18:27
Generally updates to the document are driven by change.
18:32
So if there is a state law that is proposed, adds a new regulation, something that this code would react to after the state.
18:41
Okay, all right. Great. Thank you. Thank you.
18:45
JACK, I think you had a comment before.
18:49
Yeah, just a question for you, Tyler. I noticed in your right up here, you said most of these amendments are what we already had with the 2010 code. I’m just wondering, is there anything new that you have added as a city for this version of amendments?
19:10
There is let’s see.
19:18
There is
19:21
in large part there is nothing new there. It would be semantics. It’s nothing particularly no big new items that say all of a sudden you can only drive on the other side of the road. There’s not any big substantial changes, per se, there’s just word text amendments that are relatively minor.
19:37
Okay, great. Thank you.
19:41
Great and Tyler, just to clarify at this point, are you looking for feedback on some of the details or are going to run through in more detail first,
19:53
so we’re if you if you want to discuss your free discuss ultimately we’re asking for a recommendation. You can recommend this To let this be adopted, or you can recommend with changes.
20:06
Okay, I had a couple clarifying questions, but see who else’s comments first.
20:15
Alright, Liz you want to go for?
20:18
And don’t forget to take care of yourself off mute.
20:23
Sorry about that. I was able to figure out most of the deletions and where they replaced. I’m just curious about speed racing, why that’s deleted, and what it was replaced with. So that would be I think that was 1104 10 f that was in place said it was deleting it.
20:47
Bear with me for one sec.
20:58
And before I come in,
21:11
so 1105 is where the speaker regulations are, is that I think I heard 1104, but 1105 looks like words.
21:19
I was actually the deletion that is on.
21:38
It’s the 111 Oh, 4010 have speed relations. And it seemed to me the I could understand why the speed racing one was.
21:58
I’m trying to remember which 111 Oh, five, seven or eight that was?
22:14
Oh, never mind.
22:20
Okay, then 55678.
22:28
It was the sentencing I get it. All the penalties are taken off. What’s
22:34
the penalty? The penalties are, are in our in our municipal code rather than the state penalties. Thank you.
22:47
So Tyler, I had a couple just two quick questions for you. One. I don’t really have a strong opinion, though. Just surprised. I’m page for this PDF. PAGE 14 of the PDF packet page for that particular section.
23:08
line number 16.
23:11
is the section that talks about traffic regulations generally amended there around motorized bicycles, animals, keys, toy vehicles, and etc. There’s reference on on line 17. To let me just look at my notes here. It is also political for any person upon roller skates, a skateboard riding by any means to go on any way. I want to make sure I’m correctly is am I reading this correctly that that that existing language in our existing ordinance is being is being struck or language would be added to our ordinances.
23:57
So this is a modification of the proposed amendment in Section 109. Section nine of the model traffic code is being amended to say this. So this is what our local amendment was will say or would say if we prove it.
24:13
Can you help me understand the rationale for why a child wouldn’t be allowed to ride a skateboard on a residential local road?
24:22
Really the
24:25
I think the historically why that’s been and why we would continue encouraging that we’re not playing in the street is really just for the safety aspect of not wanting when we do expect cars in the street. I think that any driver should be cautious and expect kids in the street but it is not uncommon that it’s deemed unlawful to do so.
24:54
Okay, I’d be curious if other people have opinions on that I I don’t have a strong opinion on it. I just it kind of struck me as not worried about the fleet planning out a bunch of tickets to kids. But I’ll just want to be thoughtful since this is for the next 10 years. And then the reality is
25:10
I don’t you mentioned thing PD is out looking to write tickets to people on boards, it more comes into play if and when there’s a crash. Right. Okay, that
25:23
the other question that I had was on page 11, I guess in the PDF packet is page 21. But in our little section was page 11. Let’s pull it up real fast. And there’s a section that talks about speed limits. And I noticed that that the language is references. In no event will the speed be less than 25 miles per hour on all streets in any district have noticed that a growing number of communities are starting to pilot and test 20 mile per hour speed limit in certain sections. That may be an area that the high crash area, maybe it’s an area that happens to coincide with,
26:16
you know, where local businesses are, are gonna have,
26:22
you know, community interest in being able to,
26:26
you know, with with city approval, they’re a little closer to the streets.
26:31
What options are there to amend that to 20 miles per hour, five miles per hour minimum so that the transportation team has a little bit more flexibility to look at circumstances on their own merit?
26:47
Definitely something that we can take back to the legal team and save see if that’s a an amendment make.
26:55
Thank you, I think that would be worth looking into.
27:01
That’s all for me. Any additional comments from your board members?
27:06
Yes, Edie?
27:09
Well, I just lived in this neighborhood my neighborhood for quite a while. And I remember back several years ago on produce circle, we had kids riding their skateboards on the street and there was a major crash and a kid was killed. And and so I i understand where you’re coming from, Neil about why can’t they ride it in the streets, but safety sake guide drivers don’t expect to see kids even though they’re trying to slow down and do the 25 miles per hour for that I just thought no kid should be in in the street with a skateboard and no driver wants day to kid and, you know, family wants to lose their child. So I I’m with the ordinance that we have. Thank you.
27:56
Thank you, Sandy.
27:58
Emotional comments. Can you?
28:07
Um, oh, I see you.
28:13
Hi, Courtney, go for it.
28:14
I just had two small tiny things about grammar in in the package or in the on page on our packet page 12. It’s a page.
28:26
Let’s see.
28:27
Two in the packet.
28:29
Line five, it says three copies of the mobile traffic code adopted section is and that should be our because it’s referencing the three copies. And then on page
28:47
16 in our packet, which is Page Six of the document line. Line eight there’s a my that should be a May in a why. So
29:00
little things but going
29:05
good. I forget
29:11
it.
29:14
Courtney real quick, Neil, I think one thing and talking about the 25 mile an hour. It doesn’t explicitly say it can’t be less than 25 as it says except when special hazard exists that requires a lower speed the following speech shall be lawful. So 25 is the has been unposted bringing bassy England up but it does looks like it does allow for some flexibility if you had a special hazards require a lower speed limit.
29:46
Is there any legal team but
29:49
at this point, is there any definition special hazard or is that really at the discretion of the transportation team
29:56
that would largely be at the discretion of the transportation team. Okay.
30:05
I just want to make sure that that that, that we don’t come back three years from now and say, Hey, the ordinance is very clear. We’re not supposed to go less than 25. And except in extraordinary circumstances, so just want to make sure you have the flexibility that that you need there, especially as we go forward over the next 10 years.
30:29
Yeah, this.
30:31
I was just curious. And I appreciate Courtney pointing this out. It’s that’s what the free copies are filed with the city clerk.
30:40
Is this will this be available online for people to look up?
30:46
Yes.
30:49
Oh, traffic code is all available online through city longbox. Municipal code. It’s online.
31:00
Great, any last comments?
31:08
Great. Well, I do think that as it relates the 20 mile per hour, if, if you can at least double check with the legal team there just to see, you know, what flexibility? They feel like we have there and and it’d be possible to build on to that that language in a way that would hopefully provide flexibility down the road. But But beyond that, I didn’t hear any additional any material changes there other than the items that were raised so far, and some of the grammatical updates there. Yes, any.
31:41
I just read a note that I wrote to south. I’m just curious, is long modifications that we’re making? Are they similar to other modifications that other communities are making here in Boulder County? Do you know do you guys do any talking?
32:00
Similar, I think
32:04
I think I’ve talked with Fort Collins and looked at their amendments. I think they’ve definitely made some more amendments to specifically talk about scooters. That’s one thing that I did notice boulder and Fort Collins have both had to adapt to that.
32:20
Okay. All right. Thank you.
32:26
Great. So at this point, Tyler, are you seeking a motion of support for the the proposed code as presented there with the modifications that have discussed there? Okay, is there like entertain a motion there? As as such
32:55
I move to recommend these amendments with the said modifications. I’m trying to think if there’s anything else I need to add in there, I guess with with the additional comment to explore the 20 mile an hour provision that we talked about brought forward.
33:15
Okay, thanks. Is there a second the motion
33:21
All right. I heard I saw I saw wait for the show there for I think that’s sufficient. Sounds good. Any comments before Yeah, vote. Okay, all in favor of motion either raise your hand or say Aye.
33:44
Okay, and and
33:49
Courtney
33:52
looks like your screen is off there. So are you an up or or are will do the other way there? I Okay, fair enough. Any opposing?
34:07
Okay, the motion carries.
34:10
Thank you, Tyler.
34:15
jump back to her agenda here. And I think that we are up to any informational items there.
34:24
Tyler, Phil, any additional informational items
34:28
no additional information.
34:32
Either speed can muster.
34:37
So yeah, it’s gonna be for me to be on the on the line today. Um, anyway, we just want to let you know now. Member pack is on the line too. I just wanted to let folks know that we do have various letters from the mayor as part of the mayor and commissioners coalition. We have our Northwest chamber. That includes the Longmont chamber, we have Boulder County all supporting party reading the tracks internal savings account funds for bus projects, lots of feedback. So I’m having a tough time. But um, there’s there’s been that call by this by most all elected officials here in the along the Northwest corridor and within the Northwest region to not read that Pfizer, again, fast tracks internal savings account dollars that we’ve been saving for. And you know, it’s not going to cover the cost of rail by any means, but it does provide a nice, you know, matching dollars for future you know, if there’s any kind of future federal grants or state grants that we can go after, this provides some of that and gives us an winds up to be to go after some of those with matching dollars. So just wanted to let you know that that’s been in the newspapers lately. I’m sure you’ve read about it. Some strong words, obviously from this community. So just wanted to let you know that was happening. And Councilmember Peck may have more to add in during her time. Thank you.
36:20
Oh, you’re muted, Neil.
36:26
All right. Just since we’re on the topic there, Councilmember Peck, is there anything else for you to add on that particular topic?
36:35
Thank you, and I apologize for being late I, I got called out on something that I couldn’t get away from. Um, thank you, Phil, for telling me I didn’t realize that that was happening. I was actually going to ask counsel tomorrow night, if they would also send a letter of support in keeping that face of funding intact. So I think the more people that speak up, the better it is at least put a hold on it until we get our new director. And until we see if there’s going to be any transportation funds coming down federally in January, I would hate to rob it, and then find out we didn’t really have to, because there’s not going to be any way we’re going to get that back. So I agree with everything that you said. And I thank you. So great.
37:27
Um, such.
37:29
So I do want to speak to something when it comes up to Oh, man, though.
37:36
Sounds good. We’ll come back to you in just a minute. There want to make sure that from our agenda, we have a chance to get the board members a chance to, to comment and then we’ll we’ll come right back to you. So no problem at all. Are there any comments from any board members, we can just go around here starting with Jacques, and we’ll just go in the order that people just happen to appear on my screen. So shock, any comments from your side? Thank you, Neil.
38:05
A couple comments. So on the north part of Main Street, probably, let’s see me is that section and I can’t remember exactly where the delineation is. But it’s between that 17th and highway 66 have their I continue to see a need for those improvements that we’ve talked about in the past where people are crossing mid block. And it looks like a very dangerous situation with four lanes. So I just that need is still there. It’s still present. And you know, I hope at some point, we can look at that more. I know, it’s it’s in the plan, because I remember seeing it there. I don’t know how many dollars we have allocated to it. But especially given the fact that one of the buildings and housing right there as a retirement center. I see a lot of elderly slowly making their way across the street. And I would hate for something to happen there. So I just wanted to bring that up. So thank you.
39:06
Great, thanks. Awesome.
39:10
Joe, do you want to go next? Any comments on your site?
39:15
really didn’t have anything? Believe it or not?
39:17
Fair enough.
39:20
All right. Liz, you’re next on my screen here. Do I have any comments in your side?
39:29
I didn’t tell I thought this morning about having seen a lot of people and it’s not really an art thing because it’s Burlington Northern but the railroad track crossing problems on 66 this morning caused a lot of frustration.
39:48
I can imagine it Tyler Do you want to comment on that?
39:51
Yeah, so I can jump in there real quick on that one. So a couple things they’ve had. This is their second coder and the last couple weeks for that same issue. They keep having panels that are breaking apart it. I saw a picture of the one this morning, it looks like the panel literally exploded there is rebar sticking out all the concrete was busted out, the time they came in to fix it was a temporary patch, they are planning a more permanent repair for the next couple of weeks into the month are waiting for permits from Sita. But that will we do anticipate that they’re going to need to close the road for two full days to do the proper repair. So we’ve been working with both BNSF and c.on on a detour route that’s not through local streets. And then there will be some impact on some arterials in Longmont, but their initial traffic control plan was routing all traffic down Alpine and over to 21st. So that we’re not going to put 25,000 cars from 66 through that neighborhood. Not a good plan. So we’re working with them to at least get that traffic on arterials. Instead, what we do anticipate at the end of the month having another full day closure permanently repair that panel that keeps breaking apart.
41:03
Thank you, Tyler.
41:05
Great, thanks. jealous. Akiva follow on that.
41:08
Just a question Is that something that like a PSA or something can be communicated to the community to help mitigate some of that detour requirement at all? times.
41:24
Joe, when it when it’s when it’s an emergency repair, unfortunately, we don’t have the luxury of the PSA, I think through our our public safety, publish some information as possible. And we work with you to get that information. It was on the message boards 25 to at least provide what information we could as we can to the planned closure. Absolutely. We’ll do everything we can to get the word out to try and share the message that hey, this is going to be closed for two days. Please plan accordingly. Excellent. Thanks.
41:58
Sounds good. Thank you. All right. Next my screen. I have a sandy and then Courtney, Michelle. Sandy, any comments on your side?
42:08
Yes, I am. I was at the Boulder County local coordinating council meeting today. And somebody from the county spoke about
42:18
they use streetlight data to gain
42:22
data for transportation and the masterplan for the county. Do we use anything like that? gain transportation data for Longmont knowing how many cars come in from maybe Larimer County or weld county or maybe even coming from Boulder? mountains. I mean, I’ve never heard of street light. And I have always just curious what we used.
42:51
So Phil may want to jump in on this one too. But we haven’t. We have not used that currently. But it’s something talked about. It’s his, his model. And we’ve talked about getting a quote to see what that would cost ration, there could absolutely be some value to that. We do have some other infrastructure in place to where we can share data with both Greeley and Loveland with some of the devices that they have out there to try and come up with a ballpark origin destination. But it’s limited to the communities that are using similar technology on that. So streetlight might be something that look at next year in upcoming years, updating our comprehensive plan, something that maybe we’re looking at, we utilize that data a little better.
43:36
Well, it just seems like we have lunch, as we are requesting, you know, transportation dollars for the quarter of the 119 quarter. If you have that kind of data and knowing where people are or originating and passing through and going in ending up here. Maybe we can work better together in I don’t know, our transportation needs and requesting grants to help us do what we need to do. So I just found it to be interesting. Just thank you,
44:12
Sandy, just as a follow up and as a as a heads up just to let you know, we didn’t use that county data for our build grant, which we’re hopefully going to hear about tomorrow, yes or no on a $26 million bill grant. We’re hoping to hear today and kind of where I’m kind of worried now that we’re not hearing by today, but we should hear it definitely by tomorrow. We got the $26 million, but we use that county data and they worked with us. We partnered with them on that data and we did some pretty interesting things with their contract with streetlight and we’re able to, to just kind of find out where people were coming from. We’re able to show the 30% of the traffic. Oh, well, it’s it’s about 25 right now, but it’s gonna grow that traffic up a diagonal. is going to be from Southwest weld and from Larimer County. So, we know that you know, about a third of that traffic is from outside of Longmont outside of Boulder County. So we’re able to use some of that data, we also had them do some things showing us how traffic moves through Longmont, whereas, you know, he really showed a strong connection, we knew we kind of knew this, but it was good to see it and data is that a lot of people coming from the north, utilize 66. And so that’s why we’re going after design dollars right now, first date, I was 66, for that widening between hoever Main Street, because we know and we know just by watching it and measuring the volumes, but the stream ID there’s really showed, you know, because it’s based on people’s cell phones, address, it doesn’t know whose cell phone it is, necessarily. But it does, it does track a cell phone number or a serial number. And so we can find out kind of how fast it’s moving and where it’s going, we’re able to see a very strong connection of anybody coming down to 87, or two on 66 using hoever Street to get to that diagonal. And we saw some people using our airport, and a bypass or alternative route as well, which was really pleasant to see that as well. And I don’t know if Tyler’s talking too much. But he also has a Wi Fi tracking piece where he can actually watch use the same kind of technology, almost a streetlight data and kind of track we can track serial numbers. Two points in town. It’s not as it’s not as comprehensive as that. But we’re all trying to come together and partner with all this different data. So we’re using it for these grants.
46:42
Yeah. Okay. That’s what I wanted to hear you be using it for grants. Good, good.
46:48
Good, up question on that.
46:51
Yeah. Based on trace and track, regardless of technology, do you have or do we know there’s public awareness in that did that delves into privacy and a whole litany of other issues?
47:09
So what is your question? Is that? Do people know that this is happening?
47:14
Correct? Yeah. Because it’s a very serious and growing issue around privacy and, and that sort of data.
47:22
Right. And I think, you know, these cell phone companies, obviously make you sign a contract. And I believe that in that contract, there is that stipulation that, you should know that if you have your Wi Fi on or your Bluetooth on, there might be a chance that there’s or if you have any kind of GPS function with your phone, when you’re using Google Maps, or, or Apple Maps or whatever maps, you know, you’re you’re sending out a signal that’s going out to the world that says this phone, not not necessarily the phone number, but this the serial number of the phone is at this location. And then it can track that location. So you’re right. It’s, I don’t think anybody really knows this is happening. But I think we all feel like, you know, whenever we’ve said this to people, they all kind of nod their heads and say, Yeah, I understand that. This is being checked. And we always, we always want to say these these companies don’t know your name, as necessarily, but, um, but but that’s another issue. Right? I mean, maybe they don’t know your name, but they do.
48:25
Okay, thank you. I appreciate that.
48:28
Great, thanks, Courtney. I think you’re next.
48:32
I’m good. Thank you.
48:34
Awesome. Thanks, Courtney. Nothing additional for me. I don’t think I miss anybody. I think David’s here today. All right. Why don’t we jump back to a Councilmember Peck?
48:49
Thank you, Neil. Um, I also want to make a point about some of that data that’s being collected. Feel correct me if I’m wrong, but did they not use part of that data for one 19th to show the traffic that would be going down 119 from the north as well as
49:08
as well as Southwest weld?
49:11
Yes, that was the 30% number that we shared earlier was 30% of the traffic in 2014. I believe it is we’ll be right now. It’s 25%. We expect that to go to 30% of traffic on the diagonal will be going to and from Southwest weld county and Larimer counties. So outside of Boulder County in the other places, we think of people traveling on that court over
49:36
Oh, you did say the diagonal, okay. And my frustration has always been with the peak services that that data they said would not work. When we’re looking at ridership for the North for the peak service, Northwest rail corridor. That was always a bit of frustration for me. But what I wanted to ask you as we move forward, we’ve all been watching RTD and the Feist account and and the ridership And then numbers etc. For years, I know that the virus has had an impact on revenues. But for Longmont, regardless of what we do, especially with our local transportation. RTD has always been using ridership numbers with us and we pay a lot of money. So I’ve been thinking as we move forward, what depending upon what this new RTD director does, depending upon what they do with or the conversation goes for the local free buyout for our local transportation with RTD. At some point, and I’m coming to you as an advisory group, I was wondering if it would warrant going to council advising them to set up a task force to look at our own local transportation hub, bringing in our businesses like smuckers, and our big businesses, all businesses, basically, the community to look at routes, other transportation providers like the the hub, the brew hub, Holly brew, hop shuttle has wanted to expand, as well, as Xilinx has mentioned wanting to get a shuttle of their own. What would that look like in Longmont? Would it be worth us putting up a task force to study that? To see if in fact, we can without the big dollars? We’re getting to RTD? If we could do this study to see if it would actually be something that long, much should look at? And I don’t want an answer right now, I would like you to think about that. But we really don’t know where RTD is going, and should be we should we be ready. If in fact, at some point, we say we need to just get out of this district, we just need to get out of this artiguez because they’re not providing what we want. And I’m speaking only of the fast tracks part, not of the base operations, which would be regional. So that is my Thought for the Day. And I was wondering, we already have this group put together through led up. But since the dance long month, two went away. And the virus, there’s been no discussion or conversation around it. And I’m wondering if it would be worth revisiting to see if in fact, that would be something in the future, it would be a two or three year project to get up and running anyway. So at some point, if you want to think about that, and think that that’s a good idea. And to come to it with to counsel and advise it has for us to look at that. That would be appreciated.
52:50
So that’s it.
52:53
Phil, any clarifying questions on that before we go forward?
52:59
clarifying questions for me or any questions for me,
53:03
clarifying questions from you about that topic?
53:07
Well, I just will just will preface what Councilmember Peck said with some ideas that there’s a there’s a committee that’s been put together kind of state or region region wide for the entire Regional Transportation district that’s looking at kind of the revamp of RTD. altogether. I mean, there, there’s a lot of people who are saying this right now, and not very happy with the way the local governments are treated, as far as you know, fairness issue. So I think what Councilmember Peck is asking for is pretty pretty in line with what we’re doing already, the the governor commissioned a well has a commission that he commissioned, I guess, that is looking at just kind of the inner workings of RTD. And kind of how they look at funding and how they are organized. We’ve often talked about what’s called a sub regional model, where, you know, RTD, could certainly be in charge of the regional connections, the longer distance pieces, but that each county would be responsible for their share of, of dollars that they actually, you know, generate. And so, you know, some of that generation would go into the regional piece and be more that hub and spoke kind of operation. But a majority would go into the local local buses or the local transit, and do what we want them to do, because we know our cities and counties better than RTD, we feel. So I think that’s already happening. I can send you more information on kind of what’s going on with that and where that’s at in the process. So that might give you some idea of kind of how that’s tracking and what’s going on. But those are some things that I think we’re doing right now, but I think Councilmember Peck brings up even more grassroots level, you know, there’s some, there’s some transit services out there right now that would like to grow And, you know, with RGD in place, they’re not really allowed to grow into the public sector. There’s actually a state statute that says, all public transit shall be provided by RTD. And they’re only RTD can allow others to come in. And we had to do that with the flex bus that came from Fort Collins, we actually had to get permission from RTD to let them come into the Regional Transportation district and provide service from Longmont to Boulder. And they can’t pick up any passengers in between they can provide service between Longmont and Boulder, because our GDPR provides that. So there’s a lot of nuances, a lot of flaws that are out there that we need to kind of work around. I’m sorry, that’s a long answer to your clarifying question. But there’s a lot going on.
55:43
And that’s helpful there. It sounds to me like there’s a committee that’s starting to do some initial studying there and will hopefully learn more about that as well as I have no doubt we will hear from the new GM from RTD. Before long and and get a sense of of the new priorities. So it’ll be a wild ride, I’m sure in the months ahead. But thanks for the background context in that appreciate it.
56:09
I do have one of the things the RTD director Judy lubos position is open. So anyone that is interested in being the RTD, director of the Boulder County Commissioners will be appointing one because the the gentleman Austin did not get enough signatures to be on the ballot. So there will be no ballot. Question about an RTD director this fall, but they are going to pick that directors soon before the first week of November. So if you’re interested, please go out to the Boulder County Commissioners website. And there will be applications out there to apply or if you know anyone that would be interested.
56:54
Wonderful, thank you.
56:58
Okay, next agenda item their information on upcoming transportation related meetings. Are there any transportation meetings on the radar?
57:15
All right, well, if there are some that you know of in the future, just keep the group in the loop
57:21
as they come up, so
57:23
Tyler, you chime in in there? You’re muted.
57:27
I don’t have any update, right.
57:31
Okay.
57:33
Sounds good. Well, we have a few items for upcoming transfer upcoming agendas there including our equable transportation roadmap, crash report, always important. County wise sales tax neighborhood traffic mitigation. So we’ll look forward to learning more about the details of the next agenda. Any last item before we before we consider a closed? All right, hearing none, thank you, everybody. I appreciate all your good insight there and we’ll consider this September transportation advisory meeting close and you can enjoy the extra hour of your night. Thanks, everybody. I’ll see you Go Broncos.
58:17
Good night. Good night, you guys.
58:20
Not everybody
Transcribed by https://otter.ai