Board of County Commissioners Business Meeting - workshop

Commissioner. Kendra? Kendra Davis, commissioner's

office. Leslie Summey, commissioner.

Carrie Warren, Gully, commissioner. Kathy Smith, community resources.

Brad, you wanna introduce yourself, please?

Yes. Brad Campy, judicial services.

Thank you. And commissioner is on her way. We were taking a break, and she is on her way back. Okay. So we're here with director of community resources, Captain Smith. What do you have for us?

Okay. So you may remember, gosh, a couple months ago, we went we came and asked to do an RFP for our community corrections providers. Mhmm. So we did issue out that RFP and did our solicitation. Our hope was to identify if there were other providers that were able to provide the services that we need that are currently provided by CoreCivic and GEO Group.

So two submissions were received, but only one of them met the minimum requirements to be considered responsive. And that is because the submission was late from one of providers. So our largest incumbent provider, CoraCivic, unfortunately, they were aware of the solicitation, and they were working with our team, but they failed to get that submission in by the deadline. They did contact us immediately after missing the deadline. Mhmm.

However, the late submission technically could not be accepted because it was outside of our of our regulations. So they did submit their late proposal. We requested that they still do that. That was reviewed, and it was deemed as acceptable. And we feel that it is necessary to accept their proposal as a continuation of services.

If we don't, of course, we are losing, you know, 200 beds for our community corrections programming, which is very necessary. So we are here today to request the approval of a waiver per the purchasing policy for our community corrections contracts with CoreCivic for the next fiscal year of 2627.

Okay. Commissioner Campbell.

I have no questions, and I move that we approve the waiver.

Thank you.

Alright. Was there a second? No.

Personally, as somebody who has missed deadlines, they called they caught it. They got back to us.

Alright. There we go. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Brad. Thanks,

Brad. Yeah. Thanks, Brad.

Yeah. Glad you drove over here. Exactly. Thank you very, very much. Alright.

And you can still hear Wonderful. Wonderful. Excuse me. Good afternoon, everybody. We are now here for a study session, comprehensive safety action plan with Jim Kotzer and Steven Buckley. And we have added, commissioner Campbell has joined us and, so has, county attorney, assistant senior assistant county attorney, Matt Hader. So we have accounted for everybody in the room. And so, mister Kotzer.

I'm I'll go

ahead and get

us I'll get us I'm sorry, Carrie. Yes. Please, miss Joplin.

Well, thank you for letting us come and present this Safety Action Plan. What we're really requesting from the commissioners today is any comments and concerns on the plan. It's not quite finalized. We're headed towards finalizing that, but we want to capture any concerns you might have. This plan helps us apply for the Safe Streets for All grant and we the county has to have a plan in place to do that.

So we will be back on May 12 for adoption of the plan. And I will let you know that the slides you received have changed. Mhmm. We did I took comments from yesterday, and we have tapered it down to try to stay a little more high level so you have more detail on the slides that were presented or given to you earlier, but this is a little bit different. I just wanted to warn you

that. Alright. You very much.

Alright. Yeah. Thanks for having us. I'm gonna turn it over to Steven here in a minute. Once again I wanted to point out this is a quick moving project and we've hit all the deadlines so far so we appreciate you bearing with us as we're moving quickly. So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Steven. He's gonna give a high level overview, and we're hoping to leave up plenty of time for questions. Okay.

Yeah. And so I will be brief in my overview because we have come before you several times in, the past six months, discussing this plan as you all will recall. We're really here today, yet to emphasize what, what Carrie said, to get any final feedback before this plan comes to you for adoption in few weeks. So that the purpose of this plan is to, you know, have a goal to eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes in the unincorporated roads of Arapahoe County. Next slide.

And we're doing this by the safe systems approach. This is a nationally recognized FHWA endorsed, you know, approach of of safer people, vehicles, emphasizing safe speeds, post crash care, and and safer and safe infrastructure. Right? You know, I think we've we've mentioned this before you. In the county's plan, we feel like we have the most direct control over the safer roads and the safer speeds. That's kinda like the the areas of our plan. Next slide. And so we did public engagement. Having a robust public engagement process is a requirement of the s s four a's. That's why it was a essential requirement of our plans so that we are eligible for this grant program, you know, coming up already at the at the end of the month.

And so we got a lot of comments and feedback, you know, just the comments were all over the place, but lots of people had said lots of things. One quote I wanna highlight, Parker Road's really important to people. It turns out our data, as we've, you know, showed you before Yeah. Says that Parker Road's also our most serious crash problem. So there is an alignment in many respects between what people perceive and and what our data tells us. Next slide. And so the plan is organized. There are those five core strategies that are part of the safe systems approach. There are 51 action items coming out of that. So, you know, like many other planning documents, it's we've big goals and ideas.

How do we do that? We've got 51 particular action items and steps. Part of those action items are strategic capital projects that break down kind of into the site specific hotspots and, you know, our high injury network on road where, we have, the worst number of fatal and severe injury collisions. And then the systemic treatments which are proactive safety things that we can do everywhere across the board to improve safety. These strategic projects are just part of the action items.

Many of the action items are also kind of administrative or process oriented. I will get to that in a bit, know, go on next slide. And so, yeah, this is a breakdown to get into the five strategies in here that safe systems structure, a culture of safety, the policy and process alignment as well, and the strategic project selection. Those next two strategies are kind of the meat of the project, of of the plan. You know, number three is gonna have a lot of things that, like, orient just how public works does the things it does over, you know, the coming years.

Strategy four is really gonna be something you see in future, you know, CIP plans, you know, with these projects at the site specific and more systemic level of what we're doing to address the safety problems and then progress and transparency and accountability. Right? We're gonna be reporting every year on we adopt this. This is what we've done. You know, this is the progress we're making towards achieving the things we said we would achieve.

Alright. Next slide. And so just summarizing some of the technical findings of, the study that the high injury network, these are the roads that have the highest concentration of severe injury and fatal crashes. So segments of, Parker Road, Florida Avenue, and and two different parts of, Hampton Avenue in different parts of the county are on the list. I live this on there, but really because our data analysis period covered seven years, about half of which was before the I live reconstruction project.

We've already seen some after data that the crashes of ILEF have significantly reduced. And so we expect when we kinda just do an interim reanalysis in a few years, ILEF probably doesn't meet the threshold anymore if if current trends continue since that reconstruction. So when we talk about, like, safe systems and corridors and, like, you know, in the urban areas of county where we're focusing, you know, because of the result of the stops in this plan, we'll be talking about Parker and Florida and Hampden a lot. That's just objectively where the most of your issues are. Next slide.

And then in the rural areas, it's it's a systemic treatment problem. Right? Like, as we've emphasized in one of our previous presentations, you can almost throw a dart at, a rural part of the county on a map, and anywhere it lands could be a potential site of the next crash because it's not a particular hotspot. It's just it's a systemic feature of the roads that every single one of our fatalities on our local roads in the in the rural part of the county is people departing from their lane or departing from the roadway. And so the question is how do we keep people in their lane, keep people on the roadway?

Wider shoulders, rumble strips, you know, guardrails, delineators. Right? We have also an issue with, you know, severe collisions, ankle like, right ankle collisions at the intersections out in the rural areas. You're driving for miles and miles of high speeds. You know, especially at night it's hard to see those intersections come up. How can we light those up, you know, LED stop signs and flashing beacons, you know, transverse rumble strips to warn you slowing down that intersections are coming up. It's these simple strategies deployed at scale over time everywhere. Right? We won't have the resources to do this at scale right away everywhere, but just hopefully with the implementing it into our systematic maintenance program, these roads all get resurfaced on a periodic interval. It's a good time to do rumble strips.

It's a good time to widen out the shoulders while we're repaving. There there will be a could be in some cases a significant extra cost of the shoulder widening, but, you know, this will be rolled out over a period of years, when we're out there doing something on these rural roads anyways. Alright. Next slide. The site specific intersections, these are these are the intersections on the left here, the the top severe injury fatal crash locations in the counties that they'll be targeted for improvements. These could be, you know, signal upgrades. It could be pedestrian amenity upgrades. It could be geometric redesign of the intersection. It really varies treatment by treatment. The details are in the report that that you all have.

Corridor improvements similar similarly, you know, some of these like Gun Club from Crestline to Quincy is a project that's already in design. So that being identified is not not a surprise to us. That's a substantial capital investment project that's already going on. And and some other segments too, like Himalaya Street maybe bubbled up from us. It's one that was not previously on our radar. So, you know, these will be subjects of future CIP programs. Next slide.

Mhmm. Before I to the next slide, I wanted to point out, you can see those top four intersection improvement projects. Four of those are CDOT facilities. Right. And we talked to you about the s s four a grant for Florida and Tucker. We got a cooperation with them. So there's gonna be further conversation with CDOT on these other three interchanges. Also, one of the things out of the safety action plan is it's it validated some of the things we're already doing. So you noted on here the the Gun Club Road on the right side, Quincy to Jewel. It's an issue not Quincy to Jewel.

Sorry. The one right above the crest line to Quincy. It's been identified as needing safety improvements. Well, we're currently in final design for that corridor, so it validated that project. Now there's a few more Alameda At Gun Club that also is currently under design for a a traffic signal. So it's it's very good that we have this action plan, but it also identified some projects that we need to put on our list. So those will be rolled into our five and ten year plan, and we're kinda prioritizing with other projects as as time marches on.

Right.

So I wanted to mention that in this in this slide.

Absolutely. Yeah. And Parker and Florida are two other corridors that, you know, Parker, we just did a quarter study on last year. Florida, we're doing one with doctor Cobb right now. So it it kinda validated that. We knew these were issues, and and and now we know for even more reasons why. Okay. So there's a safety commitment. This is a a requirement of the SS four a grant to commit to, you know, the vision zero of of of goal of zero fatalities and fatal injuries. The draft report you have has the year 2040 handed in for this this blank year.

I get I'll I'll let Jim get give me a little more detail. We want to tell you now that we're not gonna be advocating for 2040 anymore. This is a fast moving project. Mhmm. Things have been changing rapidly.

So we review the way that we wanted to establish the date is look at the cost of everything in this program and assume the typical amount of funding that we have gotten in the past in the CIP being more or less typical going forward. We didn't wanna make any dramatically different assumptions of of funding levels, to be able to complete all the recommended, capital projects, that, are in the highest crash locations. And, upon reviewing the consultant's cost estimates, we told them to to sharpen the pencil. We think some of those estimates were too low. So the draft report that we sent a few weeks ago, since this is an in in progress project had twenty forty.

You know, I I don't wanna say exactly what the date is gonna be. I think 2045 or even '20 is looking a lot more likely though Mhmm. Just based on I I knew there were some estimates in there drilling way down the weeds that were just too high. And so before it comes due on May 12, we wanna make sure we have a a dated backed and realistic and defendable date on, you know, what real resources currently are. And then we're making a good set of assumptions. So, Jim, I think you said Yeah.

So we we have a proposal to to to present to you. So '24 is not a date that we we support right now. Just the estimates were low. So this week, this is the first time we saw the the data today. So we we dug into it. It's it's low. So we're gonna work with consultant to get a an accurate cost estimate. We think by the early next week, we can present, a date to the board, the county commissioners. We can do it via email. If we do it via email and and you can say, hey.

We're comfortable with this, then we can put that date in the March 12, presentation, and you can adopt it at that time. If the board's not comfortable with that approach, then we're put in jeopardy of meeting that May 26 deadline. It is what it is. We wanna get a plan that's that's reasonable, that's accurate, and what the board is comfortable with. So it just mean we probably miss the SS four a deadline, which we can apply for later. The SS four a deadline grant deadline came quick upon us. In the past, it was in in June

Right.

Or July. Or July, they shortened the deadline. It is what it is, and we're we're we've done good so far. This is the first hiccup in in in the deadline that we've we've experienced. So wanted to get some input from the board, what you're most comfortable with. We think we can have a cost estimate, a man accurate one by the end of this week, and do some some math and get you a date by early next week.

Commission gamble? So the major

impact of moving the date up from 2040 is that costs will be concentrated in the years towards the deadline.

Yes. Okay. Yeah.

We'd we'd have to put some more more money aside for safety projects than what's historically been been given to the the department.

And you guys don't have a year for that yet

nor a cost estimate.

Right? We we were talking to the consultant. It was 40,000,000 was the estimated project cost. We're like, We've historically been given 2 and a half to 3,000,000 every year for safety. It ebbs and flows.

Mhmm.

And we go get grant money to help with that and partners. So $20.40 was very reasonable. But now that if the cost estimate doubles or goes up 25%, $20.40 doesn't look reasonable. Yeah. And I we don't want the board put the board in an uncomfortable spot where, oh, we have to now we have to spend 5,000,000 every year now.

Yeah. What do you mean move the date back

or move

it up?

Back.

Oh, you move it back.

Oh, I thought okay.

To 2015. Oh.

Yeah. Interesting.

Yeah. So give us more runway.

The idea is that we didn't want to presume, like, an additional amount of funding compared to what we historically have been receiving in the CIB program. You know, to and make a date that is reasonable to implement all these projects based on an assumption of about the same current funding levels. And so pick our date based off of what the work is to do and and how long it will take us to to gather up that much money. And there's there's kind of an implicit assumption there that, you know, these funding levels we know inflation's an issue over time, but funding levels also gradually increase over time. So there's a little bit of a some assumptions in there.

But, yeah, it it is as Jim said. Something that our approach to come back to you with our recommended date is when we think we can get the projects done if we continue to receive the levels of funding that we've historically typically average received.

Commissioner Baker has

a

question

for you. Yeah. Just on the the selection of the date because I remember seeing in in doctor Cog or elsewhere 2050 as a year for Vision Zero, the the Vision Zero Oh, okay. Cutoff or not cutoff, target date. Because this is all Yeah.

A a prognostication. It's a, you know, a target date, so to speak. But I would also be interested in hearing what our neighboring jurisdictions are putting in their comprehensive safety action plan. Sure. Simply because you can learn a lot about you can take advantage of the hard work they've done in other jurisdictions and maybe the state as well for what went into their selection of the year in in their plan.

Yeah. Commissioner Baker, you are, as always, extremely on point with what's going on at doctor Cobb.

Didn't move

the year 2040. Weird.

Yeah. Weird. Yeah. That is doctor Cobb's goal date. Most of the safety action plans that have been adopted by local counties and cities in the Denver region are also using that 2040 date inspired inspired by doctor Cox. I I can't swear that every single one has, but I've I've heard that's the majority of it. Okay. It's been my conversation with doctor Cox staff on the issue.

If we move it up, we would be the first to go beyond that

2040. If we promise sooner than '20 Yeah. If we move it sooner than '20 if it became the year that happened before 2040, we'd be more ambitious. If we push it back, I don't think we'd be the first to push it back.

Okay.

But most have stated 2040. I think I think our internal staff position is that we would rather commit to something that we feel is more realistic than just to commit to something just because other people have committed to it.

Agree. Alright. We can provide that information, commissioner Baker. Let me send that email if that's what you prefer to do.

Commissioners? Commissioner Warren Geller? Thank you, madam chair. I can't remember if I asked this the last time you were here. Does do do these safety plans contemplate new development or projected development in areas at all? That I I appreciate what y'all are saying about choosing a year here and wanting to be realistic and and such. I guess I also see this as a moving target somewhat because, you know, we just have no idea what the future looks like. But I wondered if your safety action plan does contemplate

Yeah.

Particularly areas that we know where growth is going to happen. We see that happening.

That's a great question. The primary mechanism of identifying the projects in this plan was based on the data analysis and then very secondarily to that was like the public comment on, you know, and then there were some projects that maybe were boosted up a little bit. The recommended priority because of public comment. But, you know, the public is commenting on things they see today and the data is reflecting things that happened in the past. And so there's not an immediate great tie in and nexus on like areas we know we're gonna grow in the future.

That being said, one of the things that surprised me, detail of the plan, was that in some of our recent high growth areas, little of a crash picture there was. Right? There's almost no I I don't think there were any severe injury or fatal crashes, for instance, in Sky Ranch. Right? So that's one of the newest developed areas of the county. We know there's a lot more filings of Sky Ranch coming. There's growth in other places than just there. Mhmm. But I was a little bit surprised to see that in that new rapidly growing area we we haven't had much of a crash picture or concern yet. Okay.

There are other quarters like gun club that are, you know, getting very very overloaded with traffic for, you know, the capacity and facility type they are designed for and a lot of that is coming from growth and development pressure out there, much of which is in incorporated areas as opposed to the unincorporated areas, but it still affects the traffic pattern in on our roads. And so in that sense, yeah, is is there more growth out there that's gonna put more traffic in the future in gun club? Yes. Well, there's projects out there that are already identifying that as an issue in a a course of our action, which will, you know, be an infrastructure upgrade to accommodate those projected areas of future growth. So Right.

While, frankly, the plan did not focus directly in any mechanism on future growth areas, there's projects in there that are related to areas we know will be concerned because of future growth pressures. And it's comforting that in the newest growth we have, we didn't see so much of an issue.

I would imagine some of these things are being incorporated into the designs that you do

For sure.

In these new areas.

Yeah. And I can just say Very good. I can just say like about a Sky Ranch example here, like new development. I've assisted our engineering services group in in public works with reviewing the design of several roundabout intersections in future filings of that development over the past year or so. So we're gonna have more big intersections over there as roundabouts. Well, roundabouts are the safest kind of intersection. They take a lot of right of way. It's really good to plan them when you have a greenfield development like exactly what's happening out there, because the intersection itself does have a much higher right of way need than something like a signal. But I mean the the crash reduction factor of a roundabout versus a signal is about a 90% reduction.

It's crazy. Roundabouts.

Roundabouts are amazing. They're very safe.

Exactly. They're awesome. Jim knows. Jim knows. I'm a big fan.

Yeah. We need a song

about them.

We need a song about roundabouts. That's what the District 2 song could be about.

District 2.

Yeah. I

agree. That's I

can I'm inspired. Yeah.

You're right.

The follow-up question that I would have for you all is, and not that I'm saying that I think we should just commit to something willy nilly. Mhmm. But I'm also recognizing that a lot of this stuff Mhmm. It doesn't doesn't contemplate future growth. It it it it's a moving target.

And so I if we don't if we put let's say we put 2045 in here Mhmm. And we don't reach that goal by twenty forty forty five. Mhmm. I guess I'm trying to figure out what the consequence for that is if, say, for example, you know, we we need to redirect funding from safe Right. From these safety projects to something else just because of whatever happens. You know? I mean

A lock

in that. I just am kind of like I I I I appreciate the concern about it, but I also want to recognize that commitments that we make that are what is that? Fourteen years out is difficult to it's difficult to actually, like, recognize that that would happen by 2014.

I totally understand your your point, commissioner. I will say that there's maybe one additional aspect to the plan that does speak a little bit to the future growth and that's like our policy process changes. Like so at there's a lot of action items in this list. It's the 51 action items. They're not just doing capital projects. Many of them are things that like looking at specific engineering standards in our infrastructure design and construction standards and making updates there. So Mhmm. As over time our standards become better and more aligned with safe systems principles, you know, development which has to build to our latest standard will inherently be building something that's Yeah. More systemically safe. Right?

Sure. We just cheered on roundabouts. I'll keep on cheering on roundabouts. I can cheer roundabouts all day. I like roundabouts a lot. One of the action items I think that's in the plan is to look at a policy for having a round about first preference on a new development intersection. If it meets the warrants to be a signal does it also operate okay as a roundabout and if it does let's tell the developer they need to build the roundabout not the signal because we know the roundabout is just gonna have less crashes. Mhmm. Right? And so that's just one example.

There are several policies in here in in our yeah in our action plan to improve our design standards and design standards have the most effect on what happens in the future, the future growth. Okay. And so we're proactively addressing growth in that way but yes the data analysis itself can't look at facilities that don't exist yet.

Another aspect to your question, and I appreciate you asking it, is that this is an update from our 2020 local road safety plan. So may hopefully, in five, six, seven years, we'll be giving another update showing any progress. That there might be things in this act this action plan that we need to double down on. There might be things, oh, that didn't work. So we we need to focus less on that. Or, hey. Here's some new projects we can tackle. So it it is a moving target if you would. There's there's a little, uncertainty if we're gonna achieve it. But, as we come back and update the plan, hopefully, we can continue to to get better and refine.

So when you come back to update plan in seven years or whatever, we we could actually adjust this date Yeah. As we see more data and we have more information about how successful or whatever

Mhmm. Mhmm. The the

plan is in the next six years.

Yeah.

And I I guess I'm just thinking I I respect wanting to be true to picking a date. Mhmm. But there's also a part of me that is is understanding of 2040 sounds like a long time away, and who knows what's gonna happen. And in five years, seven years, when you come back, we could really look at this and say, yeah, that wasn't realistic. And now we have a better idea of what would be realistic to achieve these program these

That's very fair. And you should note too, another one of those 51 action items is in the year 2031 to update the safety action plan. So we're we're we're establishing this a regular five year cadence.

Right.

Right? So

So if we were to commit to 2040 today, so you didn't have to come back to us and we can move forward with a vote in May, you we could update this date in 2031.

Yeah. We

can all agree to be

here. Yeah. Except for you.

If we're alive. Yeah. It's questionable questionable for for me. Me. Just the same.

Okay. That's just my other question.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

I think our last line is quest discussion.

Oh, hey. There we are. That's cool. I'm gonna share cable.

So kinda going along that same line of thought and knowing that we'll be getting data along the way now so we'll be able to be informed. What so and I apologize if you missed this. It's or if I you already said this and I missed this, and thank you for repeating yourself. The when the cost estimates came in, were there aspects of the project scope or quotes that you just kind of identified of going like, did it just feel low? And then you were like, oh, yeah.

Design's not in here. Scope is in here. Like, the the whole scope of a project. And they were maybe just thinking about kind of like shovels and, you know, like, kind of the the this part of or however that cost estimate got in. Is that what happened there?

There's parts of that. I don't know if Steven

Yeah. Yeah. So yeah, the consultant prepared a kind of a planning level cost estimate and it was that.

Planning level cost.

So it was actually the front end not the the actual construction cost.

Exactly. I mean, so that it was based on construction cost of recent similar projects. Right? But they if you go back a few slides to that list of all the site specific border improvements. Right? They actually broke down like a list of what the constructed improvements would be at each of these things and how much that cost like for, you know, signal rebuilds and, you know, lane widenings and and and so forth. And I just upon reviewing that, I identified things that would logically be in the scope of that kind of project that would cost money that I didn't feel they were properly accounting for. So they you know, it's a work in progress. Right? It's very common that we review things that consultant prepare for us and we go back and forth a lot of times until we both get to a spot where we agree it's right.

And so this is a fast moving project. So I don't wanna give any impression that, you know, we or the consulting hired are not doing anything outside the bounds of what we normally do. It's just we are presenting to you a little bit earlier because of the s s four a deadline. This is fast moving. But mean, frankly, identified projects that in all probability are gonna need right of way and there was not a right of way line item.

Right? I I identified a few projects that, like in the rural side, you know, where we have like, you know, we're gonna do, you know, rumble strips and shoulder widenings and and that kind of thing where we didn't, you know, fully take into account all the impacts of like, you know, drainage and utilities when you widen the shoulder. And so I said, you know, you you go back. There are scope elements in here that were were just missed. Some of the cost too, I felt were were low because I also have access to recent construction cost data. Right? I don't have to just take our consultant's word for it. I I can look at these databases too and we have our own bids from construction costs and I just, you know, we look at construction cost data all the time. We bid out several projects a year and so I just had a sense myself that some of this is too low. Right?

It's a it's a variety of things. I'm gonna give them a lot of comments and I know that my comments will have the net effect of making the cost go up. Mhmm.

But it's better again, like I'd rather deal with reality Exactly.

Than like Exactly my Yeah. Agreed.

Yeah. And okay. And so interesting. I just am trying to think about that if the effect of setting a date and then kind of pushing it back because there's also sort of what if we set it back and then we got stuff done faster? You know?

Yeah. If it's based on the assumption and so when you're looking at it, I mean, you were throwing numbers around like, oh, it could go up 20%, or what if it doubles, or what if it you I just I'd rather under promise and over deliver than kind of that vibe of we didn't get our stuff done. We need to kind of scoot it back. Mhmm. But money is real.

And then also trying it's actually kinda made up, but you know what I mean. We have to actually pay for things. Yes. But it's I just I'm also trying to think because how where we've been working with Road and Bridge and one a Mhmm. And then where we've been aggressive on grants and different things. And then also, as Baker was saying, our partner jurisdictions and the transportation forum. Isn't that what it's called? Council? Something. Whatever. Yeah. The little yeah.

Yeah. The the Yeah.

The thing. And Denver South and then also the micromobility and kinda there's a lot of stuff that could be bundled together that if we were really mindful about working with rodent prints, like, really kind of incorporating projects and perspectives together, how whether cost savings would be there overall within the CIP budget. And especially, I think, you know, I think there's also a difference between, I think, where we said corridor improvements, some of the rural stuff. Would that count as CIP, or would that be considered maintenance? Because we have for CIP, it has to be net new.

Right.

But not necessarily net new.

It has

to be basically rebuilt.

Yeah. And and we're we're seeing some of these as safety enhancements. So we we could say this is a safety enhancement capital project.

Uh-huh.

Okay. Where we're looking at it. And then some of these projects a way we can reduce some of these costs is, like, on a Florida Willow, for instance, if it says, hey. Do do signal timing and do these other improvements that we we we, constrain ourselves to just those things and not, hey. We're not not not to scope creep and do a and now we're doing a a widening of a road.

Right.

Okay. Let's just focus on these specific improvements. So we can take that approach too.

And is there a way also then because, you know, when we're sitting in CIP and it's kinda like and we kinda do the the same thing with EBC. Right? You're gonna have some things that are gonna be some big dollars. And then you're like, alright. We got, like, 600,000 left. Like and then you're like, okay. What else can we get done? Yeah. You know, kind of thinking about some of that and especially where if we can't if there are things when I when I'm thinking about the prioritization. Right?

Yes. Data informed. But if the public is commenting on what they're experiencing today, then we understand that the data is old. While we will be getting ongoing data, there could be some shifting of priorities. I also think there could be shifting of priorities in terms of what we can get done sooner and sort of bumping things.

And what like, if we can get light improvements or something and that can get done in a year Mhmm. Where the maybe the overall, like, recommendation could would be the overall recommendation may be a widening or be some kind of other larger infrastructure or something. If we see that striping signals, something like that addresses the problem and decreases Mhmm. The deaths and the fight or serious injuries, does that kind of cross it off the list? Or is that larger project still out there?

I mean, like, can we be like, bosh, done. We actually did it and we didn't need the full thing. We just needed that.

It it went from that safety perspective. That that, you know, other other perspectives like capacity or accessibility still need to be addressed. And we look to incorporate those, but, yes, from a safety perspective, you would check that box.

Yeah. And and there are, of course, as we it really do. This is a list of project locations. Definitely, the cost associated with what these locations need is not all equal. Right? Right. Let's look at the quarters. Both gun clubs are significant major capital investment widening projects. Himalaya Street from Quincy to Hampton is an existing street that is 40 feet wide and has no striking at all and is kind of a racetrack and it needs lanes.

It's wild wild west on Himalaya.

Yeah. It's it's literally a striping and signage project and a few like raised, you know, pedestrian crossing islands.

And it's near schools.

Right. And so Himalaya, like, it's corridor that is very cheap. Gun club is a corridor that's very expensive. So, you know, I have an easy time guessing which one will probably happen first.

K. Did

I answer your question, Krishna?

Yeah. I'm just trying to think about in terms of the number. Right? And the expectation and how attainable it is. Because also the idea is to get to zero deaths, not to just get a list of projects

done. Right.

The list of projects are the path to the zero deaths.

Yes.

But also, I mean, by '24 I mean, it I just I just have I get

the

philosophy behind vision zero.

Mhmm.

Right? How many deaths is too many. You know, one is too many. We want people to be able to travel and get where they're going. Mhmm. But how do we actually even claim success from this? Because we could hit 2040, have no deaths, and then we have also imagined we've invested in this. We get all the projects done. Mhmm. And then in 2041, there's a death. That's right. Right? And so I think there's also a component of this that okay. That is yeah. I'm just trying to deal with I I don't know what a I mean, what if we split the difference and went twenty forty five?

Right? Yeah. And then if we get it done faster, if we can kinda do that, then then we're not, like, a decade behind everybody. Exactly. But we're also acknowledging budget realities Yeah. That's right. And movements in population and development and just how long also projects take. And I'd rather us under promise and over deliver than have to move a date back. And I think our verbiage and our our dialogue around it could be like, we're gonna go after this as aggressively as possible. But we're very conscientious of budget realities, partnerships, things like this.

A lot of things are moving. But also in terms of the time value of money, which I sound like director Weimer now, the time value of money is if I feel like if we push it back, it delays things so much that at what point are we not even getting accurate estimates of the costs. Right? Even 40 is kinda like Totally. Again, made up numbers. Fuzzy math. I feel like I got fuzzy math happening over here. Sure. Yeah. It just is like a kajillion dollars.

Right? And so what is even like I I don't know. It's it's an art and a science. And I feel like 2045 gives us a number that doesn't push us out too much. Like, we're not a decade behind everybody, But we're also acknowledging the realities while then we can also say it's our commitment to do this as quickly as possible.

But the list of strategies are the path to how we get there. Not necessarily commitment to like, we are doing this exact project this exact way. We are gonna try to as efficiently and quickly get to vision zero as we can. And dear people, drive safe. Like, also, like, work You with know? Mhmm. So I I don't know. I guess that that's my thinking on the the year. But it's also, like, it's whatever. I just want you guys I just want us to land on a year so you guys can get it submitted.

And I also am with you in terms of people are moving fast. And I know I am very aware of your concerns because I have absolutely crawled up people's hinies for missing grant deadlines and kinda like pushing and doing all these things. And I have felt you guys pushing and working on this really expeditiously and really appreciate it. And I appreciate your mindfulness around that. I just want us to just be on point. Mhmm. Like commissioner Baker. Mhmm. But not like roundabouts. I mean, it happens.

I I appreciate you pointing out that to get there, we're off implementing these projects and strategies. So really appreciate that perspective, and you're right on. Thank you. Any other questions that that we can have

or any other discussion? Carrie, what do you think of all of this? Yeah. I know you're I know you're kinda new to building, but what are you just kind of an overview of where what what what what your thoughts are.

Of the plan that we've got, I do think that they've brushed this to try to get this done. Mhmm. I do think it's good. I think if you look through the projects, there is a lot of administrative stuff. It's not just projects. So it is really kinda trying to change the way we're doing things, but also tracking I thought one of them was tracking the future accidents too. It's not like you're turning a blind eye Yeah. Right. To what is going

to be happening. Mhmm. Right? Mhmm.

So I think 2045 is a reasonable approach to take. I do think 2050 does look bad with everybody else adopting the 2040. So I would agree. I think the cost I was hearing were low. They need to be adjusted. So but I think they've got a good plan that they're moving forward with. It it's the trend right now.

Mhmm.

The vision zero, I agree. You can't stop stupid sometimes. You know? People aren't always gonna drive smart. So We've seen that. You can design your streets as safe as you can and just hope

that

the driver's doing the right thing. So do think a lot of the improvements out in the East Mhmm. Can be picked up as they're out there doing projects. Some of them was just improving the signage.

Mhmm. Yep.

You know? It's I think there are things that we can chip away at. Yeah. And, you know, it may not be one project. You get the whole county taken care of with signage, but that's why I was talking to him before we met. Mhmm. It's chipping away at those and getting them done and trying to build the safest road we can out there.

So okay. And 2045 sounds okay. The twenty forty is what everybody else is doing? Or this is my question. What are Denver and El Paso doing?

I don't know what El Paso was doing, and I'm pretty sure Denver is saying twenty forty. They also adopted their plan similar to this, like, five years ago, so they had a little bit of a head start.

Okay. Yeah. I remember that on the yeah. Fish was here.

So it doesn't it wouldn't it doesn't look bad for us to say 2045. It's still in line with our our

our folks. I don't think

you should do twenty forty just to do twenty forty. Right. I think you should try to do something reasonable Yeah. If it's twenty forty five. That makes sense to me.

And I just wanna make sure

I have all my questions. Mhmm.

Thank you. Alright, commissioners. What are we thinking? Twenty forty five? We have four thumbs up.

Alright. Great. 25. Yay.

Appreciate it. So we'd like to come back on May 12 Mhmm. With the final draft the final plan of Not the draft. The final plan, present to you five, ten minutes, and take a vote at that time. Is there any adjustments to the plan that that we need to make? Comfortable with it? We'll add this twenty four five in there. We'll also document the cost of these projects, these this planning level estimation, cost estimate.

I think

We'll go to jail. I think incorporating some of the dialogue we've had here about, like, what the overall perspective is is that we're gonna try to be as efficient. Like, we're gonna try to get to this as efficiently as possible, and that we set the date out to be more realistic. Just kind of, like, in that narrative. Yeah.

You know? I think also where where and I apologize. I haven't read the whole thing. But I think the two things I've sort of heard today are one is, like, what is going to be the role of the data we're collecting going forward? And being explicit about how that may impact the plan going forward and just being like, we this is a living working document. Mhmm. It helps shape and inform things. But as data comes in, like, we may shift and pivot, especially as or as traffic climbing measures work or we see different things like we will show

up shop.

I think it just makes sense to be very explicit about that. Mhmm. So that is also expectation setting with the public. Two,

I

would say also kind of along with that is the explicit contemplation of future development and the impact or other future changes and and micro mobility or different things that happen. I think just kind of that for future casting of sort of these are the things that we will be thinking about and considering as strategies in terms of or or considerations as we are making and adjusting this plan going forward. And I think that was kind of all I thought. Oh, and then again, being very explicit about in that efficiency towards hitting vision zero Mhmm. That two things.

One, at the end of the day, it takes drivers on the road to help us reach this. So help us help you.

Yeah.

Number two shit. Just let my brain. Number two what was the other thing we were talking about? The

factors that could affect economy.

Yeah. Close to that. But it's close to that, but I think oh, that the projects listed are the path. Yeah. To Vision Zero, but there may be multiple pathways. Right? And so being very clear and setting the expectation that these are what we think. There are other ways to do this. And as we're doing this efficiently, we're gonna try to get as much done as we can as quickly as we can. But this is not, like, written in stone in terms of this project, this specific way.

They are recommendations. They're based in data. They could be good. But like you said, if we can get a traffic light up and do some striping, and that's something we can fund and three of those things or just one project over here, I wanna do three of

those. Yeah.

Right? Make an impact.

Yeah. Absolutely. In as many locations and ways we can.

Yeah. Exactly. And so the the goal is vision zero. How we get there, these are potential paths Mhmm. Is a recommended path and things, but we're going to make the most sense of it as possible.

And so that way, people have a lens through which to read the plan and there's an expectation. Because also, I think ultimately, and what I've seen in terms of Jenny's, director Pinguineau's reliance on the open space master plan and our reliance on like the bike and pet plan and different things is that as commissioners, like, it needs to be a royal we, and we need to inform future commissioners what our perspective was and how we were going about that. And writing it into the plan and us adopting that is a way for then either you or the future you can tell us or the future us. This was what was thought of. This was the approach, and nobody has to go back

and listen to a study session.

Okay. That's good input. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you. And and I'll say, yeah, many of the themes you touched upon, just the ongoing centrality and importance to the data, that's that's in the plan. Those are among the 51 action items. You know, we we will be continuously looking at crash data every year. That's not leaving us. And and, yeah, we're establishing a five year cadence to do this this big review of a whole new plan. Right? So that can carry things from this plan forward just like this plan is carrying things from the last plan forward. But

We we failed to mention out of those 51 action items or objectives. With our current staffing level, we're we we think we can implement 26. So we're not here to talk to about, hey. Additional resources right now. Future conversation with the next PWD leadership on on what how we wanna prioritize that that work.

Yeah. We don't think it'll impact the twenty forty five number, but they're they're they're bigger bigger projects. I'll give one instance of one on this. On every high injury network, we're gonna spend we're gonna take one of those high injury networks and and evaluate it every year and develop an action plan. So that is currently setting aside, so we don't have enough staffing to do that part. We have 26 other items that we're working through, and and that's in your plan. We have a handout to leave with you.

Yeah. Do you have FTE estimates to get I I would so then I would say going looking at the other plan. Like, what else should we include and what comes to us on the twelfth is an FTE estimate to hit the 2045 goal.

We we think we can we can hit the twenty twenty forty five goal with with those 21 not getting implemented

currently. But it also depends on what they are, how pivotal they are to the program. And so, like, it's kind of like one a. Mhmm. Have to, should

That's right.

Could. Give us sort of, if you can, this is what we can this is what we can do with current staffing levels, current funding levels. This is blah. You know? Then kind of this will take this. Like, if we really wanna do this kind of level of studying or we wanna do this kind of thing because sometimes that's also those are grants we could go after or different things of like ways of getting funding to do it so we can see our gaps, and then we can address those.

Yep. And and to be fair, it could be just a reprioritization of public works too. Don't do don't do that. Do this. So just just for future conversation with leadership as well.

I think I think that makes sense.

That's fair.

So but to the best of your ability, giving us a perspective of what that FTE would look like.

Okay.

And then as you guys are doing it, like, I would work with Carrie and kind of whether it makes sense to have it in the plan or is it, like, kinda supplemental information for us to know. Yeah. Because it's I definitely wanna know, but I don't know if it's really relevant for the exact plan.

I'm with you.

Okay. That's about

yeah. But, again, it speaks to if we're making a commitment, what does that mean? And what are we obligating future iterations of the board to if we're serious about vision zero. Mhmm. I don't like just little plans that don't mean anything. Like, you've planned your work, and then you work your day. And you have to have the resources available to do that work. So

Okay. Thank you. Anything

else? Any other comments? Questions? Concerns?

No. We'll be back on May 12.

That's what I hear.

Thank you. Commissioner Campbell has some. Just just real quick. Did you guys get any FTE last year?

Did you get going

to? Not transportation.

Not transportation.

It was

It's something been building and engineering. Yeah. Okay. That's what I thought. Okay. Okay.

So more conversations. Surprising anyway, Kevin.

Why don't

have the question?

Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

But

Wrap ago, there's future conversations

with Okay. Because I don't remember you guys.

It's too fast. It might not have we put it forward. I don't know if it made the the final list going in.

Okay. Okay. Cool. Thank you. Good to know. That helps.

Good job. Thank you very much. Yes. Very good job.

Before everybody leaves though uh-oh. I just wanted to did you hear about the traffic engineer that was accused of stealing Tell us. From work? They couldn't believe it, but when they got to his home, all the signs were there.

Commissioners, can I I have something that I wanted to just I