Land Development & Transportation Committee - Regular Meeting

29-year-old Reza Valdez were taken to the hospital where they were pronounced deceased from their injuries. All three of these victims died from gunshot wounds. Immediately after the shooting, the three shooters fled on foot. They got into a vehicle and they fled the scene. This happened despite that there were marked LMPD vehicles next door at a business where they were eating lunch. Officers were then immediately on scene. Shortly after this shooting, we identified a suspect vehicle. And through the use of flock cameras, we were able to track this vehicle before the shooting and after the shooting. And again, we were able to recover that vehicle the same day. It was recovered at 35th and Chauncey. This vehicle was taken from a dealership. Through the investigation, we found that the dealership had not yet known that the vehicle was missing. So it was reported stolen after the shooting, but it was taken several days prior. The vehicle was processed by our crime scene unit. Evidence was obtained from that vehicle, and we were able to send that evidence to DNA Labs International. With our partnership with them, we were able to get several DNA profiles from inside that vehicle. Over the past 17 months, the lead detective in this investigation has written and drafted and served approximately 50 search warrants for this specific investigation. These search warrants were able to obtain evidence so we could identify the individual that was charged yesterday. He was charged with murder, wanton endangerment, and receiving stolen property. At the time of his arrest yesterday, he was already on HIP for committing unrelated incidents. Additional DNA profiles have led us to identify other people who could be involved in this. One possible suspect who was identified through a DNA profile has since been murdered in a separate homicide. This is still an active investigation as we are still trying to identify the third suspect from this incident, but we need the community's help to solve these cases. We ask anyone with information to call 574-LMPD. Through the cooperation of eyewitnesses and the use of technology ranging from DNA, surveillance videos, cell phones, and GPS, we were able to get justice for these families. Louisville has had a dramatic decrease in the last two years of criminal homicides. Currently, LNPD is just shy of a 60% clearance rate mid-year. This is an unprecedented number. It is much higher than previous years. And it's due to the fact that our detectives are able to have fewer cases and work those cases because these cases take time and they take patience. We want the families to know that we've not, the other families of homicide victims to know we've not forgotten about your family, your member. We ask that you take these investigations. Many times we do know who committed these murders, but due to double jeopardy, we need proof beyond a reasonable doubt before we can charge them. If we charge someone without enough probable cause to make sure that the arrest sticks and that they go to prison, then no matter what happens, if we find additional evidence later, we can't go back. So that's why it's crucial to have as much information, as much evidence as possible, And the biggest thing for past homicide victims families that we are still we are still working for justice for you. Many times we have exhausted technology search warrants to find those other homicide suspects is why it's crucial for eyewitness testimony to come forward and tell us what they saw or what they heard. We are doing everything possible to bring justice and closure for the families of every single homicide victim. Now take questions.

email, the charge is listed as murder complicity. Can you say what the then 17 year old role was in this triple homicide?

The question is the charge was murder complicity. And what was the role that the 17 year old played in the homicide? At the time of the murder, the individual arrested yesterday was 17. He is currently 19 years old. He's charged with murder complicity because he and two others all three fired their weapons into a line of people standing outside of the DMV.

The question is how confident are we that the second suspect that was identified through DNA

Was at the scene. So a DNA profile was developed from the vehicle once it was recovered. So again, it was a possible suspect. We believe that that would have been someone who was also present during the time of the homicide, but unfortunately they were murdered in a separate homicide. So we feel confident enough to say that we believe it's him, but at this point with him being deceased, We're unable to continue to question him about that. And so that's.

Are you able to say who he is?

We're not able to say who he is. It's still an ongoing investigation. It's again, that's a separate incident. And then we're going to focus on this one today. The question is posthumous charges. That's possible. Ultimately, it would depend through coordination and cooperation with a Commonwealth attorney.

SOS is a global health nonprofit based here in Louisville.

For years now, we've been able to rely on SOS for when we see critical, immediate needs when we're out doing street outreach.

A lot of people know us for our international work because we've been doing it for decades. But since 2019, our local health program has been one of our fastest growing areas of work.

Now we do. Now we do. Sonia, now we do. All right. Thank you, everybody, for waiting withstanding the weather to get here. This is the regularly scheduled meeting of the Public Works Committee. This meeting is being held pursuant to KRS 61.826 in Council Rule 5A. Is this mic really hot? We're joined online by Councilman Bittson, joined in chamber by my Vice Chair, Councilman Herndon, Councilman Crystal Bast, Councilman Bratcher, and Councilman Piangentini. All right, we're gonna hold items four through 15 again. and we will go backwards through the agenda with item three first. Resolution R-090-26. a resolution determining real property located at 207 North English Station Road as surplus and not needed for governmental purposes of Metro government and authorizing its transfer. Do we have a motion? Do we have a second? I have a motion and a second. And I believe Councilman Piacentini would like to speak to this.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Unfortunately, I don't have the document in front of me, but just for my colleagues, and I'm assuming you're going to speak to it as well, this is a bit of an administrative thing. Essentially, right next to Middletown Commons in my district, there is land that the water company has owned and used. They have a couple water towers there. There's a very funky thing where historically we have had all water company land was sort of dual deeded or had both the name of Metro and the water company on it. The water companies wanted to do some things with parcels around this land and around these water towers and our name being on it is sort of holding all of this up. So we're just actually acknowledging the reality of the situation by saying we have no purpose for this land allowing the water company to have sole jurisdiction over the land which quite frankly was the intent all along. So this ultimately achieves that but I don't know if the administration want to speak a little more detail on that.

Good afternoon. Mike King, Assistant Director of Louisville Metro Department of Transportation. Councilman Piagentini pretty much nailed it with everything there. The only thing I would add would be there are a potential couple of road projects KYTC is looking at in that area. So by kind of cleaning up this clerical error, it will make it a lot easier that they wouldn't have to have two signatures. They would just need the one. But that was the gist of it.

All right. Anyone else want to speak to this? Anyone in the queue? I will note that we've been joined in chamber by Councilman Ben Reno-Weber, Councilwoman Josie Raymond, and Councilwoman Chappell. Having no one in the queue, this is a resolution requiring a voice vote. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? And motion carries. Thank you. We will go to item number two next. Ordinance O-188-26, an ordinance authorizing Louisville Metro Government to renew the gas franchise with Louisville Gas and Electric Company and assign a gas franchise, I think that's supposed to say, and assign a gas franchise agreement. Oh, no. Oh, it's probably over there. And sign a gas franchise agreement. Sorry. I was wrong. I believe we have someone from the county attorney's office to speak to this.

Yes. Good afternoon, council members. Holly Hopkins.

Oh, wait a minute. Do I need to take a motion? Do I have a motion? Motion. Second. Do I have a second?

Second.

Motion and a second. Now it is before us, Connie Hopkins.

Connie Hopkins with the Jefferson County Attorney's Office. This is the second renewal of Metro's gas franchise agreement with LG&E. The original agreement was entered into in 2016 for, it's got a 20 year total lifespan and they're in five year increments. It was renewed for the first time in 2021. That renewal will expire in August of this year, and nobody wants to bump up against the deadline for the franchise, right? So it renews the agreement on the same terms and conditions as before, and the administration supports renewing it as is, and I'm happy to answer any questions anybody would have.

All right, thank you. I have no one in the queue. Does anyone wish to speak to this? All right.

I think, sir.

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you.

And this fee is only applied to residents in the Urban Services District. Is that correct?

There is no fee. Metro, for that very reason. the public service commission in 2016 issued an order that said if metro charged a fee it would i mean it allowed lg e to recover a fee is a better way to say it it could only be applied to urban services district and the unincorporated areas it could only be applied to bills as a line item, because it would have to appear as a line item, on those areas over which Metro has jurisdiction. And it does not have jurisdiction over the suburban cities for this purpose because every city under the Kentucky Constitution has franchise authority. Now, none of them have ever imposed a franchise because Why would they? They get to use the gas in the streets and whatever for this. So it would essentially be taxing one part of the population without taxing another part of the population. You might have somebody in the Urban Services District paying a fee and they're butted up right against City of St. Matthews, which wouldn't pay a fee. would not have a line item on their bill and you would. So for that reason, when the agreement was negotiated in 2016, Metro chose just to forego that and not collect the fee because of its uneven application.

So this is saying, this agreement is saying that for another five years we won't impose a franchise fee?

This agreement would continue that practice in effect However, the agreement has a provision in it that if at any point Metro decides to operate differently, it would have an ability, I believe with 60 days notice, to tell LG&E we want to start charging a fee on this segment of the population of Jefferson County. And it would apply to that segment of the population of Jefferson County only.

And that franchise fee can be earmarked for something that council identifies?

I can't answer that as I sit here today. We would have to look at what the funds could be used for. I would think they would go into the general fund. I'm not sure you could air mark it but we can look into that and get back to you.

And last question. You said this is a 20 year agreement that has to be renewed every five years? Correct. So we renew it this time and in five years is when the we'll have to revisit it or create another 20 year.

There would be one more renewal at the end of this. So it was originally in 2016, so the first renewal was in 2021, the second renewal now, and the third renewal would be five years from now, so 2031.

And 2036 is when we would have to revisit the whole ball of wax. Thank you.

Chair recognizes Councilman Weber.

So I'm just trying to understand this. So this is the master services agreement between LG&E and Metro government, is that correct? Or is this just related to the fees?

This is just the overall gas franchise agreement that authorizes LG&E to have its pipes and use our streets and provide the service.

And are we, I mean, there are those moments when, by virtue of the way our convoluted state laws and systems are set up, where we have to ratify and vote for something about which we have no choice. This is going to happen one way or the other. Is this one of those circumstances?

I'm not sure I follow your question.

So sometimes we have to say, hey, listen, Frankfurt has said this, and so now we have to adjust our laws in order to comply with Frankfurt's laws because they have precedence over ours. If we were to theoretically vote this down, what happens?

I would assume that would mean LG&E couldn't provide gas service because they would have no authority to use the pipes in the streets in order to do so. But you mentioned Frankfurt and it's not the General Assembly here This is the Kentucky Constitution that grants the franchise authority to cities. So it's under that constitutional provision that allows every municipality to have its own franchise authority.

So, OK. And is there a similar version of this for electricity?

My guess is yes, but I'm not the best person to speak to that. The best person to speak to that had a conflict today, so he is not with us today. Okay. But I assume LG&E has an agreement, a poll attachment agreement, and right to put their polls in the right of way. And it is not in this agreement. This is just the gas franchise agreement.

Got it. Okay. I mean, I'm raising that because having pretty regularly dealt with a very lopsided set of agreements that we have currently with LG&E in which we get the privilege of paying more than our peers for electricity in order to support a corporate institution, not headquartered here, where if we have, for example, in a street in the Highlands, no streetlights, we have the privilege of saying, well, we can pay for those streetlights, and then we can pay for the service And then I look at other communities like San Antonio that own their municipal electricity where it is in fact a revenue generating entity. But we're saying in this franchise agreement that we are continuing to operate there. And in theory there is a legal mechanism by which we would say, well actually no, you can't do that. And then they would be stuck with these, now we would have to figure out what that looks like, but they would be stuck with these assets that they would either have to figure out how to sell or not. I'm trying to understand. This is something that we do have an option around that set of agreements, theoretically.

I'm sorry, are you talking about the electrical?

Yeah, or the gas. If we said no, what then would happen?

I don't think you'd have gas. I really can't speculate on your hypothetical.

Yeah, that makes total sense. Okay, I'm just trying to understand where the legal bounds are. Thank you so much.

Thank you. I have no one else in my queue. Is there anyone else who wants to speak to this?

All right.

This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote. Clerk, please open the voting. Councilman Bitson?

Yes.

You have five yes votes, three present.

So with the present votes, this will go to the old business.

All right. Thank you, County Attorney.

The last item on the agenda we have is a paving status update. Sir, if you will then identify yourself with the record, you have the floor.

Good afternoon. I'm Wes Sidnor. I'm the Executive Director of Metro Public Works. Thank you all for having me.

This is not, yeah. Are you going to give this presentation for us?

Do you want to introduce yourself?

Yes, Nick Vale, Assistant Director of Engineering for the Metro Public Works. Awesome.

So I'm going to give a quick presentation. First of all, thank you to the chair and the committee for having us today to talk about the FY27 through 29 plan for paving. Going over the team, some of our pavement classes and assets, historically how this has been funded, the status of the most recent paving plan, what we're using to update and build future plans, and then the schedule going forward. So I want to introduce Nick, introduce himself. We have some folks, not the entire team, In the back of the room here, I just want to recognize today we have with us Clint Davis and Brian Davis. No relation, right? Yeah, okay. So key members of our paving and infrastructure renewal team. So when you think about the pavement plan, alleys, sidewalks, and those updates and that capital investment, This is the team that works every day to put those plans together and into action. So big kudos to them. It's a small but mighty team that does that work. Just a high level overview of the different classifications that we have. Just the total miles of metro assets in terms of roadways that we have and so you'll see We have a little over 2,000 miles of center line, so that's regardless of the number of lanes in a roadway, that's sort of if you stretch it all out, you're going to have 2,100 miles of roadway, and then when you factor in the multiple lanes on those roadways, we're over 4,500 as far as miles, and so it's a significant amount. a large metro area and so we have big investments that we have to make to address and maintain those miles of pavement. So we get this question from time to time about the different categories and classifications of roadways and pavement. Right off the bat, interstates and freeways, that's KYTC. That's not typically something that we will, as Metro, be involved with as far as repaving. Even some of the state roadways within Metro are paved by KYTC. So we'll do what we need to do to help support that effort. that's a different entity and a different conversation on those investments. We have major and minor arterials, and so these big collector roadways, I shouldn't use the word collector, but the more significant roadways that have a lot of volume as far as traffic, and then you have just the next step below that, major and minor collectors. A lot of connections between major roadways and then the lowest tier down is local roads and so standard neighborhood roads. And so there are different strategies that we use when we're looking at the number of and mileage of these different types of roadways as well as if you're having a major or minor arterial, the usage and the the impact of all that traffic is going to be much different than what you would see on a local road in most cases. And so that figures in sort of the strategy of where we repave and where we're doing that planning. So when we look at repaving in the plan, we use a metric called Pavement Condition Index. So that's PCI, that's what we'll use when giving this presentation is we're looking at a roadway, what is the PCI of that roadway, and then if our goal is to have every road in Metro above a 70 in terms of that condition. And so what we want to get to is get to roadways that require mostly preventive maintenance, not a bunch of rebuilding and significant rehab. And then when you get into the poor and deteriorating, it really creates a safety or hazardous condition that we have to look at. And so what our goal is with the paving plan year after year is to get As we go forward, there are more streets that get older and get onto that plan, but we're trying to get ahead of that curve as far as aging. Historically, looking back at the last 15, 17 years, we have made significant strides, and this body has made significant investments in paving, and in restoration of those assets. And so we're seeing the fruit of that investment over the last four or five years where there's been a historically $30 million set aside for pavement and rehab. And so that has started to bend that curve of what we were seeing in Metro. We had a lot of catch-up to do. We're still doing some catch up, but this last few years have made a huge difference for us in terms of what we're able to do and what we're seeing out in the field. So the status of FY25 and FY26, as you would expect, FY25 is almost entirely complete. You might ask, why isn't this 100%? There are a few segments out there that had utility work and some other some other things that were going on that prevented us from paving at that time. But as soon as those conflicts clear up, we're going to be working to get this to 100%. And similar to FY26, I think this is one of the first one of the first times we can say in July that we are 95% complete with the previous year's paving plan. So a lot of effort to get streets inspected, get contractors lined up to get, a lot of this goes into the strategy of the planning of how can we group different line segment or street segments together so that we're not going all over Metro to address streets that could be paved right next to each other. So there's a lot of thought that goes into that, a lot of strategy. We use some tools to help us do that. One of those tools is OpenGov. So this is a software package that has really been almost a game changer for us in that we can go in, going from spreadsheets to more of a geographical system of looking at the pavement plan, going to this database where we can put in pavement conditions that we're seeing, we can put in what we expect different types of roadways to deteriorate, what kind of rate that's going to happen. And so we put that all into this you know, this system, and that helps guide us on, okay, this segment of roadway is more than likely going to be in a state of needing to be repaved. And so we'll verify that. We'll vet it in the field. But this has been an awesome tool to help us, you know, sort of move forward in that effort. And just a snapshot of what we see. This is I zoom way back, so if you went into each pavement segment or roadway segment, it will tell you the type of roadway, what the latest observed PCI is on it, what the curve of degradation is going to be for that segment. And so that, again, helps us to build out this plan in a strategic way. So we launched this in 2025 in October. Lots of data integration at the front end of that, as you would expect. Lots of taking things, like I said, from spreadsheets and different other databases to load into this software. It is sort of a hybrid plan because we took what you all and your constituents are seeing in the field and sort of married that up with what the software is predicting as far as places that are needed for rehab. And so it is a hybrid in that regard. Also try to exclude pieces of pavement that will be impacted by major utility work or that. where that utility will be coming back and restoring that pavement. I mean, this is not, as you all will, I'm sure, attest, that is not perfect, but we're working every day to try to get that coordinated so that we're not repeating and repaving work that was just, or somebody's not coming in in a non-emergency basis and tearing up something that we just paved. I know that causes frustration for everyone involved with this a little bit. So we're trying to do our part to coordinate with those other entities to make sure that we're all on the same page as far as that collaboration, knowing that emergencies happen and so sometimes you can't avoid that. So priorities now, continue to build out OpenGov to complete the FY26 and 25 work plans, or work before the end of the paving season. We're on a good path to do that. Very close to being done on those. And then continuing to, like I said, to tweak and build out that plan going forward. So, This is one of the first times we've built out a three-year plan, so we're trying to look ahead. We're using some of the tools that we have available now to be able to project out. Anticipate is maybe not the right word, but just using $30 million that's been invested as a starting point for us to build a plan, knowing that that number might not be what gets through budgeting, but gives us a place to start looking out. Prioritization, you know, trying to finish out those pavement segments that were in previous work plans and fiscal years. We're taking in data all the time as far as this is maybe a street or an area that has a need and trying to build those into scenarios. Yeah, so the scenario builder, that's what's really cool to me about this project about this tool, the Open Gov tool, is that you can sort of tweak different things, take segments out. I know I'm simplifying this, but you can take segments out. Let's say that you had a street that you wanted to move up into a plan from a future fiscal year. You could do that, and it can run scenarios to make this work. still be efficient, grouping things together so that we're trying to optimize if a contractor is going to a neighborhood, making sure that we're getting the most out of them when they're on the ground in that neighborhood. Just a really quick overview of the schedule. you know, continuing to collect data on PCIs. We do that in a variety of ways. You know, there's some other things that we're looking at AI tools to help better collect pavement data. So that's more to come on that. We'll report out on that at a future meeting. Most of these we've already hit. We had meetings with each, we tried to schedule meetings with each council member and council district to talk about the plan and see where we needed to modify and move things up and back. and then based on what passed through the budget process, making adjustments to match what was passed through that process. And so we have, you know, contractors out, you know, right now there's finishing up some of the FY26 work, but we're trying to optimize that so that there's as little lag between the FY26-25 work and the future, or FY27 work. So I know there was a lot, I'll pause there. I'm sure there are questions about the plan and the strategy and what we're doing.

All right, well thank you. I did have a couple questions. Yes, sir. I'll get to the queue. How do you take the subjectivity out of assigning the PCI scores?

You want to? Sure. Yeah, this is Nick Vale. So we paid for a consultant to ride the roads using LIDAR to analyze the condition of the structure. So it was done with some human, but also a lot of technology built in. So there's a... I can provide documentation about how that survey was done, but that was done I think at the end of fiscal, or end of calendar year 24 into 25, and so then that data was input into our system, and we have degradation curves built in, so that's all automatically being assigned. Roads are degrading a little bit every day, and depending on the type of road, arterials collectors obviously receive more higher volumes, higher daily traffic, It's pretty objective outside of the process that we undertake in meeting with council. And sometimes what you might see as a score when you drive the road, you might actually see because you might actually feel a difference there. And a lot of that just comes from every segment of a road. isn't the same in terms of a whole stretch. So then there's kind of our system uses basically, they take a super segment. of those adjacent road segments, because everything's broken down by intersection, so each one of those, each is a little piece. With the new software, I would say it's, I would say 90 to 95% objective, data-based, and obviously there's some, working with council, we address constituents' concerns, if there's that, and try to incorporate those as best we can.

Do you have a gauge on our number to back up the confidence of 95%?

I mean, it's based on the data that was collected by an independent consultant, and then our software, which doesn't, you know, it's an automation, so that's the source of the PCI scores.

I understand the sources, but what I'm asking is, have you ever done a gauge R&R to compare those sources to verify that the answers that they're giving you are actually matching one? they're saying they're giving you.

Yes, we'll, and you can speak more to this if you want, but we will field survey. If you want to get back to me on it, that'd be fine. Yeah, yeah. All right. We can do that, but we do.

Right, so once a road is selected, like our paving design consultants and construction inspectors are gonna go out there and actually look at that roadway. They're gonna put eyes on and develop, when they develop that scoping map for what needs to be done as part of the milling and paving, they would identify, oh no, this section to this section looks, pretty good and we probably can save taxpayers some dollars by not paving that right now. So there's some subjectivity in that when we go into the field, folks are taking a closer look at what the road actually looks like and our paving design consultant does that in part with our construction inspectors and our staff. Yes sir. If you could just get back to me with the gauge on our number, that'd be great, thank you.

Vice Chair Herndon, you're first in the queue.

Thank you, sir. On average, on an average road, average use, how often do you repave? Not main arteries, just an average, you know, is there kind of a ballpark?

I'd say, and I know there's a lot of variability depending on the type of road and usage and all that stuff, so I would say 20 years is generally a rule that I use.

You mentioned before, I think the last three years were at 30 million? That's correct. And then projecting to 2029, also 30 million?

Just for planning purposes.

Yeah, but those are flat numbers, not inflation-adjusted, correct?

That's correct. That's correct, but we do account for inflation. So when you look at our proposed plan for 28 and 29, that is including a proposed inflation of, I think, 4% or 5% based on what we see. from our contractors providing unit price increases annually.

As far as expenditures, are we losing ground with application because inflation pressures? Yes. So over time, especially in recent years, that's going to be a pretty big drop, I think, wouldn't it be? Because I think is inflation right now pretty good to be three and a half percent this year, for example. So cumulatively, are we going to, next budget season, should we begin to, I mean, adjust for that? Just try to not lose that ground? Is it not your fault? I'm just asking if we can keep up with stuff.

without actively lobbying. We won't turn away. We'll find a way to do more.

I guess I'm talking to you and speaking to colleagues that may be next on the budget committee. We need to make that adjustment so we can not lose as much ground. Another question, are there state, am I correct, are there sometimes state, by mutual agreement, state roads that convert to local roads? Is that happening very often? I think is that happening either on Logan or Shelby right now? Is that about to happen on one of those two?

Yes, and also Market is in the process of doing that too, right?

Yes, there's also discussion once, I think Maine is two-wayed about turning Market over to Louisville Metro. And yeah, one of the two segments of Logan and Shelby, and so... and maybe a story if we do that, that kind of thing.

I think I know the answer. I'm assuming they're not giving you extra money to take care of their former roadways. Is that probably not true?

That's probably not. Is that correct? That's, your statement is probably correct.

Just putting it out there.

Yes.

Isn't there, in southern Indiana, or in Indiana, do they have a provision when state, gets to the city limits that they stop caring for it, but hand it over to locals, but with that comes funding, is that correct? Did I read that or?

So when I used to work at KIPTA, I think it was like 10 to 12 years ago, I believe, yeah, Indiana Department of Transportation or the state turned over a number of state roads to the local city county jurisdictions. They provided, I think, like two to three years worth of maintenance funding, and then said, you know, it's your responsibility now.

Okay, any chance in Kentucky? I can't speak to that. Probably not, but I'm just bringing it up. There's another way to do this, and it makes more sense for locals to take care of the local roads, but, you know, just don't hand it off. I just wanted to make sure that.

Yeah, as you said, there are other states, other municipalities that do just that.

Sure, thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Chappell.

three questions yes first off great thanks for the new map we've been expecting that and so it's great to have that to share with constituents when they ask us when is my street getting paved so you get that a lot three questions like I said pavement markings and speed humps Is there a contractual requirement to replace what was there when they go in to repave the road? And the reason I'm asking that is because a road was just repaved in my district. I had paid $600 two years ago for painted bump outs. Those painted bump outs weren't added when they put the stop bars in. Grateful for the stop bars, grateful for the paving. But I'm just wondering as a Councilwoman, am I expected to pay 600 more dollars to have that, or since that was paved over, Was that the responsibility of that company to replace since it was already there?

Yes, typically it's a responsibility. It's part of the cost that we pay is to put back in whatever was taken out as part of the milling and paving. So if there's a particular example, you can let me know and we can coordinate with our team and make sure that if something wasn't caught that we go back and make corrections.

Thank you. Big dog right there already knows about this. So we're getting that taken care of, I hope. Paving is great, but innovation is even better. So when we're looking at a paving list or the paving map that you have, there's some streets that might be considered for traffic calming or other improvements or maybe even more innovative striping. And I'm just wondering how is that determined and then is your paving map, does it take into consideration things like the Complete Streets Coalition's recommendations, the traffic, council directed traffic calming, Vision Zero, some of those things that really are looking to make our streets not only easier to drive down but also safer.

Yeah, so I'll start, if you wanna jump in. But absolutely, we want to make sure that if there's something that's identified in the Vision Zero plan or by the Complete Streets Coalition or any of the Safe Streets for All, any of the groups that are engaged on this, including council, that we're not duplicating efforts. If we have, there are situations where we will hold off on either paving or striping because we don't wanna get out of sync with that and just have to come back. And that's not always the case, but we don't wanna have to duplicate that work. And so, yeah, if there's opportunities for us to make some of those changes, in concert with the repaving, then we're gonna absolutely look to try to do that if we can make that work.

And this isn't my third one, but a piggyback off of that one. Would you recommend council members look at that three-year paving map and kind of look in their records and say what conversations have been had about this street? And maybe we can look at new ways to do it.

Thank you. And last question. 2014, you put up a chart up there, and...

I think that the paving budget was $1 million. I can't say for exact, but I mean, it's abysmal funding, and we don't really see it going up until 2017. So I'm just wondering that, you know, considering those low amounts that we've been paying, and now with past budgets, present budget, and projected budgets, it's gonna be $30 million. Is that all just playing catch up to an abysmal budget? or are we at a place that 10 years from now, we're still anticipated to pay $30 million and not taking into inflation into account, that was interesting information, but just looking at what we expect to be paying for paving.

Yeah, so the 30 million over the last few years has definitely been a lot of catch-up, and so we're Very appreciative of that. Very much needed, in my opinion. We've projected out, and it's not exact, but at the current clip, I think we start to sort of bend that curve in the next four or five years. That's not counting for inflation or some of the variability in cost. a product that is dependent on resources, oil, different things, and so that can, we'll see volatility in the price of paving because of that. But those things excluded, we start to make a bend if we stay at the current rate.

like I said, in the next four or five years. I can provide a couple just examples. So we look at what the condition rating was from 2013 to 2025, and whether it's local collectors or arterials, we're seeing between a five to eight point rise in the average condition rating for our roads. So it has... made a significant improvement. So for example, local roads, the average is roughly 70. Collectors and arterials, 73, 75. And then arterials, 66 to 68. So those are all five to eight percent, not percent, but point increases over a 12-year span. So that's really good. It's huge.

That's awesome. And that curve hopefully going down. Yes. Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Bratcher. First, I want to say I really like the way Public Works has been since some of the changes. You guys are really great to work with. The question I have is, when you say paving, does that mean asphalt?

Only? It can mean asphalt or concrete, typically. So there's two, typically. Most of our roads are asphalt. But when they are concrete, they are much more expensive to repave.

And I know that Bardstown Road is a state road. Yes. But they've got some Grand Canyon holes that are concrete. You guys patch them up, and I know it's hard because you can't hardly find a good thing to stay very long. But am I right in that when and if they ever fix that, they'll have to tear up that whole concrete block and relay it? More than likely, yeah.

Yes, sir.

I mean, there's no, do you pave over concrete?

Oh, you can.

I don't know what KYTC standards are, but... Is that like, is paving, what do you pave it with if it's concrete? Pave it with more concrete or asphalt?

So, yeah, like Nick said, we're not sure exactly what they're... exact plans are but I mean a lot of times you'll have to come in and and break up remove the concrete that's there if it's a concrete road and then come back with either a base you know rock base and an asphalt or with and there's a base to with with concrete but Yeah, there's a lot of either milling or, I guess, removal of the existing driving lanes when you have to come back and repave. And so, yeah, there are situations where we'll pave over concrete, but that's...

Yeah, I would have to probably defer to my experts on the team. We could definitely get back to you with more about those specific questions and get you some information about that process.

Well, one of the questions I would ask an engineer or whatnot is, Why can't we just put asphalt everywhere? Why do we use concrete? Or why does the state use concrete? And is it cheaper or better or whatever? I mean, if it's a pothole on asphalt seems to last a whole lot longer. than concrete. Just questions like that. It's not a big deal, but just thought I'd throw that out there.

Yeah, we can definitely get back on that. We talk to KYTC all the time. We can have a discussion about that. If I had to. Well, don't tell them the question's coming from me. No, I will. Understood. I would guess that it's based on the type and amount of traffic that is, like the interstates, for example, within town. But we'll get you an answer on that. Yep. That's a woman best.

thank you um can we talk a little bit about the partnership of paving with metro and state what exactly is metro contracted to do for the state and what does that look like yeah so our agreement with the state is to perform maintenance on state roadways within metro

and that could look like a variety of different things. That could be filling potholes. That could be something we've seen in this last pothole season was there were areas that it wasn't quite a full pavement replacement or repave, and it wasn't just filling a couple of potholes. It was pretty extensive potholes, including some in your district where it was a more, I guess a more involved fix on some of those. And so typically the process works, we have crews at our central district that are dedicated to state maintenance and that could be, yeah, maintenance like paving or, sorry not paving, but pothole filling, some cutbacks, cracks, things like that, and then basically we need to get, on a lot of things, we have to get approval from the state to be able to expend those dollars to do that maintenance.

So does that budget come from Metro on that maintenance, or is that coming from the state?

That comes from the state.

Okay. And excuse my ignorance on this, but for budget's sake, I'll use Dixie Highway for an example, where you all had to go out and do those major cutouts where it keeps falling out and breaking back open. What is the funding from the state for metro state roads? Do we know what that number was, like what they got in their budget?

Yeah, so, and one of the things that we're that we're working through right now is that there's a tight budget time at the state as well. So there are three, basically three buckets of funding. One is for the regular roads. like potholes, that type of thing, and that's around, I wanna say $5 million for the year. And then, give me if my numbers are off here, but there's also a snow removal allotment for state roads that has historically been a little less than $2 million a year. When you have a winter like we had where you have 15 events, that goes pretty quick. And then there's also cutbacks. There's some, I think, trash pickup and mowing is part of that as well.

So it's fair to say full paving jobs would be you all wouldn't do that. That would be on the state. That's correct. And it would have to be in the budget. That's correct. So for an example, like the Dixie that you all repaired, it's so bad. So I noticed recently that's all coming apart again. And I know y'all done some extensive repairs there. Do you all communicate and coordinate with the state in saying, hey, it's about time this section of Dixie is going to have to be completely redone? What does that look like as far as, do you get information back from them, responses from them? Because I know I'm not getting much response from the state when I try to get questions pertaining to that.

Yeah, so our interaction a lot of times would be, like the situation on Dixie, I know there I think it was a Saturday night, we had to call in crews to, and I think it was still storming when the work was being done. So we'll advise KYTC that hey, this is almost an emergency project, we're going out to address this. And so they know where we're working. There's an exchange of okay, we were here, that X, Y, and Z on these dates, and this is our documentation to be reimbursed for that. And so they're aware of where we're addressing issues, and we have meetings with them on a recurring basis to try to convey, okay, here's some, you know, big picture issues as well as here are some things that we're seeing in the field that more than likely need to be addressed sooner rather than later with a capital project in that situation.

Okay, thank you for that. Yep.

All right, any more? Thank you. I don't have anyone else in the queue. Is there anyone else that likes to speak to this? All right. We've got our five minutes that I will yield back. Thank you all. Thank you for the presentation. Thank you.

Thank you.

We are adjourned.