Central Virginia
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission
MPO Policy Board Meeting 2/25/2026
Auto-scroll
MPO Policy Board Meeting
2/25/2026
Attachments
3a CA-MPO Policy Board Meeting Agenda - February 25, 2026.pdf
3b Draft MPO PB 12-17-25 Minutes February 25, 2026.pdf
4a ii Staff Memo - Travel Demand Model Update CA-MPO Policy Board February 25, 2026.pdf
4a i Travel Demand Model 2050 Demographics - Presentation.pdf
4b iii MPO_2026_Safety_Target_Submission_Letter - DRAFT February 25, 2026.pdf
4b ii Performance Safety Targets 2026 - Staff Memo CA-MPO – February 25, 2026.pdf
4b i Performance Safety Targets - 2026 CA-MPO - Presentation February 25, 2026.pdf
4c i Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee - Presentation.pdf
4c ii Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee - Staff Memorandum.pdf
4d i Draft CA-MPO FY27 UPWP Presentation.pdf
4d ii Draft CA-MPO FY27 UPWP 2026-01-27.pdf
5a CA-MPO Policy Board Staff Report February 25, 2026.pdf
6a SMART SCALE Round 7 Application Status Update.pdf
CA-MPO Policy Board Meeting - Full Meeting Packet - 02.25.2026.pdf
SPEAKER_16
00:00:00
Those of you online, we had a little miscue again, but we have called to order and we're going to go through our roll call.
00:00:08
Ann, can you hear us, Ann Mallek?
00:00:14
And Stacy Londrey, can you hear me?
SPEAKER_03
00:00:17
I can hear you.
SPEAKER_16
00:00:18
Say present, please.
SPEAKER_03
00:00:20
I'm present.
SPEAKER_16
00:00:21
It's not you.
00:00:23
Alright, I think we're caught up.
00:00:26
Ann, can you hear me?
SPEAKER_02
00:00:29
She's muted, so even if she's responding, we're not hearing it.
SPEAKER_16
00:00:36
Do we have a control for her microphone?
SPEAKER_02
00:00:49
We've sent a thing to her to ask her to unmute.
SPEAKER_09
00:00:57
OK. We can continue.
00:01:01
She looks tiny, whatever that background is.
SPEAKER_03
00:01:07
Christine Jacobs, present.
00:01:11
Ivan Rucker, Daniel Koenig, Mitch Huber, Wood Hudson, Julia Monteith, Mike Murphy, representing, Sarah Medley,
00:01:31
I'm present.
00:01:34
Garland Williams.
SPEAKER_08
00:01:35
Present.
SPEAKER_16
00:01:41
Thank you.
00:01:44
Looks like Ann is out and logging back in.
00:01:46
We'll proceed as we have a quorum.
00:01:48
All right, next item of business.
00:01:51
I'd like to introduce that we have a new policy board member joining us for the first time and new city council member.
00:01:58
So welcome, Jen Fleischer.
00:02:00
I would certainly like to give you a... Well, now it's official.
SPEAKER_02
00:02:08
I've always wanted one of these.
SPEAKER_19
00:02:11
Oh yeah, Lucy can donate.
00:02:12
Yes.
00:02:13
Thank you.
00:02:13
I feel real.
00:02:15
I feel seen.
00:02:16
Okay.
SPEAKER_16
00:02:17
I would certainly if you would like the opportunity to say a few words of intro by all means.
SPEAKER_19
00:02:25
Just thank you for having me and I'm excited to be a part of this group.
00:02:29
Having attended a lot of RTP meetings and been involved in transportation as a mode to better health for the district, it is an honor to sit and be part of this decision.
SPEAKER_16
00:02:42
Awesome, thank you.
00:02:43
The next item, we will move to matters from the public.
00:02:48
Do we have members here who wish to speak under matters from the public?
00:02:51
I do.
00:02:52
All right, we have one.
00:02:53
Do we have any others?
SPEAKER_08
00:02:54
Do I go up there?
SPEAKER_16
00:02:55
Hold on, we have two.
00:02:56
Is there anyone online who wishes to speak?
00:02:59
Mr. Condor is three.
00:03:00
All right.
00:03:03
Yeah, sir, you can come up to the podium.
00:03:06
You have three minutes once you begin.
SPEAKER_08
00:03:21
My name is Paul Grady.
00:03:22
I live just outside of Crozet.
00:03:25
I missed the city council meeting at the beginning of the month, so my comments are directed to the two city councilors.
00:03:37
This is about the intersection at
00:03:49
for a roundabout there for many years.
00:03:55
But the design that was presented at the last public information meeting was so horrible, it had to have been designed by some deranged transportation planner who thinks that making Water Street one way again is a good idea.
00:04:11
It's not.
00:04:12
In fact, it's dumb as a post.
00:04:16
It seems like over the last 10 years or so transportation planning in Charlottesville has leaned heavily toward pedestrian and bicycle at the expense of drivers.
00:04:36
I'll give you a good example.
00:04:38
The intersection at
00:04:41
Harris Street and McIntire Road used to have two right turn lanes, but now they don't.
00:04:47
Now it doesn't.
00:04:50
Think of how much gas is wasted by people sitting there waiting to make a right turn and Charlottesville calls itself a green city.
00:04:59
I'm not sure.
00:05:01
So as far as I'm concerned, any improvements to the Reg.
00:05:08
McIntire
00:05:10
Ridge, West Lane, blah, blah, blah.
00:05:13
Intersection that doesn't include a roundabout is just putting lipstick on the pick.
SPEAKER_16
00:05:20
Thank you.
SPEAKER_08
00:05:20
Thank you, sir.
SPEAKER_16
00:05:21
Mr Krebs.
SPEAKER_14
00:05:38
Good afternoon, I'm Peter Kreps from the Piedmont Environmental Council.
00:05:43
I'm here to invite everybody to attend next week's Active Mobility Summit.
00:05:48
That's March 5th and 6th at the Wolf Factory.
00:05:52
There are two sessions, both of which are full of content, both of which are good.
00:05:57
They build on each other, but it's not necessary to attend both.
00:06:01
Recommended but not required.
00:06:03
Thursday night we'll feature keynote speaker Pete Eshelman from outside Roanoke.
00:06:09
We'll talk about the city of Roanoke and surrounding nations approach to economic development, which focuses on connectivity and access to the outdoors.
00:06:20
We're going to award a community champion who's a rising star in the community.
00:06:27
I think this individual might be on this desk one day.
00:06:31
I'm super excited to share that, but it's a secret.
00:06:34
And there'll be lots of fellowship and inspiration and networking.
00:06:39
But we'll be back together on Friday morning for a couple of panels.
00:06:43
One panel will be about solutions from across Virginia.
00:06:47
So for example, we'll hear about what's happening in Harrisonburg.
00:06:51
And then we're going to have another panel that's about local solutions, and that's going to include local leaders.
00:06:58
So Julia will be on that panel and Wal will be there, James Breeze.
00:07:03
And in addition, a real hero of mine named Zach Roberts, he's the person who runs the great outdoors provision company here in Charlottesville.
00:07:14
And then we will also have collaborative work sessions.
00:07:17
And we have another secret surprise guest for Friday morning.
00:07:21
So we'll announce that next week, but I'm super excited.
00:07:25
I invite everybody to sign up.
00:07:27
It's free.
00:07:28
There'll be food, drink and fellowship.
00:07:30
You can learn more by going to PECVA.org slash mobility summit.
00:07:37
And I fly this, which I'll leave on the couch.
SPEAKER_16
00:07:44
All right, Mr. Condor.
SPEAKER_01
00:07:47
Hello.
00:07:48
My comment concerns the very last entry or various line on the very last page of the packet, which is the Interstate 64 Exit 118 improvements.
00:08:02
The BDOT hired a consultant that came up with three alternatives, which ranged from not very good to terrible.
00:08:11
I see they have TBD as far as what the concept is.
00:08:15
I just want to make you aware I did submit a concept that basically had a weave area greater than a quarter of a mile.
00:08:29
The original design of the interchange had a weave area or
00:08:35
traffic entering eastbound I-64 from southbound US 29 to the exit for eastbound I-64 to northbound US 29 of less than 400 feet, which was insufficient time for the traffic entering the highway to accelerate to the 65 to 75 mile an hour speed of the traffic to be able to merge to the left
00:09:04
causing traffic that wanted to exit the highway to have to practically stop to avoid collision with the vehicles that are entering.
00:09:14
A one quarter mile merge area, however, especially on a downhill would give ample time for the traffic to accelerate, that's entering to accelerate and match the speed of the
00:09:29
traffic on I-64 so they can easily merge to the left.
00:09:34
Meanwhile, the traffic that wants to exit onto US 29 North would have plenty of opportunity to move to the right without having to decelerate prematurely.
00:09:49
I've submitted that design to VDOT, but I just want you all to be aware of it so that as you continue to consider that
00:09:58
alternatives there that you at least give some thought to mind.
00:10:02
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:10:04
Thank you, Mr Condor.
00:10:05
Is there anyone else who wishes to get public comment online or in person?
00:10:10
Can't see all of the hands online.
00:10:12
Are they all?
00:10:13
I don't know if there were more windows up there somewhere in the
00:10:21
OK, we will close matters from the public and move to item number three.
00:10:24
So the first item is review and acceptance of the agenda.
00:10:28
Are there any?
00:10:29
Yes.
SPEAKER_04
00:10:30
Sorry to interrupt.
00:10:31
Can we check and see if Ms. Malek is present and we can vote her in if she is?
SPEAKER_16
00:10:34
I don't think she is present.
SPEAKER_04
00:10:36
So she's back in the meeting.
00:10:39
Can you hear us, Ann?
00:10:42
Supervisor Malek, are you able to hear us?
00:10:47
And she's unmuted.
00:10:48
showing that she's on using her phone, but we're not getting a response.
SPEAKER_16
00:10:52
Can you go to the gallery view?
00:10:53
Is that all the people online?
00:10:56
Because I'm not seeing her.
SPEAKER_04
00:10:58
No, there's another page full.
SPEAKER_09
00:11:01
Oh, there it is, the blue arrow.
SPEAKER_16
00:11:07
Ann, can you hear us, please?
00:11:13
Someone might need to call her offline.
SPEAKER_02
00:11:15
Please come back.
SPEAKER_16
00:11:16
Thank you.
00:11:18
But once we get her connected, we can roll her in.
00:11:24
All right, so for the agenda, any changes or additions to the agenda?
00:11:31
All right, is there a motion to adopt the agenda?
00:11:34
So moved.
00:11:38
I heard it coming, second made.
00:11:39
So first and second, all in favor, please say aye.
00:11:42
Aye.
00:11:43
Any opposed?
00:11:44
Abstentions?
00:11:45
The next item is the approval of the draft December 17, 2025 meeting minutes.
00:11:52
Any corrections, edits may need to be made to those minutes?
00:11:58
All right, is there a motion to approve the minutes?
SPEAKER_07
00:12:01
So moved.
SPEAKER_16
00:12:03
All right, the motion has been made and seconded.
00:12:11
All in favor, please say aye.
00:12:13
Aye.
00:12:13
Opposed?
00:12:14
Abstentions?
00:12:17
You're abstaining.
00:12:19
All right, and item number C, election of officers.
00:12:23
This would be the chair and the vice chair.
00:12:28
Myself, I've been the chair.
00:12:30
Oschrin has been the vice chair.
00:12:33
It's either we can continue with those from the Albemarle side, whether I'm chair or vice chair, I'll stay in one of those roles and then what you all described.
00:12:42
So I'll let you guys speak about what you feel about that.
SPEAKER_07
00:12:45
We would like to keep things as is.
SPEAKER_16
00:12:47
So we'll continue with myself as chair and Natalie as vice chair.
00:12:53
We can do that both at the same time.
00:12:55
Is there a motion for that?
00:12:58
Okay, it's been moved.
00:13:00
Is there a second?
00:13:01
Second.
00:13:01
Alright, motion has been made and seconded.
00:13:03
That's Ned as chair, Natalie as vice chair.
00:13:07
All in favor, please say aye.
00:13:09
Aye.
00:13:10
Any opposed?
00:13:11
Abstentions?
00:13:13
Great.
00:13:15
We will continue on and then number four, we move to new business and item A is traveled and these first three are all action items.
00:13:27
Travel demand model 2050 demographics and is there an introduction first?
00:13:33
I'll look to Taylor.
SPEAKER_03
00:13:34
Yes, so we've got members from our project team from VDOT and from AECOM who are supporting our model update for this year.
00:13:41
So they're going to give a presentation on the 2050 demographic forecast that includes population and employment.
00:13:48
And so these have to be approved today before they can proceed to the next steps of the model process.
00:13:53
So I'll invite them to go ahead and unmute and share their screen.
SPEAKER_00
00:14:20
I'm sorry, I was speaking on you.
00:14:22
Good afternoon, everyone.
00:14:23
I'm Nag Kashi from AECOM.
00:14:25
I'm involved with the travel demand forecasting aspect of this project.
00:14:32
So we are involved right now in the upgrading of the Charlottesville model.
00:14:38
So as part of which the base year has been upgraded to 2022 and the future year of 2050.
00:14:46
We have completed the 2022 upgrade of the demographics and in August of last year, we did present it to the committee here.
00:14:56
And right now we are in the process of updating the demographics for 2050.
00:15:05
After the 2022 demographics were updated, we used that and grew it to the 2050 using the county level forecast.
00:15:17
so these list the sources that we have used which include the Weldon Cooper 2050 population forecast and Woodson pool 2050 socio-demographic forecasts and for the city of Charlottesville the city provided us the employment and their population estimates that's what is included in the model
00:15:40
And the Albemarle County reviewed the 2050 and they suggested some changes and the current dataset includes the suggested changes.
00:15:56
So this table here shows the population comparison between 22 and 2050 and also compares that with the Weldon Cooper data.
00:16:07
So this shows that the growth is in line with the Weldon Cooper trends.
00:16:13
And a point to note that the model area includes the city of Charlottesville and portions of the Albemarle County and portions of the Greene, Louisa, and Flovina Counties.
00:16:28
So the table here shows the different variables and how they compare between 22 and 50.
00:16:34
And in general, they all show a healthy growth.
00:16:42
This is the district definition that's being used in the model to compare some summaries.
00:16:48
And also a point to note here is that these boundaries are just for the modeling purpose and they do not reflect the actual MPO boundaries.
00:17:00
This has a comparison of the 22 and 2050 population employment by the district.
00:17:07
And in general, it looks like the North of Charlottesville district shows the most increase in the population and employment.
00:17:18
This on the following slide shows some spatial distribution of the population employment and the household population for the new 2050.
00:17:31
This shows the TAC level household distribution, the household population for the 2050, the employment for the 2050, the modeling area.
00:17:54
This shows a change in population between 2050 and 2022.
00:18:05
This graphic here shows the changes in employment, proposed changes in employment between 2015 and 22.
00:18:16
This graphic shows here the 2015 network that's proposed to be used in the model.
00:18:26
The same network by the facility type.
00:18:35
and the number of lane.
00:18:42
So after the update, we hope that the model would serve as a tool to analyze different projects in the area and help get an understanding of how the network would react to the proposed projects and as a measure to measure some metrics such as the congestion and help develop some maps
00:19:03
which shows the level of service in the area, transit ridership and the mode shares in the area and also help as a tool to estimate VMT per capita and average driving commute times in the area.
00:19:22
So this is where we are and the summaries of the 2050.
SPEAKER_16
00:19:34
All right, ready for questions?
00:19:39
That is a yes.
00:19:41
I invite all the support members to ask any questions.
SPEAKER_07
00:19:49
What are you looking for from us?
SPEAKER_03
00:19:52
So today we need approval on the 2050 demographic forecast.
00:19:56
So the numbers that they went through for employment and population
00:19:59
Those have to be formally approved by the policy board before we can proceed with using them as inputs in our model.
00:20:05
Got it.
00:20:06
OK.
SPEAKER_02
00:20:08
I have questions.
00:20:09
Do you have more questions?
SPEAKER_19
00:20:10
No, please go ahead.
00:20:12
So for the UVA projected numbers, does that include UVA Health as well as the academic sites?
00:20:22
It says Darden on there, but it doesn't say UVA Health or Med School.
SPEAKER_00
00:20:27
I believe it includes both.
00:20:30
That was the targets provided by the UVA.
SPEAKER_19
00:20:37
OK, so both.
SPEAKER_04
00:20:40
Can you repeat the answer, please, just to make sure that we got it?
SPEAKER_00
00:20:44
I believe that includes both the health and the university because that's the total provided by the UVA.
SPEAKER_19
00:20:53
OK, and then
00:20:56
Were there any assumptions made about remote work in the employment model?
SPEAKER_00
00:21:07
I don't think so.
00:21:08
That's the total I mean, the way it was developed is the woods and pool data.
00:21:13
They projected that this is the total employment that's going to be in this future year.
00:21:21
And that's the target we used.
00:21:22
So the model does not have an attribute for remote employment as one of the employment categories.
00:21:32
So to answer the question, it does not include any specific category.
SPEAKER_02
00:21:38
Okay, thank you.
SPEAKER_07
00:21:40
That's all I have.
00:21:42
On the data development and model input updates chart, there's two lines, college university enrollment and university enrollment.
00:21:53
They're off by one number.
00:21:55
Are they the same?
00:21:56
Are they different?
00:21:57
And if they're different, how so?
00:22:05
There's UnivPop and UnivEnter.
SPEAKER_00
00:22:19
Yeah, so we do not have the separate information for the university enrollment.
00:22:27
So the we have used the same population, but when we distributed it that I think that surrounding error that you see that one extra thing.
00:22:36
but the target, we only have the information for the total university population slash enrollment.
00:22:44
We do not have any extra or rather a different source.
00:22:50
So the one difference we see is due to the rounding, but otherwise, yeah, it's the same.
SPEAKER_07
00:22:56
And for the college and university enrollment numbers, you said that they were sourced from UVA.
00:23:05
UVA provided data and training for enrollment in parking.
00:23:13
Something that one of our colleagues has pointed out is that UVA grows an average of 1%.
00:23:18
That's what they've been trending year over year.
00:23:21
And if this chart is modeling only 9%, but historically it's been a 1% adjustment, but we are more than nine years away from 2050, I wonder if that number was double-checked on historic precedent, or was it just UVA says we're only going to grow 9% over the next several years, or if any accounting was done for?
00:23:42
Because that's a little different.
SPEAKER_00
00:23:48
We have used just the targets provided by the UVA and I also would like to mention here that the modeling area is not the same as the whole area because the model only includes a portion of some of the counties.
00:24:03
So that would have been the differences when you compare by area and then you take the whole and compare with the 2050.
00:24:12
So the only information we have used it for what UVA has provided.
00:24:17
We have not used any other sources.
SPEAKER_07
00:24:23
That's kind of the only number that's jumping out to me.
00:24:27
I mean, I understand there's assumptions here.
00:24:30
If we underestimate that, it has kind of significant impact in a way that matters.
00:24:40
I don't know what appears to be done about that, but that's just a
00:24:46
point of concern.
SPEAKER_04
00:24:49
Can I ask a clarifying?
00:24:54
Yeah.
00:24:55
That we should use different projections than what are provided by the university.
00:24:59
Is that?
SPEAKER_07
00:25:01
If their historical trend is 1% per year, and this is under doing that,
00:25:09
Yeah.
00:25:11
Or like, I mean, I don't know what the idea is of, you know, like run both, run a 14% and a 9% or the middle.
00:25:22
I don't know.
00:25:23
I just don't want to, I mean, who knows, right?
00:25:26
These are all assumptions.
00:25:27
So I just wanted to point out that if that is different than their historical trend, I wonder why.
00:25:33
Are they, are there decisions they're making about reaching a specific capacity so they're tapering off or not?
SPEAKER_03
00:25:41
There could be other environmental things at play too.
00:25:44
Like I sat in on a presentation at, I think it was the State of the Community event on Friday with the Chamber where we heard a presentation from a Weldon Cooper staff member that talked about declining college enrollment overall because of just the age and the demographics of our overall population.
00:26:00
So I could wonder if some of that- Fewer young people.
SPEAKER_06
00:26:03
Yeah.
00:26:03
Yeah.
SPEAKER_07
00:26:04
Yeah.
00:26:06
Okay.
00:26:09
That's what I have right now.
00:26:10
Thanks.
SPEAKER_16
00:26:13
Any other questions or comments?
00:26:18
All right, and we are, the action here is to adopt the travel demand model 2050 demographics.
00:26:27
Another question, Papa?
SPEAKER_07
00:26:28
Yes, sorry.
00:26:32
Is there anything you would expect us to ask that we're not, since we're not collecting these numbers, we're not double checking
00:26:40
Just sources in advance?
SPEAKER_03
00:26:42
You know, I think these are all really great questions.
00:26:44
MPO tech committee did provide a recommendation for these.
00:26:48
We worked with city staff, county staff to make sure everybody had an opportunity to get their eyes on it, suggest edits before this came over.
SPEAKER_16
00:27:06
Great.
00:27:07
So we just need a motion to adopt the travel model.
00:27:11
What did I say?
00:27:12
Travel demand model 2050.
SPEAKER_07
00:27:14
So moved.
00:27:17
Second.
SPEAKER_16
00:27:18
All right.
00:27:19
All in favor, please say aye.
00:27:21
Aye.
00:27:22
Any opposed?
00:27:24
All right.
00:27:25
That model is approved.
SPEAKER_02
00:27:26
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:27:31
I know that all of these will be used in a lot of the
00:27:36
assumptions for that ultimately gets down to projects.
00:27:39
But when they actually get to tight projects, then there's a whole nother lever and model of modeling that happens for that project.
00:27:50
So the tightening happens when we get down to it.
00:27:56
All right.
00:27:57
Performance safety, is Goran here?
00:27:59
Is he online?
SPEAKER_03
00:27:59
Goran will be presenting virtually today.
SPEAKER_13
00:28:03
Goran, can you hear me?
00:28:05
Yes, sir, loud and clear.
00:28:07
Just requested to share my screen.
00:28:15
I believe the presentation has to be on shared.
00:28:18
It's currently on before I can share my screen.
SPEAKER_00
00:28:22
Sorry, I need to figure out how to stop this.
SPEAKER_07
00:28:26
Thank you.
SPEAKER_02
00:28:37
Now, is there a way that you could stop sharing?
SPEAKER_00
00:28:40
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.
00:28:42
For some reason, I cannot, the button only shows me to hope.
00:28:50
Maybe I can leave and then come back.
SPEAKER_13
00:29:07
Thank you, Mr.
00:29:08
Chair, members of the board.
00:29:10
My name is Gloria Georgievsky.
00:29:11
I serve as a regional transportation planner for the TJPDC.
00:29:15
It's my pleasure to present to you this afternoon.
00:29:18
In your packet are included this presentation, a staff memo, and a draft response letter to VDOT regarding the performance safety targets for 2026.
00:29:30
This is a federally mandated process for the NPO.
00:29:34
Tonight I'm taking action from the board, which will be adoption of one of the options that are included in the presentation.
00:29:43
When Moving Ahead for Progress was enacted in the 21st century, known as MAP 21, was enacted in 2012, it established the Framework for National Transportation Performance Goals.
00:29:57
These goals were supported by Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act,
00:30:02
which replaced MAP in 2015 and finally continued by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021.
00:30:10
These national targets are set by the US Secretary of Transportation and define the overarching safety objective for the nation transportation system.
00:30:20
The targets filter down to the states which develop their own safety targets and finally MPOs which are tasked with adopting targets in support of the statewide objectives.
00:30:32
The primary reason we adopt safety targets is to comply with federal funding requirements.
00:30:40
NPS are not directly held accountable for meeting these targets.
00:30:44
That responsibility lies with the state.
00:30:46
Our targets are meant to assist the state in achieving its goals.
00:30:50
Annually, we adopt our own targets to align with these efforts.
00:30:53
The state provides us with valuable data and tools to help us determine our regional targets.
00:30:59
And when I say the state, I mean VDOT.
00:31:02
Historically, this NPO has adopted the state targets.
00:31:07
However, in 2023, the NPO took a different approach by adopting alternative targets.
00:31:14
And in 2024 and 2025, the NPO adopted the aspirational targets that are aligned with the comprehensive safety action plan known as Move Safely to the Gorge.
00:31:25
The state provides data to illustrate safety trends, including recent and long-term projections.
00:31:32
When we establish safety targets, we focus on five key metrics.
00:31:36
The number of fatalities, the number of serious injuries and their rates, and the number of non-moderate fatalities and serious injuries.
00:31:45
Regardless of which targets the MPO policy or choose to adopt, we remain fully committed to improving safety for everyone who uses our transportation system.
00:31:56
In some cases, the state level targets may show an increase in the number of hostilities and serious injuries.
00:32:05
This is because the targets are data driven and reflect actual trends, which sometimes project increases.
00:32:12
In those cases, the goal shifts to minimizing the rate of increase rather than achieving an immediate reduction.
00:32:19
And this just underscores the importance of using this data to inform our strategies in the adoption
00:32:27
Another metric that we are looking at when we calculate these targets is the vehicle miles traveled or VMT percentage for the MPO.
00:32:38
This metric projects expected change in the VMT within the MPO for the year and it's important because fluctuations in the VMT can directly influence the five key safety performance measures.
00:32:51
For this year, based on a five-year average of annual VMT values, excluding the COVID years, we anticipate that for this year is going to be 1.37 increase of VMT within the NPL.
00:33:09
The state gave us several options for establishing the safety targets, which are right here on this slide.
00:33:17
These options include the state targets, which are to the very right in red, which assume a negative 1.31 percent decrease in the rates of fatalities and serious injuries, and a 0.96 decrease in the non-moderate fatalities and serious injuries from last year.
00:33:37
Alternatively, the other options were to base our targets on regional trends, either recent or long-term trend lines.
00:33:44
The recent trend lines showed a significant increase in fatalities and serious injuries, while the long-term trend line indicates a smaller increase in fatalities and a slight decrease in serious injuries.
00:33:58
These differences highlight how short-term data can sometimes deviate from long-term patterns.
00:34:04
Finally, the aspirational targets in orange, which are aligned with the Comfort Safety Action Plan and the statewide goal of reducing fatalities by 50% by 2045.
00:34:17
This is approximately 2% annual reduction in the fatalities and serious injuries.
00:34:26
This slide just highlights the differences between what was adopted last year and this year.
00:34:37
As you can see, there's a difference in the number of fatalities.
00:34:43
However, there is a difference, a slight increase in the number of serious injuries, and that is because the rate has gone up not significantly enough to make a big impact.
00:34:56
Just as a reminder, there's one final round of Safe Streets on Roads for All.
00:35:02
Since we are aligning our safety targets potentially with the comprehensive safety action plan, we're anticipating the NOFO to be released very soon with $1 billion available.
00:35:15
And all applications will require a 20% non-federal match.
00:35:20
Of course, projects have to be identified in the safety action plan.
00:35:25
So for our IPO, we have about 15 spot specific improvements and many systemic improvements that are located on the high-engine network within the IPO.
00:35:38
Before I take any questions, I do want to highlight the recommendation from the NPO Technical Committee, which recommend that the policy board adopt the
00:35:48
aspirational safety targets for 1.26 based on the discussion from the last meeting.
00:35:55
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:35:58
Thank you, Jorjan.
00:35:59
Questions, comments from the board?
SPEAKER_07
00:36:03
I don't have any questions yet.
00:36:05
I have a question.
00:36:06
Back to the chart that's got the biggest chart that you showed, I guess page three of the presentation.
00:36:18
It's got trend line information for 24, 25, and 26 with the, it's titled Projected Five-Year Average Basin of Strict Trendline.
00:36:28
Does that take into account the actuals from 24 and 25, or are these the projections we had before we got to 24 and 25, and they're just noted here for reference to compare to 26?
SPEAKER_13
00:36:41
Those are the actuals from those years.
00:36:47
Usually when we receive the data from, you know, there's a lot more years into that data, but all of them are actuals.
00:36:59
Other than 2026.
SPEAKER_07
00:37:03
So 2026 is the projection, but 2024 and 2025 are the actual five-year averages.
SPEAKER_13
00:37:09
Yes, that is my understanding.
SPEAKER_07
00:37:11
Okay, that's helpful.
00:37:14
Do we have, or do you happen to have on hand not the five-year average, but the actual 2024 and just that alone and 2025 alone fatalities?
SPEAKER_13
00:37:33
Not on hand, but I can probably get it by the end of the meeting and send an email out.
SPEAKER_07
00:37:45
This is the annual time of year where I'm frustrated that we don't project or aspire to zero.
00:37:50
But I think if I think of it not as a target, but an expectation,
00:37:58
A target feels like something we try to meet.
00:38:02
An anticipated result is something that happens around us, and that is an easier way to comprehend that.
00:38:13
Just so the public knows, we are not aspiring to 16 fatalities or 12, if that's what we would like to adopt in our aspirations.
00:38:25
Okay, that's all I have, thanks.
SPEAKER_10
00:38:26
You'll probably be helpful to put in perspective too at some point how the projects that are brought forth in this region help to reduce these numbers and take a look back of where we were versus where we're at now to see how what we're doing is actually helping.
00:38:43
because a whole lot of these things, I mean, they could be just in the middle of nowhere.
00:38:47
I mean, so in some of the stuff you can't control also, some of the things, because I look at it from a district perspective of all nine counties and the biggest thing I'm seeing as far as trends in the entire district of all nine is off the road crashes into fixed options on secondary roadways.
00:39:05
I mean, and this body really isn't even looking.
00:39:09
at those areas.
00:39:10
So I think it would help maybe if we can come back to this board at some point in time in the future to talk about the major projects that have come through the MPO board and how we've addressed some of the safety issues based on the numbers.
SPEAKER_16
00:39:27
Perhaps.
00:39:28
All right, I'm going to pause here because I see Supervisor Mallek is on and with a hand raised.
00:39:33
And we need to vote you into the meeting, so we're going to do that first before you go.
00:39:38
If you could please just state your location and reason for attending electronically.
SPEAKER_11
00:39:45
I am back at my home having had a doctor's appointment and was not able to get to the building.
SPEAKER_16
00:39:50
Thank you.
00:39:51
Thank you.
00:39:52
And is there a motion to permit Supervisor Mallek to participate electronically?
SPEAKER_07
00:39:58
I move to permit Supervisor Malek to participate electronically.
SPEAKER_16
00:40:03
Second?
00:40:03
Second.
00:40:05
Alright, motion has been made and seconded.
00:40:07
All in favor please say aye.
00:40:09
Aye.
00:40:09
Any opposed?
00:40:11
Alright, you are now officially in the meeting and please go ahead with your question.
SPEAKER_11
00:40:15
Thank you very much and thank you for welcoming me virtually.
00:40:19
This particular topic has been so incomprehensible over so many years, but I know in the past we have often gone with the state recommendation just because we really didn't figure out a way that we could do anything else.
00:40:35
And so I guess I'll just raise that again.
00:40:37
I'm comfortable with the aspirational or I'm comfortable with the state recommendation because I don't know, other than sort of checking a federal box,
00:40:47
I guess it allows us to perhaps apply for the grant, which might help us to accelerate some of our most high priority danger zones.
00:40:55
And so for that purpose, if I'm interpreting that correctly, then that would be a reason to perhaps go with the aspirational.
00:41:00
But perhaps Sean can explain whether I'm on target or not.
00:41:04
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:41:08
Well, I think
00:41:12
I think the three comments that I heard were all a lead up to endorsing, yes, we should have a recommendation or the information brought forward by Mr. Nelson.
00:41:21
My own comment on the aspirational worth of state targets, when we aligned it with Move Safely Blue Ridge, it finally, for me, gave me a purpose for and an intentional reason to go with the aspirational numbers versus the state numbers, because it matches that plan.
00:41:37
So I would prefer the aspirational just to stay consistent with what we did in Move Safely Blue Ridge, which, I don't know, kind of eliminates the whole, I mean, I get it, because that's, for years, the same thing.
00:41:51
But regardless of who the members of the MPO have been, it's always been the same conversation.
00:41:57
But until the Move Safely Blue Ridge, there wasn't really a point where we're like, oh, see, that gives the target, and let's stick with that for consistency purposes.
00:42:07
All right, any other questions or comments about the presentation?
SPEAKER_19
00:42:13
I have one question about the comparison of 25 to 26 with the, I don't know what page this is, 34.
00:42:23
With the number of serious injuries, am I reading that right, that we're accepting a higher number as, or no?
00:42:36
What was adopting 25 now and 26 the number we're adopting would be higher?
SPEAKER_16
00:42:42
The is because you're you're looking at the 143 to the 145.
SPEAKER_19
00:42:45
Yeah, so.
SPEAKER_16
00:42:49
With the percentages staying the same based on the trends, then yes, it would move up again.
00:42:55
It's that piece where we're like, well, we're not.
00:42:57
It's not like we're asking or we're going out there looking for two more, right?
SPEAKER_07
00:43:01
Because that's based on VMT, right?
00:43:04
OK, so two.
00:43:06
Okay, whatever percent of VMT and the VMT is up 1.37 or whatever.
00:43:13
In that percentage, okay, thank you, sorry.
SPEAKER_16
00:43:15
I mean, that could be, frankly, the frustrating part about the statistic.
00:43:18
You aim for the percentage, you might achieve it, but the end might have gone up.
SPEAKER_07
00:43:22
The end might have gone up, yes.
00:43:23
Which, again, brings us to the only solution being reduce car dependence by the number of EMT.
00:43:30
Thank you for that.
00:43:32
And design the necessary roads better as well, which is where Sean comes in.
SPEAKER_16
00:43:39
Any other questions or comments?
00:43:42
All right, this is an action item.
00:43:44
Are we adopting the performance safety targets, Christine, or are we accepting, or Taylor?
SPEAKER_03
00:43:50
Adopting the aspirational performance safety targets.
SPEAKER_07
00:43:55
Motion to adopt the aspirational performance safety targets.
SPEAKER_16
00:44:00
Second.
00:44:01
All right, the motion has been made and seconded.
00:44:03
All in favor, please say aye.
00:44:05
Aye.
00:44:06
All right, motion carried.
00:44:08
Thank you.
00:44:09
Thank you, Gorion.
SPEAKER_13
00:44:11
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:44:14
This will take us to item C, the Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee and Taylor, remind me, am I setting this up or are you setting this up?
SPEAKER_03
00:44:23
I have one slide to share, but ultimately it'll be discussion.
SPEAKER_16
00:44:29
I didn't want to just skip if there was.
SPEAKER_03
00:44:43
Right, I just wanted to tee us up with a little bit of background for how we got here today.
00:44:47
Starting in March of last year, CTAC members began requesting and reviewing the committee's bylaws and there were questions about the purpose of the committee and really what the items were that they were supposed to be working on.
00:45:01
Even though these conversations sort of renewed in March 2025, when staff went
00:45:06
back and did some research and looked in our historical files, there have been multiple iterations of CTAC discussions in the past as well that always kind of seem to come back up after every few years.
00:45:17
And so I put a couple dates up on this slide just to show the progression of how the conversations have gone, how the meetings have gone, the things that we've covered over time.
00:45:26
Staff have done a lot of peer benchmarking, looking around to see what other MCOs have done, looking to see what CTAC has done in the past, and trying to explore what a future and things that the committee works on in the future could look like.
00:45:39
And so the action item for today is for you all to have a discussion and determine what the most effective path forward will be for the CTAC committee.
00:45:47
And we do have, I believe, Chair Sarah Medley is on the call today, and there's also a CTAC member that's seated over here in the room as well.
00:45:55
I'll pass it over to you, Ned.
SPEAKER_16
00:45:56
Yep, and I know Mr. Condor is on CTAC.
00:45:59
He was online.
00:45:59
I don't know if he's remained or not.
00:46:02
And I'll just frame it that it sounds like both the vice chair and I, through both the county and the city, from members, not that it necessarily affected every CTAC member's view, but there were concerns that started to bubble up that really focused in on the purpose of CTAC
00:46:24
There were, of course, concerns also as to process and what the expectations and meeting expectations.
00:46:31
But at the end of the day, the purpose was there.
00:46:34
Natalie and I met with the chair and vice chair of C-TAC over the summer.
00:46:40
I know that C-TAC had a very good conversation in November relative to this.
00:46:46
And then myself and Natalie joined C-TAC in January.
00:46:54
and listen to another very good discussion and then that leads us here today without trying to be overly general or condensing it down and invite the chair of C-Tech to weigh in.
00:47:07
Natalie obviously will weigh in.
00:47:09
about where we're at.
00:47:10
But in my mind, it's come down to we've got really good people on CTAC who want to do really good things.
00:47:17
That's not in question.
00:47:19
But the purpose that is driven by the policy board of what they should be doing has become unclear and very cloudy.
00:47:27
I think you could have conversations about process and how process could be tightened up, how expectations and performance levels could be met.
00:47:36
But if the purpose, the committee's purpose driven by the policy board is unclear, everything else is really doesn't matter.
00:47:45
So that has come down to what it would be.
00:47:47
I think there's a lot of
00:47:52
of Want for Advocacy and to have input and concern at right points on different transportation and transportation-related projects, which I don't fault them for.
00:48:03
I would too if I were there.
00:48:06
But it's become whether or not the MPO
00:48:10
Board and the CTAC Advisory Committee, the Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee is the right place to advance those.
00:48:18
And if it is right to obligate MPO staff time from a budget perspective of what our charge is as a policy organization,
00:48:29
would be to meet those type of needs.
00:48:31
So today, the idea is to decide moving forward.
00:48:37
Basic options are it can continue.
00:48:40
If it continues, then we need to identify its clear and proper purpose.
00:48:44
And then from there, we would clarify good process and expectations.
00:48:50
I feel like purpose is on the board.
00:48:52
Everything's on the board, but purpose is certainly on the board.
00:48:56
process as a staff board relationship and then meeting expectations as a combo of everybody involved.
00:49:03
We can disband the CTAC committee permanently.
00:49:07
We could put a pause on CTAC and only use CTAC for the long range transportation plan process.
00:49:16
And there's other options, obviously.
00:49:19
I mean, if we wanted to continue with CTAC, then this board, I think, has to step back and do a lot of work on purpose, defining what the clear purpose is and how it actually advises votes that come before this board and not ancillary or related things in terms of like, say, a transportation project that lives in the county.
00:49:41
Do you come to the MPO to advocate for that project or changes in that project?
00:49:45
Because a lot of times the project design happened prior to it comes to the MPO.
00:49:51
So where's the point of attack if, for lack of a better word, to do the advocacy?
00:49:55
Natalie, did I miss anything?
00:49:57
Anything there you would like to add?
SPEAKER_07
00:49:58
No, that was a good summary of what's been happening.
00:50:05
We've heard from CTAC members, current and former, about
00:50:11
about the desire to disband or the desire to stay.
00:50:17
And that's kind of shifted a little bit over the last couple of months.
00:50:20
It's ebbed and flowed.
00:50:23
When we talked with staff, we asked for some background on how useful, because I haven't been here for a long-range transportation plan year,
00:50:40
Did the CTAC group interact during that year and was it different than normal and got the feedback that the same struggles still existed where what are the points of interaction and do we have enough opportunities for engagement for CTAC?
00:51:03
Are they
00:51:07
getting out of it what they want as well.
00:51:09
All of that continued during the longer transportation years.
00:51:12
So that kind of missing the mark on what it's for, the purpose, is something that's present even in the year where there is theoretically the most activity.
00:51:33
The one piece of commentary from, we had a lot of good commentary from C-Tech members.
00:51:40
One piece that stuck out was the potential use of having a consistent board of people.
00:51:49
to ask to reflect.
00:51:51
So it's not just people coming to council or people coming to the board when it's, oh, this is immediately affecting me in my backyard, so I have an opinion, versus people who are commenting on, consistently commenting on things as they come up.
00:52:04
But again, at what point are those comments useful?
00:52:09
By the time it gets to us, it's either baked into a VDOT project that has community engagement options already, or it's a city or county
00:52:18
project where it's easier to direct commentary straight to the city or the county.
00:52:28
We were discussing about how much effort the staff of TJPDC should put towards this as well, because if we decide to use CTEC as a focus group, it should be bigger and there's more engagement processes.
00:52:42
When we got a rundown of
00:52:45
CTAC, a comp set of CTAC from around the state.
00:52:50
It's mostly a group of people that gets basically a summary of the presentations that are made and their MPO.
00:52:57
So in effect, those folks could just be at the MPO meeting, except for Richmond, which was larger and comprised of specific appointments from different groups.
00:53:09
So it was more of a focus group.
00:53:11
But then how much staff resources do we want to put towards that?
00:53:14
And if we decide to retool CTAC, it would be a year of kind of coming up with ideas and processing it through the policy board and CTAC and seeing what we want to do.
00:53:26
That's basically all I have to add for a little more color commentary about the process we've been going through.
SPEAKER_16
00:53:33
I'd like to invite before we open it up to comments and discussion and the chair of the CTAC committee,
00:53:39
Can you take that?
00:53:40
Go ahead and remove that and we can put the gallery view up.
00:53:44
Just so we can see folks, but I know Sarah is on.
00:53:49
Sarah, do you do you have anything to add in addition to what we've done in terms of framing the conversation?
SPEAKER_05
00:53:56
No, I think that was a really great overview of this past year of discussions I did.
00:54:01
Sorry, I'm I'm in my car driving my kid to an appointment or driving my kid home from an appointment.
00:54:09
But I I'm not driving though.
00:54:11
I'm sitting in a parking lot right now
00:54:17
This is a good overview of the past year of discussions.
00:54:22
I do agree that everybody on CTEK wants to feel engaged in processes and as though we have a clear purpose and that part has been missing.
00:54:33
I appreciate Ms. Oschrin sharing the idea of like a sustained focus group that the vice chair Donna Chen brought that idea up
00:54:43
and I thought that was a really great idea also and could be an excellent purpose but again it would take a lot of retooling to build that into the system but everything that was shared is exactly how I would have put it so I don't need to repeat all of that.
00:55:01
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:55:02
All right, thank you.
00:55:03
I'll start with questions, comments.
00:55:05
Ann?
SPEAKER_11
00:55:07
Thank you very much.
00:55:09
I'm trying to set aside the previous 26 years because obviously I'm very attached to the old experience which doesn't exist anymore because that was before internet and before all these engagement groups and the main job was to foresee tech people, chart people, was to be the voice into the community and gather information from the community.
00:55:30
So I guess staff would really need to be the best recommender on
00:55:35
when the occasions would be that that extra help would be needed because I don't have that answer.
00:55:42
And the other thing that is a little curious is when someone, a constituent for example, who's come numerous times to our meeting, Paul I don't know if you're there or not, but it's hard to get to make a presentation or an idea to staff
00:55:58
in the county level.
00:55:59
So the idea that has come to my mind is that the MPO is a well advertised
00:56:07
People can come, say I had this great idea, and it could be referred back to the city or the county staff from us, rather than having MPO staff have to deal with it, especially for these projects which are being planned in the locality.
00:56:25
So that's really all I had to open with at the moment, but anything we can do to get more people informed and participating, that would make me happy.
00:56:33
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
00:56:36
And just to respond to that, and I know that I've had just some brainstorming conversations with Taylor and Christine, and I don't know, I can't remember if this is pre-agenda or sidebars.
00:56:49
Regardless of what happens with CTAC, if people come to approach the NPO knocking on our door for where to go,
00:56:58
We do recognize that the MPO, the TJPDC, should easily and can easily be set up to direct folks to the right place.
00:57:08
So a lot like, for example, if it's a project that's happening in Albemarle County, the TJPDC is often involved and informed about those and can easily suggest to somebody, here's the date, times of when that process or contact people so that they can go there.
00:57:25
And I think that that is a kind of undercurrent of what will be happening from the TJPDC standpoint, because that tends to happen with the other bodies, CARTA, Regionalizing Partnership, the commission itself.
00:57:40
So I think that's a good point.
00:57:42
But TJPDC is often the convener of information and then can push information out.
00:57:48
Ms. Fleischer, you're the newest member, so ultimately we're going to do what you say.
00:57:53
But do you have any questions or comments about where you're at or any clarifying questions?
SPEAKER_19
00:58:00
Yeah, and we've talked about CTAC in some other transportation-minded groups, Charlottesville Area Alliance and RTP.
00:58:08
So it's been on my mind as well.
00:58:12
Sarah, I actually had a question for you.
00:58:13
You don't have to go on camera.
00:58:17
What did you expect, why did you join C-TAC and what did you expect when you joined and how has that reconciled with what's really happened?
SPEAKER_05
00:58:29
Thank you.
00:58:30
I will leave my camera off.
00:58:31
But yes, I joined SeaTac because I was interested in learning more about area transit planning.
00:58:38
And I thought this would be a good way to do that.
00:58:44
And I wanted to advocate for more bike and pedestrian access into planning processes.
00:58:52
I found that I did learn a lot about the regional transit planning that
00:58:56
I didn't fully understand the purview honestly of the MPO before I joined SeaTac and so it was a little different than what I thought it would be and more focused on these larger transportation planning projects.
00:59:13
and it's been an interesting experience in learning about how these decisions are made.
00:59:21
But at the same time, as much as I would like to be able to have a say or to have my voice heard in these, it hasn't felt like there was a good mechanism for C-Tech to actually influence any policies or anything.
SPEAKER_19
00:59:42
Thank you so much.
00:59:43
That's super helpful.
00:59:46
With the engagement being taken care of a lot with the public participation plan and all of the events and tabling that is already baked into this, the mechanism for advocacy was the piece that I was really wondering about.
01:00:00
And that CTEC doesn't quite seem like the right fit for that.
01:00:06
I'm not saying that there are other ones I can instantly refer to.
01:00:11
Hearing Sarah's, you know, response and kind of knowing that it's not leaving out engagement by kind of sunsetting C-TAC.
01:00:22
I think I'm leaning towards let's let C-TAC sunset and we can stay engaged with C-TAC members for other opportunities slash mechanisms to do that advocacy work and make an impact on transportation elsewhere.
01:00:42
Yeah.
SPEAKER_16
01:00:45
Well, I think your question is badly was an excellent one, Sir.
01:00:48
Would you like to chime in as well to that question that was just asked of your chair?
SPEAKER_17
01:00:53
Yeah, OK, sure, I'm I'm Pat Healy.
01:00:55
I'm a city representative, one of on C TAC.
01:01:03
The chair, I think.
01:01:06
Did a wonderful job summarizing and vice
01:01:12
I would use the term, well, purpose, of course, followed by structure is the way I think of it.
01:01:19
But I think we're all on the same page.
01:01:22
Vice Chair then addressed some of the, I guess I'll call them problems with the current structure.
01:01:31
And some of those may be mutable.
01:01:36
Some of them are probably just part of the picture.
01:01:38
You just got to deal with them.
01:01:42
But to answer your question, I joined because I'm retired and I have a little time and transportation is so important probably right after water and whether or not we're going to be alive.
01:02:04
The lights come on, the food in the stores and all the rest of it.
01:02:09
Plus how we get around.
01:02:20
and have great transportation.
01:02:22
Nobody can step outside their doors.
01:02:24
You don't have much in the city.
01:02:30
So I joined that.
01:02:31
The other thing is I'm kind of interested in how the sausage is being made because you can't think about what's going on in public policy if you don't know what's going on in public policy.
01:02:46
And part of the structure that I think
01:02:51
is frustrating, but all of us on CTAG get is that so much of it is out of our hands, particularly us, of course, because we're an advisory, but even members of council who control the purse.
01:03:10
When the engineering comes down from VDOT, that's the way it's gonna be.
01:03:15
That's not your call.
01:03:16
You can then say, well, we like the project,
01:03:25
there's a lot of things that just within the structure we all just have to accept.
01:03:30
So, but that can be frustrating.
01:03:35
There are some things within this structure I think in terms of CTAC that could be changed to make us more valuable to you and to help you understand us, whatever we bring.
01:03:53
and I think some of those are just rearranging when we're brought in.
01:04:01
So, and I've gone over them all, but no, you're both right.
01:04:07
And I wish you all the luck in the world.
SPEAKER_16
01:04:11
Thank you, sir.
01:04:11
Appreciate you coming today to listen and join in the conversation.
01:04:16
Where I met as a policy board member,
01:04:20
I'm not ready to disband the committee entirely.
01:04:23
I think there can be a purpose for it connected to the long-range transportation plan.
01:04:29
I just feel like the purpose, even though the general purpose is the same,
01:04:35
The purpose tied to structure and expectations is what has morphed over the years, given the technology, internet, things like that.
01:04:42
And we've never stopped and go, how does that change this committee as an advisory committee?
01:04:48
So I feel as if it's time to put up, if we were to pause where it's at now, knowing that the long range transportation planning process is going to be back upon us by fall or next year,
01:05:05
The current planning process, the actual process.
SPEAKER_04
01:05:10
Which gives us, I thought it was a year before we had this year.
01:05:15
It's a five-year plan.
01:05:17
It was adopted in 2024.
01:05:18
Yeah.
SPEAKER_07
01:05:19
So it gets done during 2027 and approved in 2028.
SPEAKER_04
01:05:23
It has to be adopted by spring of 2029.
01:05:27
So we would start, we would kick it off in spring of 2027.
01:05:29
Yes.
01:05:31
Which gives us a year to.
01:05:33
It's about a two year planning process.
SPEAKER_16
01:05:36
So I think behind the scenes, the work that the policy board would have to work with staff on is to look at our bylaws, revisit the purpose, the charge of the CTAC committee, clean that up to be specific to the long range transportation plan.
01:05:54
And then figure out structure process to support what we feel like we want that advisory committee to do because it seems like it's more than just even advise and consent on the plan itself because there were also points of
01:06:07
Folks that were pointing out, well, how they are actually advising on the engagement of how to engage more people in addition to the content that's in the plan itself.
01:06:18
So if we did that, we certainly have enough time to pull back, work on what a clear policy or a committee charge would be, and then start brainstorming with folks that are on the current part.
01:06:30
We could pull them together as an advisory group to help us do
01:06:33
Well, what would what would a good process structure look like in support of the transportation plan and then implement that and then put out the charge, put out the call for committee members as we close in at the right time for it to be ready to roll for the transportation process.
01:06:50
I feel like that would be a good function and use of it, realizing in the meantime we can continue to track work and activity along that shows up on the policy board agenda to say, oh,
01:07:03
Well, we paused the CTAC committee, but this would have been a great time to have that advice, to have the advisory committee in place.
01:07:12
So along the way, we could maybe discover and find other purposes for it.
01:07:15
But I think that's at a minimum in my mind what I would hope that the policy board are throwing out for consideration as a good plan moving forward.
01:07:24
Of course, the other options are,
01:07:26
completely disband or go past that and figure out and do policy bylaws work to still clarify the charge but grow it beyond what the long range transportation planning process would be.
01:07:39
And I've been on this committee for eight years.
01:07:43
I've brainstormed that.
01:07:45
I've had a hard time coming up with purposes beyond working on the long range transportation plan.
01:07:51
That's not to speak to comments that I've heard about access for citizens to be able to make presentation.
01:07:58
I'm not undermining all of that, but from the work of the policy board and actual votes and actions we must take.
01:08:04
I'm having a hard time justifying other purposes that are genuine based on our decisions versus us just doing it because we feel like it's a good thing to do.
01:08:14
I'm not looking for hope for is or good things to do.
01:08:17
It's going to add to staff time.
01:08:20
We don't have the budget for that at the at the at this level.
01:08:23
but that's where I'm at.
01:08:25
I've talked a lot.
01:08:26
What I'd like to do is just go to each policy board member and then ask what you think or if you have different ideas and we'll just see if we can arrive at a direction.
01:08:35
Natalie, would you like to...
SPEAKER_02
01:08:36
So ask questions?
01:08:39
Yeah.
SPEAKER_16
01:08:39
Okay.
01:08:39
Do you have some now?
SPEAKER_02
01:08:40
Yes.
01:08:41
Yeah.
01:08:42
I just wondered since we, I don't know if Sarah is still available, but you certainly are, sir.
01:08:47
I wondered between the scenarios that have been presented,
01:08:52
Is there a preference on the CTAC members part in terms of those different scenarios or is it none of the above and something else altogether?
SPEAKER_16
01:09:03
And if I might, can I let the chair answer that?
01:09:06
Sarah, can you answer that question?
SPEAKER_05
01:09:11
Yeah, I think that originally there was a lot of
01:09:17
Interest in maintaining CTAC or even having it have a larger role with the MPO policy board to have more active engagement with the community.
01:09:31
And then as the process continued throughout the year, it sort of, I think the idealism maybe started to slip away a little bit and people realized that there wasn't a great mechanism
01:09:45
and maybe it would make sense to disband.
01:09:48
So the last meeting was the first time that I had heard people share their feelings that it might make the most sense to disband.
01:09:58
I actually had a separate question which was about having, so I serve as a non-voting member on this board and the vice chair serves as a non-voting member on the technical committee and I was wondering,
01:10:11
If having more citizen non-voting members in those two boards might be a bridge away from CTAC.
01:10:22
So to have people sitting in those meetings but not having a separate committee itself.
SPEAKER_16
01:10:28
Just to clarify, I heard two committees.
01:10:31
The technical committee in which?
01:10:33
This one.
SPEAKER_05
01:10:34
Oh, this one, the policy board.
01:10:35
Yeah, sorry.
SPEAKER_16
01:10:36
Oh, got it.
01:10:37
Thank you.
01:10:38
And you may have comments on that as we go around.
01:10:41
But I'm going to return to Julia since you had the question.
01:10:45
If you had others or follow up.
SPEAKER_02
01:10:47
No, that's awesome.
01:10:49
I just wanted to hear from them.
SPEAKER_16
01:10:50
Yeah, gotcha.
01:10:52
I can just talk to Natalie any
SPEAKER_07
01:10:55
Yeah, before I talk about what I'm thinking, I do have a couple questions.
01:11:03
The tech committee, I know that meeting is open to the public, but is there a public comment portion?
01:11:12
Okay, so people can address the concerns on their agenda at that time.
01:11:20
Because the tech committee does get into the nitty-gritty more than we do here.
01:11:25
So I completely understand, and I've spoken with some people on TTAC who did think this was going to be a case of, oh, I can try and advocate for more bike ped in these larger projects.
01:11:42
And that's why they wanted to be on the team, or maybe they do have some design background and want to comment on specifics.
01:11:47
But as you said, it kind of gets a little baked by the time it gets to us.
01:11:53
And then we have in the city, we have our bike ped advisory committee where those projects kind of can work.
01:12:00
But I do hear a kind of a desire to be able to have a forum to share
01:12:10
ideas that the citizens, residents would like to suggest to decision makers specifically about transportation projects.
01:12:18
It's not just going to a random counselor board meeting and saying, what if we did this, but an actual specific dedicated place for that.
01:12:27
And I'm wondering if that might be a
01:12:33
Some kind of like community forum work session engagement thing that maybe is like a quarterly meeting that's not a board of citizen reps, resident reps, but
01:12:49
So I don't mean to be an idealistic political wonk, but kind of like Big Ball of Cheese Day on the West Wing, where you invite people.
SPEAKER_16
01:13:02
Andrew Jackson.
SPEAKER_07
01:13:04
You know, you invite people to have a time where it's like, hey, specifically like Transit Open or Transportation Open House suggestion box interact with staff, interact with not just our staff, but TAPC.
01:13:17
I don't know.
SPEAKER_19
01:13:18
But that, I've been part of the long-term transportation project as a community member and that is when that stuff happens so much.
01:13:26
I mean, I must have attended like 10 meetings where I got to be like, look, look, I want flying bicycles.
01:13:31
And, you know, like you really got to, I found like I really got to get into it at all different levels, safety, design,
01:13:39
all during that process.
01:13:41
Am I making that up?
SPEAKER_07
01:13:41
That was that style, right?
SPEAKER_19
01:13:43
Yeah.
01:13:43
Yeah.
SPEAKER_07
01:13:43
Engagement meetings that we got the note that is not a responsibility of CTAC to attend those.
01:13:49
You attended as a community.
SPEAKER_04
01:13:50
I just attended as a community.
01:13:52
You were allowed different opportunities for engagement from the public outside of a formalized committee.
SPEAKER_19
01:13:58
Yeah.
01:13:58
Yeah.
01:13:59
And that the voices that came to that were really diverse and, um, you know, came from drivers, bike, pet, et cetera, all different angles.
01:14:08
And it had more kind of what Sarah was envisioning when she signed up for this, which was I could advocate without like no hold barred on what I thought was a good idea.
01:14:17
And it was considered as part of the design of a few of the things that I had gone to.
01:14:21
So that's kind of already happening.
01:14:24
Well, hopefully that will be baked in again to the next plan, because it really it seemed more meaningful than the three minutes of these meetings where it's open.
01:14:33
Look, no one makes date night out of coming to MPO.
01:14:39
So it's hard to get a real sense of what a lot of community matters.
01:14:45
We're lucky to hear the voices we did tonight, but I've definitely been to multiple meetings where no one speaks in those three minutes.
01:14:53
I agree.
01:14:54
I'd love more is more like, you know, being together with the MPO.
01:14:58
And we have, you know, fireside chats where we get to hear on specific topics.
01:15:03
But because it was so baked in and I'm assuming and it is I'm being reassured that it will be again, I think it's already covered.
SPEAKER_07
01:15:09
Yeah.
01:15:10
Then if if if that's the case,
01:15:16
I'm trying to like figure out a balance where I don't really, I can see, I am on board with both of you in a sense that the current CTAC mission purpose is not meeting the needs of the members nor the MPO.
01:15:34
So disbanding makes a lot of sense.
01:15:36
It saves staff a lot of time.
01:15:38
And then I can understand the,
01:15:46
I have a desire to see if there is a purpose because it hasn't been updated since the internet.
01:15:55
But I also don't want to have staff spend forever on figuring that out.
01:15:58
And so I'm wondering if there is a happy medium there where we ask staff to spend like X number of time.
01:16:09
Is there something you could see this being useful for?
01:16:12
And then if there's not, we don't try and force it.
SPEAKER_16
01:16:18
Yeah, I mean, I can't speak for Steph on that, but that, when I was saying, like, I struggled to find a purpose outside a long-range transportation plan based on the votes we take, that's what I could not come up with in my brain.
01:16:29
Not that I'm not interested in the content and the feedback and even the advocacy that's coming, like you said, the flying bicycles and the transportation piece.
01:16:38
So I'm trying to own that responsibility of how does that get met, that need that I'm hearing, but the answer in my brain is not through the MPO.
01:16:47
I got to figure out how to meet that need in some other capacity and not meet that for the city, just in how we could do it in the county.
01:16:59
And I've got ideas on that.
01:17:01
But I don't know how to do it through the NPO.
01:17:04
Can I add something?
SPEAKER_07
01:17:05
Let me, one more thing.
01:17:07
Does that mean instead maybe we appoint CTAC people, but then their responsibility is to show up to the community engagement sessions that are
01:17:16
but the long-range transportation plan year hosts and then that's what CTAC is for.
SPEAKER_16
01:17:24
I think that when by the pullback what I'm saying is that I think to Ann's point trying to forget 25 or 26 years of how it's existed that we take the next year and go we know how we're doing these now
01:17:41
in terms of engagement and what that leads to.
01:17:43
Is there a clear purpose of how an advisory committee can help execute that both from study or help with the engagement and then the actual content that exists in the plan?
01:17:56
So I don't know that I had to come up with that answer tonight, but if that's how we proceeded, those would be the questions that I would be asking.
01:18:03
What's the new 2026 way of doing a citizen transportation advisory committee?
01:18:09
that falls in line with how we've been doing these for the last six, seven, eight years.
01:18:15
With all the engagement already.
01:18:17
Put into it.
SPEAKER_07
01:18:19
I don't know if that even approached your no, it's yeah, you're like let's give it a try before we give up.
SPEAKER_16
01:18:27
Just basically for this specific transportation plan.
01:18:30
Yeah, yeah, because I even think that like you're like to your point about having that time to put input in at the transportation plan.
01:18:38
And even if they accepted it, my worry, frankly, is I know what the long range transportation plan's purpose is.
01:18:45
It's similar to the modeling data that we just used.
01:18:48
It's big picture.
01:18:50
So if it's a great idea and you as a citizen came and advocated it for it, everyone included it and it got into the plan, you're thinking it's going to happen.
01:18:59
Well, because it's in the long range transportation plan doesn't necessarily mean it's going to happen.
01:19:05
and I don't like that kind of endorsement, if you would, because it would still take.
01:19:11
You going to the actual place of where that particular project originates, and then you say they decided to include this in the long range transportation as part of the giving it some weight, etc.
01:19:24
But it doesn't guarantee that all of a sudden that's going to turn into a policy of practice approach or project.
01:19:30
So I heard you say bingo.
01:19:32
Did I steal your Thunder?
SPEAKER_10
01:19:33
No, it wasn't.
01:19:33
Thunder is just like you're right.
01:19:37
Right.
01:19:37
And I mean, in other places I've worked in other localities, they've had infrastructure committees, transportation committees at the local level where that citizen advisory piece was taken there.
01:19:49
And then it informed the members that were on the MPO.
01:19:53
It, it rolled up is how it did instead of, cause I don't, I don't know how you don't have any control over a whole lot of this stuff.
01:20:02
You're a body that will vote on
01:20:05
adding a project and submitting an application.
01:20:08
But ultimately, in order to do that, you have to still have support from the counties.
01:20:14
Like it starts in the counties.
SPEAKER_19
01:20:17
Yeah, Ned, I think what you're talking about is more of like changing the A of CTAC to accountability.
01:20:22
So they could be an accountability board that, you know, follows up with all the local advisory and advocacy boards.
01:20:32
to make sure that MPO is happening on the ground.
01:20:35
But I don't know that MPO needs an accountability group.
SPEAKER_16
01:20:43
Yeah, I mean, I always use Mr. Condor as an example.
01:20:46
Like, he lives in my district.
01:20:49
He's on one of the Rio 29 Community Advisory Committee.
01:20:55
So, and he stepped off, but if he didn't have the CTAC, he knows because I've seen him use the other points in the county that are county specific.
01:21:07
and he uses both direct communication with Sean and his team with me as a supervisor.
01:21:14
Since he's a member of these different committees, he has access to staff, et cetera.
01:21:18
So he's figured out where he can have some input.
01:21:21
He's not, to satisfy a request of like a 20 minute presentation from a citizen to a body that represents, Lee wasn't doing that, but he had, at least he had the microphone and the chance to speak to it because he was a member of those committees.
01:21:37
So, you know, I think it's up to the county and the city to figure out how you provide venue and audience for this sort of request, whether it's, you know, the times are relevant, but a citizen to come forward where three minutes isn't going to get it done.
01:21:55
Some boards don't even, like our, we invite, we allow people to put up PowerPoints and things like that if they need to, to support their three minutes, but the time limit is still the same.
01:22:05
But not all bodies and boards do that either.
01:22:09
But that's not like that's me.
01:22:11
Brainstorming is outside of what the.
01:22:14
Of this venue is.
01:22:16
And like I said, I don't.
01:22:18
I didn't hear anything talking to see tech members were none of them were looking for wish for hopeful hopeful stuff.
01:22:26
They didn't want to do it just to do it or to do it for hopes sake or.
01:22:31
You know, I guess as an elected, sometimes we make decisions, I guess you could be pressured in or not pressured, influenced to make a decision because it feels like the right thing to do versus is this really going to serve its function and purpose that really validates and justifies spending staff time, which is tax dollars on it to make it, to execute it?
01:22:56
And like I said, those folks, I heard it.
01:22:58
I heard it in both the November meeting when I listened to it and the meeting I was with.
01:23:02
I mean, I know a lot of the names and faces around that room.
01:23:05
These are not folks that are looking to get together to just spend time with one another.
01:23:09
I mean, they like each other just fine.
01:23:11
But these are people that put their time and energy on places where they can get stuff done.
01:23:15
And I think that was the originating frustration.
01:23:19
It was like, are we getting anything done?
01:23:21
So, boy, if they get cut loose and go to the other places, I feel a responsibility to help them find the right pressure points.
01:23:27
But that's Ned, an individual elected, saying that, not an MPO policy board member trying to satisfy that.
01:23:36
Ann?
SPEAKER_11
01:23:37
Thank you.
01:23:38
I really appreciate all of the sort of articulation of where I've been floundering around on this.
01:23:43
And I especially appreciate the sort of county infrastructure committee, even if it starts out as a workshop and we find out how many people show up.
01:23:51
I mean,
01:23:52
getting people in the room to talk about something would be I think a really great experiment and hopefully we have these people who have been involved and they will stay you know on a list and help us to generate those kinds of actions so I am I would be in favor of keeping things alive and evolving as opposed to disbanding things and seeing how it goes I really like that approach thank you
SPEAKER_16
01:24:20
All right, I'll come back to Natalie.
01:24:23
You were kind of in the middle there a little bit.
SPEAKER_07
01:24:25
Anything you want to change?
01:24:27
Are you still?
SPEAKER_19
01:24:28
No, I'm still for fine sunsetting.
01:24:31
I mean, can we always stand it back up sometime if you?
SPEAKER_04
01:24:35
Well, that is the other option.
01:24:36
We certainly framed it as these three options in order to make sure that we could structure a conversation.
01:24:42
But it could also be that this isn't a formalized committee in the bylaws with a charge.
01:24:46
It is an ad hoc committee.
01:24:48
during the long range transportation plan that has a charge to help determine what the engagement will be with the community.
01:24:54
That isn't necessarily weighing in on all the details of the plan, but helps set the vision for what the engagement should look like.
01:25:01
That's one option.
01:25:02
We could stand up and ad hoc to serve a purpose that is different than having an ongoing with bylaws charge set and then it has to always meet that charge.
01:25:14
I mean, you guys have a lot of flexibility here.
SPEAKER_19
01:25:16
I'd like us to leverage that and let it take pause now and direct everyone to places where their advocacy and voice can serve both the committee they're speaking with and the committee itself and think about what that would look like in this runway we have towards the long-range plan about standing up an ad hoc and how to advertise for those roles and how to best use them.
01:25:42
So we're feeding two birds with one's goat on that.
SPEAKER_16
01:25:46
And so if I'm hearing what you said right, I didn't really think of it that way.
01:25:50
But even if we wanted to use it for the long-range transportation plan, you're saying we do that through the ad hoc committee structure.
01:25:56
Yeah, I like that.
SPEAKER_04
01:25:57
But you could disband CTEQ as it is, and you could stand up a temporary committee to serve whatever purpose you need.
01:26:04
If you need citizen advisory on something that you're going to be making.
SPEAKER_07
01:26:08
It would be a public engagement advisory board, not a public engagement advisory board for the long-range transportation plan.
01:26:16
Wow.
01:26:17
Big t-shirts.
01:26:21
Because I really appreciate the advocacy that this group wants to do, especially since
01:26:30
I mean, it's not just Sarah, but there's other people on there who are there because they thought it would be a good place to do bike and pet advocacy.
01:26:38
But if that takes them, if this hour, you know, every couple hours, every once in a while is taking them away from other projects that they could be advocating.
SPEAKER_16
01:26:47
Highest investors.
01:26:48
Right.
SPEAKER_07
01:26:48
Then they're in this meeting grinding their gears instead of going to BPAC or instead of coming up with a commentary for council.
01:26:57
Well,
01:26:58
I want to make sure it's getting directed in the right way.
01:27:01
And I am struggling to see outside of a public engagement advisory board, what could be useful for LRPT and for NPO.
01:27:17
If we already have the community outreach meetings, if we already have public commentary options for every project that comes to us,
SPEAKER_16
01:27:27
Yeah, I think that's why, like, given that the transportation plan doesn't kick in for a while, it gives us time to think about that.
01:27:34
But also through the ad hoc structure, what I'm hearing is something pops up and we're like, oh, this would be great to have it, then we can just call the committee and get going.
SPEAKER_04
01:27:44
rely on you all to appoint, like however you all want to direct that.
SPEAKER_07
01:27:47
Right, so would it be, OK, everybody is on this committee, but just wait for our call instead of meet regularly?
SPEAKER_16
01:27:54
You'd call for committee membership at that point.
01:27:56
If you stand up for ad hoc, then you'd say, we're setting this committee up, we're taking up, you publicize it, the applications come in, and we select.
SPEAKER_04
01:28:03
This is how often you'll meet, these are the things that you'll be making recommendations.
SPEAKER_16
01:28:07
This board, it would probably mean the county would appoint some, the city would appoint some, TJPBC would appoint some.
SPEAKER_07
01:28:14
I'm interested in that.
SPEAKER_16
01:28:18
All right.
01:28:18
Well, I'm hearing that we've landed in the where all the circles have combined.
01:28:24
So the ad hoc committee structure, because that satisfies what I was thinking about.
01:28:28
I do think we need to look at the bylaws just to clean up.
01:28:32
But that's a bylaws thing.
SPEAKER_04
01:28:33
I don't even say a formal action on disbanding C-Tech as it is and then spend the next year, the runway developing what you want this ad hoc for.
01:28:43
and developing the structure for the ad hoc committee.
01:28:47
Rather than taking what we already have and trying to make it into something else, that's a staff recommendation.
01:28:54
Certainly that's y'all's decision, what you want to do.
SPEAKER_17
01:28:57
No, I like that.
SPEAKER_19
01:28:57
But I like tracking, like, oh, we could have used to.
01:29:00
That tracking piece over time will help us make that decision, I think.
SPEAKER_16
01:29:04
Very good.
01:29:04
I think this is based on some of the angst that I was hearing, the change in energy from the fall to the recent meeting.
01:29:14
I feel like this is a happy kind of go forward because it's not a just disband and leave it behind us, continue to figure out how to make it work and hope some of these folks would be energized to want to rejoin based on the new charge, what the purpose is, structure, good structure.
SPEAKER_07
01:29:27
With the realistic caveat that it's also possible that there is not
01:29:34
going to be a need.
01:29:36
And we don't need to create an opportunity to meet if there isn't going to be a purpose for it.
01:29:41
But we can.
01:29:43
Try and look and see what and if there is.
SPEAKER_16
01:29:47
Yeah, agree.
01:29:48
And then I know, because our role is elected as conveners is still help with other.
01:29:54
To find those pathways to get them to the pressure points for our own respective legislative bodies to be able to do what they're hoping or asking to do that they thought C tech was a venue for.
SPEAKER_19
01:30:04
That's our role.
01:30:06
All right.
SPEAKER_16
01:30:07
Well, I think we've arrived.
01:30:08
Just repeat what you said, Christine.
SPEAKER_04
01:30:15
A motion to do whatever.
01:30:17
Does everyone recommend a motion to sunset or disband the Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee as it is currently structured?
01:30:26
and then use the next year to develop, is there a way that we need an ad hoc committee to advise on developing the long range transportation plan and formalize a structure for that, if it's determined that that's needed.
SPEAKER_16
01:30:39
Yeah, and I think the official motion can just be to disband C-TAC as it is, because then the next piece is really staff direction on the next step.
01:30:48
So I think we need a motion to disband the C-TAC committee as it currently operates.
SPEAKER_19
01:30:55
So moved.
SPEAKER_16
01:30:56
All right, I got so moved at the same time.
SPEAKER_19
01:31:00
Ann can move it, and I'll second it.
SPEAKER_16
01:31:02
All right, we got a motion made by Ann and a second by Jen.
01:31:06
Is there any further discussion?
01:31:09
All right, all in favor, please say aye.
01:31:12
Aye.
01:31:13
No.
01:31:14
What's the word?
01:31:16
Nays?
01:31:16
Any nays?
01:31:18
I've been sharing meetings for how long?
01:31:20
I forgot what to say.
01:31:21
Any abstentions?
01:31:22
I abstain.
01:31:24
All right.
01:31:26
I also want to just state, and I'm happy to have others make comment if you want, but for the members of CTAC, Ms. Medley, your vice chair, all the members that have been there, we really appreciate all the time and effort you have put in, and I feel like we've taken the right time and had the right
01:31:43
conversations and discussions to arrive at this decision today and we hope that as we work over this next year, I suspect we'll be reaching out for comment, input, feedback on some of the things we were thinking about that you will be willing to share those thoughts and ideas with us to see what maybe the next rendition will be.
01:32:03
And then I will follow up with folks that I feel like are county specific relative to finding places where advocacy go or to help with that effort directly.
01:32:14
I know Ann will do the same as needed.
01:32:20
Chair Medley, I would like to just give you an opportunity.
01:32:22
You don't have to, but if you feel like you would like to make any comments, I invite you to do so.
SPEAKER_05
01:32:28
Yeah, I would say that the only outcome that I didn't want to happen was for CTAC to continue without a well-defined charge.
01:32:38
So I think this is really satisfactory.
01:32:40
I think the idea of the ad hoc committees is a good one if that turns out to be useful.
01:32:47
and like I heard like nobody on C-Tech wanted to feel like we were just spinning our wheels and sort of fulfilling the space that wasn't necessary.
01:32:58
We all wanted to be working so I think likely I would be interested in following up if you had any need for comment or input later on and I think anybody else from C-Tech would also.
SPEAKER_07
01:33:09
We'll save that mailing list.
01:33:13
I would like to just add a note that
01:33:17
One of the biggest problems with C-Tech as it existed prior to 30 seconds ago was the
01:33:25
disjoint between matching needs and matching expectations.
01:33:29
And so I hope that that is kind of the central goal of whatever committees we move forward so that it's very clear to the people who would like to join and like to help that they are joining a committee that they'll be useful on and that meets their needs so that there is not that mismatch.
01:33:51
And that gives us the chance to make those committees
01:33:54
More flexible to what our needs are as well and specific.
01:33:59
Specificity and expectation management will be the name of the game.
SPEAKER_17
01:34:04
Great.
01:34:04
Any other final comments?
01:34:07
Just thank you and best of luck as I said before and I'll probably just send an email.
SPEAKER_16
01:34:16
Thank you.
01:34:17
I appreciate that.
SPEAKER_11
01:34:18
I'll just add in to thank everybody who has worked on this committee for the many decades and we're not done by any means and so please be thinking of ways that items that you want to continue to advocate about you know how to find us and so we'll keep these discussions going and you know don't go way too far.
01:34:38
Thank you very much.
SPEAKER_16
01:34:40
All right, I have not done a good job chairing, we've got behind, so I'm going to look to Taylor.
01:34:45
Is item D one that we just need to get quick height items on?
01:34:48
It's not an action item.
SPEAKER_03
01:34:50
No, yes, it's just informational purposes, so I can breeze through the slides pretty quickly.
01:35:08
All right.
01:35:09
Well, it is that time again to start talking about fiscal year 27 and the MPO's work plan.
01:35:14
So just a little background, our unified planning work program or the UPWP is basically the MPO's work plan for transportation planning activities to be conducted with federal funds.
01:35:27
Federal law requires that we incorporate and address 10 specific planning factors.
01:35:31
Those are on the screen here.
01:35:33
The ones in blue are specifically framework factors that came from our LRTP that we wanted to make sure were captured in our UPWP.
01:35:41
Two federal agencies fund the MPO and that is Federal Highway Administration, those are PL or planning funds, those come through VDOT and the Federal Transit Administration on the transit side, those come through DRPT.
01:35:54
VDOT also receives state planning funds or SPR from FHWA that basically pays for the support that they give us alongside the activities that we do.
01:36:04
So everything on this table is draft.
01:36:06
These are the values that were from last year for the MPO's budget.
01:36:10
We have not received updated budget numbers yet, so I just left these in here just to give you all a sense of scale for the MPO's budget.
01:36:17
And so down in the bottom corner, that $700,000 value that is inclusive of the VDOT SPR funds, but what's actually in the MPO's control is two lines above where it says $481,000 and change.
01:36:29
That's what's within our control for the UPWP.
01:36:32
This budget captures staff time and also captures professional development.
01:36:36
If we need any equipment replacements like computers, that's also captured in here.
01:36:41
So it's more than just staff time that goes into this.
01:36:46
The UPWP is broken out by three tasks.
01:36:49
So program administration, that is typically any reporting that we have to do, compliance with regulations, invoicing, printing, things like that, all in the admin category.
01:36:58
For long range transportation planning, that is a task that captures any long range planning.
01:37:03
So if it's an LRTP year, typically, that bucket is a lot bigger.
01:37:07
We also have been doing work for our model in there, work for the safety action plan also fell in there.
01:37:14
But because we are not yet in another LRTP year, we still recommend keeping the same splits that we did in the last fiscal year since we'll be doing more short range planning and technical assistance with our member jurisdictions.
01:37:26
So a couple highlights.
01:37:28
I'll breeze through these pretty fast.
01:37:30
So in fiscal year 26, we completed the comprehensive safety action plan for the region, Move Safely Blue Ridge.
01:37:36
So that also included the MPO jurisdictions in that.
01:37:39
We also completed the first full year of the Regional Transit Authority or CARTA.
01:37:44
And so that transition happened with the RTP this year.
01:37:46
You all just adopted safety performance targets.
01:37:50
We are also, there are a number of things that are in progress.
01:37:52
So we recognize it's February.
01:37:54
We've still got a couple more months in the fiscal year to finish some work up.
01:37:57
So we're working on a comprehensive update of our tips right now.
01:38:01
We're working on smart scale and also the travel demand model will be something that's completed this fiscal year.
01:38:07
We also submitted a lot of federal grant applications.
01:38:10
So Safe Streets and Roads for All, we submitted that one.
01:38:13
We also just submitted a build grant application.
01:38:16
and then also state applications for other programs here at the TJPEC.
01:38:21
And then of course we participate with BDOT on any STARS and project pipeline studies.
01:38:28
All right, so for the fiscal year 27 UPWP, of course there will be ongoing and continued activities that we will keep doing next fiscal year.
01:38:35
So participating in those studies, committee administration, annual adoption of the safety targets,
01:38:40
We will also roll over work on our TDM study that staff are working on right now.
01:38:44
So that will remain in the fiscal year 27 UPWP.
01:38:48
And then of course, if any discretionary grant applications come up, we will apply for those.
01:38:53
As far as new things that are captured in the UPWP, you'll notice that it does not include work for setting up this LRTP engagement framework that we just talked about.
01:39:02
So that'll be in the final draft that you all see.
01:39:05
But the first thing that's in there is work on best practices and benchmarking.
01:39:09
And so that would be incorporated into all three of those task buckets that you all saw earlier.
01:39:14
And that would be staff going out and reviewing policies, performance measures, implementation strategies to really look around and understand what does it mean to have a world class MPO?
01:39:24
What are our peers doing?
01:39:25
Do any of our policies need to be updated?
01:39:28
The bylaws haven't been updated in a really long time.
01:39:31
Just doing that on the ground work to look around and make sure that our MPO is in line with others in the state.
01:39:40
Next, doing some geospatial mapping is an activity that we included in here.
01:39:44
So we'll have a brand new tip document.
01:39:46
So staff would go and make that interactive mapping data that was available online.
01:39:53
So we have a lot of data that we have access to right now and looking at how we can better communicate and actually show the committee, the community, I'm sorry, what it is that we're working on.
01:40:02
And so we do that for both the LRTP and the new tip.
01:40:09
And finally, the last item that's captured in here is bicycle and pedestrian counting.
01:40:14
So basically investigating the feasibility of starting up a bike and pedestrian count program here at the MBO.
01:40:20
That's something that we've heard articulated from both city and county staff is something that would be valuable for them, a gap that they're trying to fill.
01:40:27
And so really taking time to workshop, to think through what are some good locations to pilot something like this?
01:40:33
What's the right type of equipment to get?
01:40:35
And how would we be able to set that program up?
01:40:41
So as far as next steps today, this came before you as informational.
01:40:44
So at your next meeting, it will be a voting item for approval.
01:40:48
We will also work with VDOT and all of our federal contacts as well to make sure they're reviewing it and if they have any comments on the document as well.
01:40:55
And hopefully at your next meeting, we will have actual budget numbers for fiscal year 27.
01:41:00
And then of course, we will do public notice as well to receive public comment on this document.
01:41:05
So I know that was really, really quick, but.
01:41:08
Any questions?
SPEAKER_16
01:41:09
I would say in the interest of time, if policy board members could direct questions to Taylor electronically, and then if you wouldn't mind replying all back with those questions so that we can move along in the agenda, that'd be great.
01:41:22
Thank you.
01:41:23
Item number five is staff updates.
01:41:25
Taylor, is there
01:41:27
Staff reports here that need to be done out loud?
SPEAKER_03
01:41:31
No, we included our written update for the sake of time.
SPEAKER_16
01:41:34
Thank you.
01:41:34
I don't want to shortchange the VDOT project updates, because a lot of times that's useful information to take back to our boards and for the public to hear.
01:41:42
So we'll move to item six, the VDOT updates on projects.
01:41:46
Sandy, are you taking the lead on this one?
SPEAKER_06
01:41:47
Yes.
01:41:48
Are you able to pull up that one slide?
01:41:50
I can.
01:41:54
We are not going to go into detail on these projects because there's going to be a special meeting next month.
01:41:59
We'll talk about this in more detail.
01:42:01
There are a couple of things that I just want to bring to your attention as changes that have occurred since I talked to this before.
01:42:08
The first one is that after having some conversations with Albemarle County about the two roundabouts on US 250 that were recommended as part of the
01:42:20
the pipeline study that was completed two cycles ago or one cycle ago previously.
01:42:25
We were initially talking about doing one project that would be a roundabout at US 250 and the Canterbury Road intersection and then a second roundabout at Canterbury Road or at the Boreshead Road intersection.
01:42:39
After some discussions about how those two projects would interrelate
01:42:44
We have landed on the direction that we will be submitting Canterbury Road as a single roundabout project and then combining the Canterbury Road and Boars Head projects together into a roundabout bundle.
01:42:56
So those two projects would be combined.
01:42:58
So it would be one project that's just the single roundabout and another project that's like a corridor that includes both roundabouts, access management in between, and the shared use path that could potentially be a connection to the Three Notch Trail.
01:43:12
So we'll be able to go through that in more detail at the next meeting.
01:43:16
The other thing that we just wanted to briefly provide an update on is the US 29 southbound at I-64 exit 118.
01:43:23
This is a current pipeline study.
01:43:26
As was mentioned previously, the concept is still to be determined.
01:43:29
And Sean, did you want to talk about where we are with that project?
SPEAKER_10
01:43:32
Yeah, we're half baked.
01:43:34
So there's no need for us to spend a whole lot of resources trying to get to a solution
01:43:42
for those around the smart scale instead of taking a step back to figure out what is ultimately needed.
01:43:47
We've studied this thing a million times.
01:43:50
What was presented to the public was probably not, like you've mentioned before, Ned, it's like a little small project that really is not solving the issue.
01:43:58
So I think we need to take a step back, figure out ultimately what is needed there for this interchange and the 29 corridor as a whole,
01:44:11
to come up with a solution that we may not be able to fund through SmartScale, but for us to at least have a discussion about ultimately with this interchange and that corridor needs.
SPEAKER_06
01:44:25
Yeah.
01:44:26
So those are the updates on the projects.
01:44:28
Otherwise, everything is moving forward.
01:44:30
We're feeling good about where everything is in terms of being prepared for the pre-application period and the application period for SmartScale.
01:44:38
and the pre-applications open next week.
01:44:42
Any other questions?
SPEAKER_16
01:44:43
All right.
01:44:43
Any questions for Sandy?
01:44:46
I can't see any.
SPEAKER_07
01:44:47
Actually, quickly, just to clarify, and I know we'll get into this later, but so the 250 Kennerberry Road roundabout and then the Kennerberry-Borshead bundle are being proposed as two applications by Albemarle County.
01:44:59
So is that in case one of them doesn't
SPEAKER_06
01:45:05
Ultimately, the best case scenario for this project would be for both of those roundabouts to be done simultaneously because then you can close the access.
01:45:15
And if you're familiar with this area, there are lots of businesses that are right at Canterbury in the westbound direction.
01:45:22
And so the best case scenario would be to be able to close the access and be able to direct anybody that would have been making left turns to one of the roundabouts to provide the access to those.
01:45:33
There just aren't a lot of needs.
01:45:35
Albemarle County staff brought this up and decided to move in this direction.
01:45:40
There aren't a lot of needs at the Boars Head roundabout itself.
01:45:42
The real benefit of the Boars Head roundabout is to try to improve the operations at Canterbury Road.
SPEAKER_07
01:45:50
Right, because one roundabout needs another to have good flow.
SPEAKER_10
01:45:53
But you don't want to not potentially get Canterbury.
SPEAKER_07
01:45:57
So you're applying for Canterbury and you're like, and it'd be nice if we could do Boars Head with it too, please?
01:46:02
Is that kind of the idea?
SPEAKER_10
01:46:03
basically, two different applications.
SPEAKER_06
01:46:06
The other thing that I will very briefly mention is that in the February CTB meeting, they introduced the idea of potentially adding innovative intersections as an eligible project type to the high priority projects program, which means that if that is approved in March at the CTB meeting, these roundabout projects onto US 250 would potentially be eligible to compete for the high priority project funding.
SPEAKER_07
01:46:31
Okay.
01:46:32
Thank you.
SPEAKER_11
01:46:33
Any other questions?
SPEAKER_16
01:46:34
Did Ann have her?
01:46:35
I can't see Ann.
01:46:35
Did she have her hand up?
SPEAKER_02
01:46:37
I don't see any hands raised.
SPEAKER_16
01:46:39
All right.
SPEAKER_11
01:46:39
I did not have my hand up, but I'm following along.
01:46:42
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
01:46:43
Thank you, Ann.
01:46:44
Thank you all.
01:46:45
All right.
01:46:45
And did Chuck have any updates here that we needed to do?
SPEAKER_06
01:46:48
Do you have any updates, Chuck?
SPEAKER_16
01:46:50
Oh, I see stars and pipelines.
01:46:51
That was here.
01:46:53
Yeah.
01:46:53
Well, you have pipeline study on there.
SPEAKER_01
01:46:55
Yeah, I think Sandy's covered it all.
SPEAKER_16
01:46:57
All right.
01:46:57
So we're good?
01:46:59
Thank you.
SPEAKER_01
01:46:59
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
01:47:01
All right, we can do a quick round of roundtable updates as wherever we are at next.
01:47:06
I will, I might need help to catch, I don't have my list of people.
01:47:10
So if, I'll go online first.
01:47:14
Sarah, are we there?
01:47:16
Is Pat?
SPEAKER_03
01:47:19
That is me from Consultant for PACL.
SPEAKER_16
01:47:22
I don't need an update from Pat.
01:47:23
Garland, do you have a roundtable update, Mr. Williams?
SPEAKER_12
01:47:27
I do.
01:47:27
A quick one.
01:47:29
It's been almost two years that we've started on this transition for alternative fuel vehicles.
01:47:36
Actually February of 24, so time has flown by.
01:47:41
For the transit side of the house, two vehicles have been procured.
01:47:46
They should be here late May, early June.
01:47:52
We've gotten the
01:47:55
Charging infrastructure, most of it is in-house now.
01:48:00
The mobile charging units to make sure that the BEV vehicles can be charged while they're being worked on in the maintenance bays have come.
01:48:08
And they say mobile, they're not little small items.
01:48:11
They're pretty big.
01:48:12
You have to use a forklift to move them, but they're in and the charging dispensing equipment is here.
01:48:20
We've got an update from VDOT.
01:48:22
the, I mean, not from, sorry, from Dominion.
01:48:26
We're hoping that the, they will start their work late April, early May.
01:48:35
So we'll be ready when the vehicles get here.
01:48:39
So that's our update.
SPEAKER_15
01:48:41
Awesome.
01:48:42
Thank you, Garland.
01:48:43
Mr. Espy, from John.
01:48:44
Just, we've been working on new brand concepts, new colors and logos.
01:48:49
So that's coming and we are rolling out
01:48:51
Mobility On Demand demo software for ADA Paratransit, City of Charlottesville in April, early April, like March, as well as for Green County.
01:49:00
So those are quick updates.
01:49:01
Awesome.
01:49:02
Thank you, sir.
SPEAKER_16
01:49:04
And well, you'll get your chance in public comment.
01:49:09
Any Jessica and or
01:49:12
I'll let Jessica introduce herself.
SPEAKER_18
01:49:18
I'm Jessica Dimmick.
01:49:20
I'm the new principal transportation planner for Albemarle County.
01:49:24
I'm taking Jessica Hirsch-Ballering's position.
01:49:34
I'll give a couple of updates.
01:49:37
At the county, we're starting to think about development of the multimodal, the county-wide multimodal transportation plan as part of AC44 implementation.
01:49:48
We are planning to go to the county board of supervisors, tentatively April 1st, to discuss the process and board direction for that.
01:49:57
And we're working with VDOT on the smart scale applications, pipeline studies, STAR studies,
01:50:02
and starting to think about some revenue sharing applications for the next round.
SPEAKER_16
01:50:07
Great.
01:50:08
Thank you.
01:50:09
And you were good with this.
01:50:10
All right.
01:50:11
City of Charlottesville.
SPEAKER_09
01:50:12
All right.
01:50:12
I've got a few updates.
01:50:14
West Mainland Ridge was a project that was touched on a little earlier.
01:50:17
We're going to be going for council for a project update on March 16th with that.
01:50:22
And then doing some additional engagement with downtown businesses and residents in April.
01:50:26
Still TBD when and where that's happening and looking for a smart skill endorsement.
01:50:31
application endorsement from council in July.
01:50:34
Rose Hill, we are kicking off a re-striking project on March 10th, which will include a walk in the neighborhood.
01:50:43
We're looking to come to council on June 15th with the conceptual design of how we would change that corridor, basically from Preston to Redby Ave, which means we'll also need to get in contact with some folks at the county to figure out what to do with those schools that are sort of in the middle of that corridor.
01:51:00
More to come on that.
01:51:02
Neighborhood walk this upcoming month is March 8th in the Meadows at 10 a.m. at Best Buy.
01:51:08
This is a neighborhood that's right there on the city-county border and we will be looking at some projects that we have done together including the District Avenue roundabout location and the US 29 pedestrian bridge.
01:51:21
We will be kicking off an onboard survey for CAT in March.
01:51:25
That's mostly led by UVA
01:51:29
We're in t-shirts and out on our buses for a few weeks asking people where they're coming from and going to so that we can understand travel patterns and transfer patterns in our system.
01:51:40
Still working through our e-bike voucher program.
01:51:42
We had 36 vouchers awarded in quarter one.
01:51:45
Sign-ups for the next one is April 1st.
01:51:48
And the only reason I mentioned it is you're getting a lot of sign-ups from county residents.
01:51:52
So we might want to collaborate on how we can expand our program a little bit to maybe all.
01:51:58
Much like Jessica covered for the county, we're also scoping a city-wide mobility plan.
01:52:03
We're developing an existing conditions assessment, sort of looking at our comp plan and how we've performed against it right now.
01:52:09
We're looking at updating planning commission on March 24th, and then we're going to have some engagement around figuring out what the priority topics around for the scope for the mobility plan.
01:52:20
That'll be in May, and we'll continue to impact other surveys as well as update the planning commission.
01:52:27
And last, I'll be doing a much longer version of this ramble, doing an annual update on transportation planning for Council on June 1st.
01:52:36
So a busy spring for me.
SPEAKER_16
01:52:38
Great.
01:52:39
Did I miss anything?
SPEAKER_10
01:52:43
All right, Sean, any?
01:52:44
Yeah, real quick.
01:52:45
240, 250 roundabout project.
01:52:46
We're targeting, hopefully getting that open in the next couple of weeks.
01:52:49
We're just waiting on some signage to open that roundabout and lift the detour for 680.
01:52:54
So we'll check that one off.
01:52:56
Out of that bundle, the Ryle-John Warner Parkway project.
01:53:01
We'll work through a few issues right now and look into officially start construction of that in the next coming weeks.
01:53:06
The exit 107 park and ride lot, we received bids on that.
01:53:09
Caden Construction was a successful bidder, so we're hoping to start construction on that the spring slash summer.
01:53:14
The next project out to shoot for advertising is the Fifth Street and Hove Trail project.
01:53:19
So we're hoping to go to advertise that for the summer.
01:53:23
And we're continuing to stress the need for regional coordination while we've got all these projects on the street for construction.
01:53:29
So we're putting together a group of folks from all areas to sit and kind of meet on a routine basis to talk about coordination while these projects are under construction.
SPEAKER_16
01:53:40
Awesome.
01:53:41
Again, questions about the
01:53:44
Cool.
01:53:46
Did I miss any?
01:53:47
I think I already did that.
01:53:49
I call it anyway.
01:53:50
No one?
01:53:50
Good.
01:53:50
All right.
01:53:51
Back to additional matters from the public.
01:53:53
Any additional matters from the public?
SPEAKER_08
01:53:55
Yeah.
SPEAKER_16
01:53:56
You can do it from here if you'd like.
01:53:57
OK. We've got three minutes.
SPEAKER_08
01:53:59
OK. Paul Grady.
01:54:03
I want the chart committee back.
01:54:07
Ann was the chairman.
01:54:11
And in 1999, 2000, I made 10 presentations to that committee.
01:54:19
And one of my ideas actually made it into the 2025 Longway Range Transportation Plan.
01:54:29
So I really think you should have a committee where the public can
01:54:40
make a presentation that's longer than three minutes and have some feedback from it from the committee.
01:54:49
I mean, you know, making a presentation here, three minutes and you don't talk, you don't ask questions, you don't, you know, it's very frustrating.
01:55:02
And I've got five or six more ideas that I'd like to present.
01:55:09
That's all.
SPEAKER_16
01:55:11
Thank you, sir.
01:55:12
Any other additional comments?
01:55:15
Peter's not looking in, so I don't think Peter's going to do a round two.
01:55:18
Got it?
01:55:20
All right.
01:55:20
Thank you for all the remarks earlier and now for public.
01:55:25
And that being said, our next meeting is our special meeting.
01:55:30
It's the SmartScale workshop on March 20 at 3 p.m. And do we have a location on that, or is that virtual?
SPEAKER_03
01:55:37
No location yet, but we'll be in person.
SPEAKER_16
01:55:39
We'll be in person.
01:55:49
It's Friday together.
SPEAKER_07
01:55:52
Quick question for Taylor since we, the staff report, we're skipping reading that aloud.
01:56:00
When everything is presented in text, it's hard to know if there's any emphasis.
01:56:05
Anything in particular you want us to call out or note is
SPEAKER_03
01:56:09
To highlight items of note, I would definitely say we have submitted grant applications as of February 1 for some of the core TJTDC programs like Rideshare, our PATH program, which is our mobility management program that grant application went in.
01:56:24
And we should hear back usually a draft budget from DRPD and VDOT comes out around April and then they vote on it in June.
01:56:32
So that's when we will hear back about those.
01:56:35
We also submitted yesterday the application for the build
01:56:39
Grant for the Rivanna River Bicycle Pedestrian Bridge.
01:56:43
So that went in, I think those are the two largest ones.
01:56:48
There was also included in your package, should anyone be interested, we did not receive the Safe Streets and Roads for All grant that we applied for last June, but we did attend a debrief meeting and we included some notes in your packet if you're curious to hear about the feedback that they have from that.
01:57:04
Great.
01:57:04
Thanks.
SPEAKER_04
01:57:06
And then not in that staff report, but based on the results of this meeting will be prepared in your next regularly scheduled meeting, not the SmartScale workshop, but the next one with a red line version of your bylaws related to CTAC and making sure that there's inclusion of language on standing up ad hoc committees as requested.
SPEAKER_16
01:57:23
Cool.
01:57:25
Great.
01:57:25
Any other items?
01:57:26
Appreciate y'all's patience as I zoomed through the last 20 minutes.
01:57:30
All right, then the next special meeting was March 20.
01:57:34
The next regular meeting is April 22.
01:57:36
That will be a virtual meeting as noted on the agenda.
01:57:38
All right, so without objection, then we are adjourned.
SPEAKER_02
01:57:41
Thank you.
01:57:47
Thank you.
SPEAKER_16
01:57:49
Can we work into the bylaws that you can't show any members?