Transportation Planning Organization Meeting - Sep 14, 2026

Welcome to this September 14th meeting of GACPO, Gainesville-Lachua County Transportation Planning Organization. All right, first up, roll call and confirmation of quorum. Yes, sir. Chair Willits? Present. Vice Chair Hay-Santos? Here. Member Alford? Here. Member Book? Here. Member Sarton? Here. Member Chesnut? Here. Member Cornell? Here. Member Desmond Walker? Here. Member Eastman? Here. Member Engel? Here. Member Cynthia Chesnut? Here. Member Priscilla? Member Taylor? Here. Member Ward? Here. Member Wheeler? That's it. Member Brown? Is there a member of DOT sitting in? Louise, here. I'm here, but I'm here. Okay, thank you. Member Dixon? Is anyone from UF here for Ms. Dixon? Mr. Chairman, we have a quorum. Thank you so much, Madam Director. Next up, we have approval of the agenda. So moved. Second. Chairman, I apologize. Could we move the biped presentation in advance of the budget? So that's down at? Still moving, making 7-1, item 2. Just swapping 7.1. 7.1 and 7.2, all right. I move that we approve the agenda with that change. Second. All right. Thank you, Commissioners Alford and Member Hayes-Santos for that motion. Any discussion? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Next up, we have approval of the minutes. The minutes are from the June 15th meeting. So moved. Motion from Ms. Hurtin. Second. Yeah, Commissioner Cornell. Commissioner elect, I shall say, certain. Any discussion about the minutes from June 15th? Seeing none, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Those opposed, say nay. Motion passes unanimously. I don't think I have any chair's announcements besides a good Gators one on Saturday. So, right? So, we're all in a good mood. Maybe UF is still cheering on. I will say that the new UF president met with a lot of the city commissioners last week. I know I had a meeting, so I'm sure in some of those meetings we talked a little bit about transportation or other kind of items. So, it was really good to have them come talk to us. And hopefully that kind of direct listening, and he called it a listening session, so that at least on the city side we could talk. And then I don't know if that's happened on the county side or whether next week. All right. So, yeah, get your ideas lined up if any of it's transportation related. That's good. All right. Now, at this point, we have public comment. If any members of the public would like to speak and have their three minutes, we have a podium and mic up here. And please tell us your name before you get started. Yes, my name is George Dondonville, and I'm here to ask a favor of you all. More directed toward the city commission rather than the county commissioners. It's hard to get to some of the city commission meetings. About three years ago, I live in Mill Pond, which is just off of Newberry Road at 48th, Northwest 48th Place. And I came to Seth Wood and said, Seth, what do I need to do in order to get a sidewalk placed on the east side of 48th from Newberry Road down to what is called Second Place, where 50th comes in and joins into 48th, but down to whatever reason that corner is called Second Place. And he said, just write it up. I'll get it on into the plan somewhere. And sure enough, it appeared on the city's plan. Seth no longer works for the city. So I have nobody to turn to other than I sent an email, and it's to his short-term replacement, who's sitting back there. I was sitting just behind him earlier, to complain that I don't think it's still on the list. Or if it is on the list, it went from being on the list where it was about third or fourth place to somewhere, kind of came to my attention at the BPAP meeting the other night when Ms. Winfield presented the master plan, which this doesn't appear on, and I can understand that, because it wouldn't appear on this MPPO master plan. But I just need to know who I need to talk to to make sure that that sidewalk is still in the eyes of the city's transportation department and somewhere at least back up on the list where it was before and not having dropped off to 99th place or something, and we'll never see a sidewalk there. It's a dangerous area. People walk there all the time. I walked it this afternoon. Sometimes I'll walk it two times a day just to get across Newberry Road over to Gainesville Health and Fitness or to walk up to the bank that I go to. So that's all I have to say, and I thank you very much for your time. Thank you, Mr. Donovanville. I'll make sure someone from city staff reach out to you, whether that's still on our mobility plan that is, a fee at least has definitely not been passed by the state, but our basic plan has been passed. Do we have other members of the public? Come on up. Do we have... Do we have access to the overhead today? We do? Okay. Can you pass that around then? We have it. Hello, I'm Joe Prager. I was invited to talk to you today about the last mile of Southwest 75th Street, which I have been trying to get help with since 2008. I've emailed all of you a copy of the illustrations and also other documents related to this and my presentation. The last mile is not a small neighborhood street. It's a two-lane county collector road. It serves 520 homes and seven Kanapahaw area subdivisions. It encompasses all of rural route 12. It has all kinds of traffic. It's also a shortcut between Southwest Archer Road and Southwest Wilson Road. It's a cycling route. I notice it's number 247 on your bicycling packet is the pavement and the trails part of it, but I'm talking about the road. In 2008, this road was number 26 on the Alachua County paved roads priority list. By 2011, and I've included a copy, it was number 25 out of 417, and then, as this gentleman mentioned, it disappeared. It's not on the TCIP. It's not on the interactive map. It's not even on the excluded roads list. In fact, no replacement for our 46-year-old road is planned through 2036 or beyond. Now, it's easy to see when you look at the images that our road won't last that long. How did this happen? Nobody knows. Perhaps somebody confused it because it's named Southwest 75th Street, with a lot of other projects also named Southwest 75th Street. They marked it done, and it fell off the list. Thanks to Commissioner Alford, in March, the Public Works Department came out and made temporary repairs to our road. You can see them there. There are 48 patch strips. Some of them are 20 to 30 yards long. In places, three patches run side by side, and yet new potholes appear every time it rains. We dodged a couple just getting here today. In fact, Public Works were out there on Friday. There's a picture of that, fixing potholes with cold patch. That was this Friday afternoon. So I'm asking for three actions here. I'm asking this committee to restore the last mile of Southwest 75th Street to its rightful place in your TCIP program. Put it on the interactive map, and I'm asking that Public Works conduct a current traffic study and a pavement condition analysis. They have not done that. Right now, the road bed's crumbling, yet it's marked for 55-mile-an-hour traffic, and they're doing repeated patching. And finally, I'm asking the commission or this organization to fund the replacement of this last mile of Southwest 75th Street. So it's finally done after 46 years. Thank you very much for your time. Mr. Prager. Good afternoon. My name is Paul Merrill. I am the CEO for the Gainesville Regional Airport. I was asked to come out and give a little bit of commentary about wayfinding signage and then our monument signs that are along Waldo Road and 39th Street. So there are some in the community that have complained that it is difficult to find the entrance of the airport. And we're dealing with kind of two different things that are going on. I have included with the fact that I handed out a couple images that you can see from, like, the Google Maps when you're approaching. You can see the monument sign is a little bit small and difficult to see. And then there is limited signage provided by the Florida Department of Transportation. It's standardized signing that they provide usually. It can be limited to just an icon of an aircraft and an arrow. So when you are driving at 55 miles per hour, it can be easy to miss. So there's been a request from some in the community that we explore working with the Florida Department of Transportation to create more of an overhead-type sign that would be along the road to give people a chance to see that the entrance is coming. And then there's been requests that we take a look at our own monument sign. Currently, the challenge that we have there is that we are restricted in how large that monument sign is based off of city code. We'll be working with the city to see if there's a chance that we may be able to get a variance for that and design something that is larger and easier to see. If that is unable to be done, there is also, in Florida statute, that the airport has the ability to create its own signage. design standards in order to accomplish that task. But we think that they, working alongside of the city, we may be able to accomplish without having to kind of go that route. But we did want to make sure that we are aware that we are giving those kind of complaints. But we do want to work with all of those individual organizations to come up with some solutions. So if you're hearing that, know that it is on our radar. And we hope to be able to come back and show you some progress on that. But thank you. Thank you, Mr. Merrill. Do you have any other members of the public who are here to speak? Looks like not. I lost my hand. All right. Do we respond to public comments? Would you like to? I would. I would like to actually make a motion to ask our staff to look into what we need to do to add the last mile of 75th Street to the TCIP list. All right. Is there a second? Second. All right. Commissioner Alford and Commissioner Parizia. Can our staff, do we, off the top of our head, is it in our TCIPs? Did we drop it at some point to county roads? So it's not? Okay. Oh, I think it was on end. Okay. Is there any discussion about this motion to just have staff come bring it back to the cadet? Point of clarification, the TPO does not look at pavement management, just capacity projects. So it would not be part of, for instance, the LRTP. County staff can look into the pavement management plan and see where this project is going. That'd be fun. So is this, I'm sorry, is this, can someone clarify, is this motion, like, appropriate? No, I don't think it is. We'll take care of it at the county level, but I think the county's got some direction. Okay. So you're withdrawing the motion? I'll withdraw the motion for this meeting, and we will address it with you. Okay. Mr. Mayor? Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I am interested in whatever we can do to help the airport out with better signage. I agree. I would also like to, and I don't need to make a motion on this, I just want to put it in everybody's thinking. I would like there to be a welcome to Gainesville sign on the east side of, or excuse me, the west side of Waldo Road coming out of the airport exit. That is a significant sign, and this is, we're glad you're here, instead of, eh, eh, eh, glad you're frightened, but okay, see you. I would prefer saying, we're glad you're here, and welcome to Gainesville. So just putting that out there is something that staff, and maybe your city staff, and maybe your workline. Commissioner Book? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. This came out of the Tourism Council last week. One of the members who's sitting behind you, Chair Cornell, just talking about economic development in the airport and things that we can do to boost. And I think that led to the Executive Director coming, so thank you, Erin, for being here, and certainly it would be a good topic for us to take, perhaps, at the GPC, the General Policy Committee, related to the airport or a presentation, and we can deal with that within our collective body there. Commissioner Chestnut? I just want to say that I love this sign, the top one, if you're going to take a vote on any of it. Mr. Haysan, please. Yeah, if the committee's interest, or if the committee's interested, having the airport give a presentation just on kind of where flights are, where are things going, I don't know if there's interest on the board for that, but kind of, I think that might, oh, there's always questions about that, so, yeah, I'd like to, if we can work, Madam Director, on scheduling a time for the airport to come give a presentation just on where it is in the future and kind of updates on things. All right, if we're ready to go forward. All right, on to action items. We're going to start with the 7.2, Approval of Alachua County Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan. Good afternoon, TPO Board. I don't usually read off of things, but I want to make sure to thank certain folks. So, Allison Moss, Transportation Planning Manager for Alachua County. I kind of have worn two hats through the development of the Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan. Before the presentation, I just wanted to say a few words. So, Commissioner Eastman and I had the opportunity to deliver a joint presentation to the Office of Greenways and Trails back in July at the Austin Carey Learning Center. The master plan was favorably received by the OGT Council and with the council chair implying that the master plan might be raising the bar for MPO-led active transportation plans throughout the state. As such, I wanted to thank the TPO Board for its interest and investment in the countywide Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan, without which we would not have been able to develop a plan of this quality. I also wanted to thank all of the agency partners, so county folks aside from myself, City of Gainesville staff and University of Florida staff who helped champion this project and project manage it. Last but not least, I wanted to thank Kittleson and Associates. Though paid to work on the project, they definitely went above and beyond to understand and deliver the scope of work even as it evolved. This was a true collaborative effort, and I thank you all for your partnership. With that, I will introduce Jennifer Musselman from Kittleson. Thanks, Allison, and good afternoon, everyone. As she mentioned, her name is Jennifer Musselman. I work for Kittleson here on behalf of the TPO to present about two years' worth of planning to come to the countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. I'll do a quick overview of background goals, community engagement, a lot of what you all have already heard in past presentations, and then spend more time talking about how we developed the network and ultimately prioritized projects to move forward. Oops. So this project was funded by the TPO and led in partnership with Alachua County, City of Gainesville, and University of Florida staff. So a great collaboration between these agencies to create a plan that's cohesive across the county and doesn't have stops and starts of jurisdictional boundaries because we know people travel throughout the county and don't always even know where they are, and so the fact that all of these entities came together to create this plan is pretty amazing. The plan identified a series of policies and programs to set up long-term success and then ultimately identified gaps in potential projects to move forward. So we started by taking a look at what exists today throughout the county, what streets are currently comfortable to walk and bike on, spent a lot of time with the community to understand what an ideal network was for them, and then prioritized projects and did a pretty extensive feasibility review to figure out what was likely to move forward. The plan had six main goals. So safety, of course, first and foremost, improving safety for people walking and biking, creating a connected network to get people where they need to go every day, incentivizing active transportation to create a healthy community, trying to prioritize projects in historically underserved communities, increasing the number of walk and bike trips that happen across the county, and then ultimately creating a plan that could move forward and was implementable. We identified a set of policies and strategies for each of these goals, and these were tailored specifically to unincorporated a lot to a county, though they could easily be adapted to other municipalities that are interested in them. So these are just a few examples in the plan, but for safety, setting safe vehicle speeds on streets throughout the county, prioritizing projects on the high injury network, for connected network, having a consistent crossing spacing, so folks can get across the street easily and consistently, and prioritizing infrastructure close to schools to start some of those healthy habits early on, and prioritizing infrastructure and communities of concern, adopting a mode shift target, and then aligning budgets accordingly, so trying to increase the number of walk and bike trips that happen in the county, and then establishing dedicated funding sources to move them forward. Many of you have probably heard of the 5Es or the 6Es, or I think we're up to 8Es now. So engineering is a big one, and that is the focus of the plan, is what are the actual infrastructure investments that we can make, but we know that's only one piece of the puzzle, and so we wanted to look at these other facets and how to move the needle on improving the walk and bike experience. So again, the programs were tailored to unincorporated a lot to a county, but could be easily adapted to the cities as well. So the 5 key programs that we identified, the first is measuring success, reporting outcomes of projects that we can learn from them and build momentum on them, training professionals, so agency staff, consultant staff, so that when they're designing projects in the county, they know what a safe walk and bike facility looks like, prioritizing investments and especially low-cost countermeasures in underserved areas and on the high injury network, exploring road safety audits for any project over a certain threshold. So say it's a maintenance project, county staff would still go out, walk the corridor, and see what safety improvements could be made and incorporated into that project, and then establishing a 20 is plenty toolkit. Jacksonville has done something similar to this. You might have seen it there, but prioritizing low speeds on our neighborhood residential streets. So we had great community engagement throughout the plan. This is a very engaged community, and they definitely came out and made their voices heard. So we had three in-person public workshops throughout the process. We heard from over 2,000 people throughout that process, had 600 location-specific comments, so I want a sidewalk here, I want a crosswalk here, and then also met with both an agency working group and a community-focused group throughout the project to vet our ideas along the way. So it's just one example of some of the input that we got from the community, and I think it's great to see that they're prioritizing safety just as much as staff bars. By and large, the highest priority for the community was improving safety. Then getting into the network development, the bulk of the plan is to create a visionary network of what walking and biking can look like in the future. So as I mentioned, we started by looking at what streets were comfortable today, and that foundation to build off of. We then envisioned what an ideal network would be, a dream network, trying to have consistent route spacing about every quarter mile in our more developed communities, and then kind of scaled back based on where streets actually exist, where public right-of-way exists, to create a network of still really good connected streets to get people to destinations that they need to access every day. And so this resulted in our county-wide bicycle and pedestrian network. You can see here, I don't expect you to see all of the routes in the map, but a couple of things to highlight here. In the more urbanized area in the center of the county, you see that consistent grid network of routes so that there's choices pretty much anywhere you want to go in that central part of the county. There would be an option to walk or bike there. And then as you get into the outer parts of the county, it becomes more of a hub-and-spoke model. So connecting people in and out of Gainesville between the cities and the outer parts of the county, and then routes within the smaller municipalities as well to get people to community destinations. And then we took all of those segments and split them into close to 500 projects by the end of the plan. So thinking about more bite-sized pieces that an agency could actually move forward. So it might be unfeasible to build 20 miles of a new trail, but could we build two miles that can still have a high impact? So breaking up projects based on logical endpoints, and then also grouping similar projects, so perhaps a bundle of sidewalks in a neighborhood or a couple of bicycle boulevard routes that could all be constructed simultaneously in a similar area. Then for each of those projects, we identified a preferred facility type. So on our low-stress, low-volume streets, bikes can maybe comfortably share the space with cars and bike in the street and, you know, in their neighborhood. But as speed of traffic increases and volume of vehicles increases, so does the separation. So more separated bike lanes, more trails, more shared use paths in those areas. And then we prioritized all of those projects. So prioritization was based primarily on the need for the project, but we also wanted to prioritize projects that could move forward in the near term. So project feasibility was 35% of that total score. The need score was based on the six goals, how well each project met the goals of the plan. And then the feasibility score was based on seven different categories of big-ticket items that can really influence how much a project costs, how easy it is to do. Are we moving curb? Are we moving utilities? Are there trees in the way? And so then with that information, we also put together a planning-level cost estimate for all of the projects, so based on the cost of the facility itself and then some of those potential feasibility challenges, what it would cost to mitigate those for the project. And so this resulted in a couple of different project lists, and you have those at your spot here in front of you. So the first one is a county-wide project ranking. So this is taking all of the projects, ranking them in one list so that the TPO can use that to advance projects later on. But within that, there's different ways to sort it. So if the city wanted to see what their top projects are, they could sort that way. If the TPO wanted to see what project was highest priority for Sun Trail funding, they could prioritize that way. So there's a lot of different ways to sort projects and make it a little bit easier to digest there. And so you have the full list of projects in your packet, and then you also have these couple of maps. So the first one is the top 50 county-wide projects across the whole county over the top 50 projects. Most of them are going to be within the city of Gainesville and the Alexandria County Urban Cluster with a few you can see here in Newberry. But we didn't want to lose sight of those that we're calling long-distance connectors. There's the way to get into the outer parts of the county. And so we prioritized those separately to see which had the highest potential moving forward. So you'll also see long-distance connectors and then opportunities to convert old rail lines to trails evaluated separately as well. This piece of this puzzle is a crossing review. So you can have the most amazing trail in the world, but if you get too busy street and you can't get to the other side, that trail doesn't do you a whole lot of good. And so with all of these projects, we looked at where they cross busier streets and flagged those areas for potential crossing upgrades. So maybe there's traffic signal today there and it's working relatively well. Maybe there's nothing there and we need some sort of device or treatment in the future. And so you can see all those little dots. I think they had close to 1,000 crossing locations identified throughout the county and then prioritized those as well to try to help with decision-making going forward on what ones could have the most potential in the near term. So that included what was there today. Again, is there some sort of treatment there today or is there nothing at all? What the priority of the neighboring project is. So if it's a high-priority project, we want to prioritize that crossing as well. And then the proximity to the nearest crosswalk. So if the nearest crosswalk is two miles down the road, we know most people are not going to walk to get there. So increasing the priority of those locations to fill those long gaps. And so to kind of close us out here, I wanted to share a few examples of how all of this work came together with a few rendering examples. So this first is one of the segments of the Hogtown Creek. This is kind of behind the Lowe's if you're familiar with that area. So you can see today it's kind of an unmarked, unpaved trail, but perhaps in the future we could come forward with a fully paved trail, incorporate some of the city's wayfinding signage and connect it into the larger system. Then here we have Southeast 43rd Street. So this is right by Lake Forest Elementary School. So this is an example where currently there's an on-street bike lane and a sidewalk. But what if we combined all of that space and made a really nice shared use path on each side, now create a space where you'd feel comfortable sending your kids to walk or bike to school in the morning out of the way of vehicles and traffic. Southwest 16th Avenue, I think this is a great example of a relatively easy, low-cost project that can make a big difference. So currently there's a buffered bike lane today, so that buffer area is just striped. But we could go out and add a concrete separator, pretty low-cost treatment. And now it's much more comfortable and really increases the safety of the people using that bike lane. And then the last example here, Southwest 20th, 24th Avenue. So this is one, not even really an on-street bike lane, just kind of a narrow shoulder there. And then a sidewalk setback from the roadway. So again, kind of combining that space into one really nice facility with shared use paths on both sides of the road. And then we could even get some street trees in that space and make it an even more comfortable environment for people using the facility. And so we'll get to the recommended motion here today to hopefully adopt the plan. And then from there, we start looking for funding for these projects. So many of the mechanisms have already come up today. Different agencies, CIPs, could be part of the TPO's list of priority projects, different grant funding opportunities. There's also a series of projects in the plan that we've called developer-driven connections. So these are large tracts of land, generally in unincorporated Alachua County, where we're trying to plan out where the routes might go. So as development comes in, you can have better conversations with those developers and try to work together to get those connections made as well. Then each of these projects would have to go through more detailed planning and environmental steps, design, and then hopefully ultimately construction. And I wanted to highlight here that community engagement would happen throughout. So this is just the start of the engagement process, putting the plan together. As each project moves forward, there would be more engagement through project planning, design, and then construction of those projects. So happy to answer any questions, take any comments. And then this is an action item, so recommended motion for you all to consider this evening. Thank you. Thank you so much, Ms. Musselman. I'm sure we're going to have a lot of questions and discussion. Commissioner Offord. Thank you. In doing the ranking, did you consider location of schools or history of bicycle incidents or other safety concerns or bus routes? Were any of those things considered in the ranking process? Yes, all of those things. So safety, we looked at bicycle and pedestrian crashes specifically, and then we also looked at the city and county's high injury network locations. We looked at proximities to schools, bus stops, also other destinations, libraries, community centers, things like that. I think there was a third thing on your list. That was it? Yes. So those were all specific criteria that went into that. I thought so, but I wanted to verify. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Member Hay-Santos. Thank you, Chair. One thing I'd like to hope that we can put this in the motion is that we kind of put into practice that every five years, we come back and reevaluate this. That's good practice, and we don't want to wait another 20 years, and also, like, where people move, new jobs, all those things change. So I think it's important to come back and see what's actually changed, see if we need to reevaluate and prioritize it. One just thing on ratings. Did you, was in terms of, was the number of people who would use it, was that kind of where it would be ranked as well? It came into account in a couple of places. The proximity to destinations is kind of by default, also kind of population density. Metric. We also looked at places where people had propensity to make short trips today, so that came into play there as well. One other thing, just verse, a lot of this is off our multi-use trails, which are probably the most expensive one that can be done in terms of these facilities. And I guess, is there any recommendations in there, like, trying to do this whole thing with multi-use trails, it's going to be hundreds of millions of dollars, probably to do it all, of doing more of our protected bike lanes or just doing kind of more intermittent things that can be done, us waiting to, oh, we have to have all the funding to be able to move forward on this. I feel like almost nothing will get done if you're trying to get the perfect. Was that taken into account of kind of, there's measures, you can put in some bollards and that gets you 75% there versus not, and it's 90% cheaper. Right, and I'll let agency staff weigh in as well because we definitely had a lot of those conversations within the project team too. There was also a lot of conversations of if we have a shared use path on one side, we don't want to lose that opportunity, so let's move forward with that while we still work towards the ultimate vision of the project. So, Allison, do you want to add? Yeah. I know communications wants me to skip into a mic. Can I just yell? Yeah. Yes, in general, if there was space within the roadway, then a separated bike lane would be considered. So it wasn't just all facilities have to be off the roadway. It was the fact that there's scarcely space to do more than a five-foot bike lane, and you can't put a physical delineator or separator if it's only that five feet. So in that case, we've reasoned that a 10-foot-wide shared use path is far superior to a five-foot painted bike lane and a five-foot sidewalk. One other thing that came into play was the sort of land use context and the overall anticipated volume of users. So if the total number of people using the facility, for instance, around University of Florida campus or the downtown area was very high, then you start looking at separating them just to mitigate potential conflicts between the users. So if you have regular bikes, e-mobility, e-bikes and e-scooters and pedestrians all in one space, that can become not very efficient and conflict-prone, so we look to separate them in those cases. But yeah, if there was space within the roadway, that's certainly more cost-effective. There just are very few opportunities to do that without, say, lane repurposing. One other thing I would say is that the recommendations of this plan are not set in stone. So if there was the preliminary development of a project and either circumstances changed or the state of practice changed or willingness, whatever the case may be, there could be openness to doing a different sort of project that still met the same intent. And I guess just one other thing just on multi-use paths. I mean, you're at 10 feet, but I guess when that kind of works better in a more rural setting, or maybe not suburban, what are there differences in multi-use paths depending on kind of the density of the area and how much was expected? 10 feet was used as the standard throughout, but I would say for the most part, the shared-use paths are recommended in suburban land-use contexts or in rural contexts where the volumes would be quite low. We even have them proposed for just one side of the roadway. In the higher-volume context, I think we really would be looking to do a separated bike lane and then a wide sidewalk as well. And just one other thing for two commissions, I think, to consider is just on funding. A lot of communities do bonding as a way to fund this. That's really, I think, the only way is to have some kind of dedicated source to actually start to move forward and gain significant traction. Thank you, Chair. Members Hurtin. Thank you. Alice Knight, the example that was given in here, it kind of brought back to my memory. Southwest 20th, 20th, 62nd, and the swag. Well, I know the bridge is DOT, but I'm wondering, I don't see like that stretch of road at the foot of the bridge on the western side that goes back to southwest, I mean, I think that's 8th Avenue that goes into the swag area, and back up to back east at the other side of the bridge that goes back east beyond 62nd because that is like, something is needed in that area and it's a really high-use area. A lot of pedestrian traffic there now because of the demographics and the residents and how that is, and I don't see it on here. I saw the little small inset that was mentioned as an example there, but I'm wondering if you all considered any types of recommendations around that particular intersection there. So I'll try to answer the question and then let me know if I've understood correctly. So the entirety of southwest 20th Avenue from 34th Street to Parker Road is identified as a project in the countywide bicycle pedestrian master plan. The part that was shown in the rendering may have been just a select segment, but the part to which you're referring, I believe, is the number one. Is it the number one, or it's definitely in the very top tier, southwest 20th Avenue, number seven of all the projects. And the county has received a raise grant from Federal Highway Administration to do planning for the segment that's the sort of I-75 bridge. So that has kicked off recently and then has also received, county in coordination with the city, has received a SS4A, which is Safe Streets and Roads for All, supplemental planning for the entire southwest 20th Avenue corridor. Sort of seeing that that area has pretty urban land uses in part of it, but we still have this kind of rural section roadway with swales and just missing facilities. It was just kind of throwing me because I saw the little insect graph here, and I did see this here, so I wasn't sure if it was two different things or whatever. Yes, the segment that is missing a pedestrian facility altogether is definitely an incredibly high priority for the county and in this master plan. Thank you. Commissioner Chestnut. Thank you. I have a particular interest in number five. Can you share with me? Can you remind me, please, what number five? It's a separated bike lane, West University Avenue, State Road 24, from Southwest 13th Street to Northeast Boulevard. So a separated bike lane there is, you mean in terms of how it would be accomplished? Yes, yes, yes. I'm just trying to figure out if you're going to take a bike lane through my house or exactly where? Northeast Boulevard. What are you doing there? The project would be on University Avenue. It won't be on my side. Thank you. We could move your house. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Thank you. Okay, with that, Councilman Taylor. Thank you. Ms. Moss, may I ask here for the city of Waldo on 121 shared use path, have you guys figured out, like, how are you going to continue to run that because we did a one lane coming into Waldo because that's a lot of some of the residents who want to know how is the bike path coming along and how is it going to run from Gainesville into Waldo? This is a question specifically once it hits the city boundary in the city of Waldo. I don't think that is determined yet, so there was, you know, an opportunity to do a separated bike lane with the FDOT project. Since that was not implemented, I don't think it's known exactly what the connection would be through the city of Waldo. Again, there'll be an initial, if the project gets funded and we have applied for SunTrail funding but have not heard back from FDOT for that project, then there'd be a look at feasibility and alternatives that may be possible. And with all of the other rural areas as well, with the long distance connector ranking, can you explain that to me a little bit more because we're ranked number four and I see if it goes three, four, five. Explain that again. Would you like me to explain the term long distance connector? Yes, ma'am. We fall in at number four. Yeah, so long distance connector is sort of a category of projects to explain or to sort of highlight projects that are a very different animal than urban, say, city of Gainesville and county urban cluster projects. So they are all, they're shown in the packet over 13 miles long. So they're, you know, they'd be expensive projects. They would necessarily have drainage improvements. They may be eligible for different types of funding than projects within the urban area. Jen, would you like to add? Yeah, I was just gonna add, they were scored with the same metrics as the rest of the projects, but they're in the same relative order but wanted to pull them out separately as Allison said, since they are just kind of a different, different hand. Yeah, and I'll just piggyback. Because they are in the rural area, they would, in general, not have as much usage as a project in an urbanized area. And so therefore, we wanted to put them, sort of showcase them separately so they're not at the way, way bottom of the list because they are also potentially eligible for a different type of funding. For instance, the SunTrail funding source for which Waldo Project is eligible. Why would they think that it wouldn't have that much usage? Like, we have the bikers out there all the time and they're in droves coming out on 1471, like, they're on 1471 and they're riding all over a little small... Yeah, it's just the sheer numbers you would get in an urbanized area will be higher than a rural area, even if it's a popular recreation route. Okay, thank you. All right, Commissioner Duncan Walker. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Staff, I probably can figure this out, but I just would like to for a point of clarity. Let's see. The item that is Northeast 8th Avenue overall ranked at 21, we've got a very clear from point, but we don't have, apparently, an end point. Can you just give us the point of clarity as to why we don't have an end point for that? The proposed end point is a new path that does not exist yet, so it's one of the other projects would be the proposed end point. But we could, let you know what the approximate end point is, even though it doesn't end at a specific street. It would be more like geographic coordinates than a street that exists today. Oh, okay. Like near the intersection of, do you guys know what it is? It was what, it was project number 21. Yes. So it'll show up on the map on the first page there. So it starts in Main Street, and then it goes to this kind of eastern edge of the city here with a new proposed trail. Oh, okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Oh, no, it goes all the way there. It's east side, correct? Say it again, so it's not going to Waldo Road. It was passed all the way to what would be an east side. So you can see, if you're looking at the map here, it's this new trail here would be the eastern end point. like, what's the church that's over there? Mount Carmel? Yeah. Going all the way to Mount Carmel? Mm-hmm. Oh, well, the neighbors have spoken against that. Well, and it's still... Like having a sidewalk? Everything, well, it's a lot of conversation about northeast 8th Avenue all the way down right now. Gotcha. Yeah. How many, how many... Commissioner Duncan Walker? Yeah. I'm good. I conclude for now. Thank you. Member Dixon. She had a question. Yeah, I just wanted to really emphasize and hope that you will think about flexibility as you use this document to implement because it really is a guide and we talked about that a lot in the working group meetings and I really want to thank Allison and the Kittleson team for all the work they did on this and all the input they took throughout the process. So, you know, thinking about how these get used in terms of recommendations you also have from corridor studies and how these might be implemented as part of larger projects versus programmed as independent projects and all the different possible funding sources and I think you're hearing some of those comments today just in terms of, you know, specific community priorities and speaking from the university community, you know, I think we all have agreed for a long time that the projects on 13th Street and University Avenue around campus are very important because there are the high volumes there, there's the history of safety problems for biking and walking in the streets near campus. Those projects don't shake out as high in the list here as we might like but I think that's just kind of a function of the process and how these projects got sorted but if you think about them in terms of the corridor studies that have been done and how those entire corridors are important in the community, you know, you may think about certain, those projects and other ones in here that kind of have a context that may not be fully reflected in the report but you may, you know, as you're looking at these projects and you're prioritizing what lists to put them on, how to fund them, you know, just kind of keep in mind that bigger picture and so this isn't necessarily just go down the list, you know, one, two, three, four. I think it's set up to have some flexibility in that kind of review. Commissioner Cornell. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I found the second and the third rails, the trails ranking. I couldn't, oh, never mind. I just saw it right now. Number 184. Yeah, I'm good. Okay, then I had Commissioner Book. Yeah, thank you, Mr. J. This is really a culmination of I think it's about three years of work but maybe you could kind of talk about, I mean, this is not something coming up now. This was a really lengthy project we've been talking about for some time and you have 442 different projects listed so it's tremendous to figure out how do you rank 442 projects and you've talked a little bit about that. Talk about how this plan interacts with our DOT plans, our long-range transportation plan, our transportation plan, our unified work plan, because there's priorities in those also and so just talk a little bit about that, how this interacts with three plans that deal with funding and big projects which I think also is what you, Ms. Dixon, are alluding to is we have some prioritizations and big things that have studies and research behind it so just talk a little bit about how this informs those and works with those. Right, so I can start and then staff can definitely add so as Linda and others have mentioned there's a lot of different ways that these projects can be funded moving forward and one of those is absolutely the TPO process so prioritize potentially in the long-range transportation plan and then ultimately as part of the list of priority projects to then move into the TIP and the five-year work program so that is how kind of the series of events for the different plans would interact. As you developed these, you know, 442 and I know you've got the ranking there, are there, do we know, are there conflicts with this and some of our existing plans there? And I'm not sure that that's even, that that even matters at this point but I would like to know that. We tried our best to incorporate other agency plans as best as possible. Some plans are, you know, farther back so maybe new thinking has emerged since then. Some things maybe aren't quite as feasible to move forward so there might be some slight differences between plans but we definitely tried our best to incorporate especially the campus plans from UF, the city's ongoing mobility planning efforts and then plans that the county had. Yeah, one other comment is you provided some really good examples up there of potential places where this plan would cover. The one that's very different from the others is actually Hogtown Creek because there's been lots of discussion about that over many years where they've talked about potentially paving it or making it different. That's just a future discussion. There's some folks who would have no desire. I think there's been a lot of discussion about that in the past and a lot of engagement about that particular area and what that would look like just because of their environment versus the path and use and multimodal. That's a conversation for another day. I just, that one is very different from the other examples but you did provide some good examples. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. Commissioner Prizia. Yeah, I mean, I guess I, one, would like to say a huge thank you to everybody, the City of Gainesville county staff and TPO staff and your team for doing this. It is a major lift and I was able to see some of the community engagement and filled out the survey myself with my own priorities and it was really, really easy to use and I sent it out to all the groups that I could think of and had others say that they were really happy with it. So thanks for the extra mile on the community engagement because I think it makes a big difference in getting, you know, quality information about the actual places people walk and bike. So thank you to everyone and I'm happy to make the motion to adopt the, sorry, the bike and pedestrian master plan but I did, I guess my question is can we get TPO staff and county staff and city staff to like, can we get this plan with like, where these projects land on existing I guess it'd be nice to understand like are these already on existing funding plans for the various agencies, right? Does anybody have a plan to fund these in the next five years or parts of these projects? So I think, I know you incorporated that into the, how you figured out if they were feasible but us understanding, you know, who's on first in terms of like, where it sits as a priority for funding with the long range transportation plan or with the county's infrastructure funds, it'd be great to know. We can, I think, Mr. Chair, we can do that as just sort of local staff, use the, it's a not beautiful but very informative Excel spreadsheet and we can go ahead and add yet more columns because we started down that path but for graphic purposes in the report it was going to be kind of crazy with icons and sometimes there's a little bit of, you know, subject to change element within local funding as well. So sometimes, you know, something is funded but it's not quite fully funded or, you know, our mobility plans can cover a lot of these projects as well but that's subject to development happening and that plan being fully funded. So, I'm sorry. I was going to second her motion and ask her to just make a slight modification. Could you ask staff to identify which of these are funded in the next five years and then add and how they're funded? That's what I just said. Yep. Right. And then ask that they come back to us every, is it five years? Every five years. Is it the right time frame or is it should have been done? And that has actually been done already. So the 442 that are on this list are the unfunded projects. You can see in the map they don't stand out quite as well in the gray color. Projects that are fully funded for construction are documented separately within the plan. So they are part of the overall network. We just didn't prioritize. So these numbered? These numbered ones are not funded at all. Correct. Yes. We have 483 total projects. They might have some partial funding on them. Maybe a study is funded. Maybe there's some grant funding. The funded projects on the plan are fully funded through construction. That's a smaller subset. Okay. So I have a motion from Prizia and a second from Prizia. And I'm happy to add that we bring this back. I guess I would look for some guidance from staff as five years. That long? That sooner? Too soon? Like, you know, Adrian was talking about having it come back for sort of like a refresh, just kind of take a look at, review the way we do the long-range transportation plan or other documents? So I would say that part of the element, one of the E's is evaluation. So I think at a high level we can look at what has been implemented and kind of track progress. That would probably be doable within five years. but a more comprehensive update I believe would not. And I would say that ultimately this question I would want to defer to TPO staff because it would be likely requiring funding for an update even if it was a relatively minor update. Yes, Mr. Chair. So one of the things that I've asked or I've been asking is to have the city staff and the county staff and the university share shape files so that we can map these projects in relation to the list of priority projects that we've just had county staff map as well as the ones that are funded from the LLPP by DLT just to see as well as the county's recently completed safety action plan and have all those shape files put together on a singular map so that it's overlayed so that we can actually identify where the priorities are where are they shared are there crash data that match each other we're also TPO staff is working with the technical advisory committee as well as CAC to re-evaluate how we're scoring projects from the lens of all modes not just like pet only projects or transit only projects but rather all the modes to see where we can prioritize our planning dollars for studies as well as our construction dollars as we enter into 2029 when our SU funds get freed up Okay Well, my list I have Eastman next or you want to talk to Eastman? Yeah Well, first of all thank you Allison and everyone Can I just wrap up? Sorry I guess I'm just saying he was asking me to change the motion but I was going to say I think maybe we leave it without the that piece and we just talk about evaluation in the future Okay, great and we'll leave it Okay, so the motion we have right now to adopt this plan and to ask for staff to bring back the list of that crossover priorities that Anach just talked about like seeing where we have the overlay between our different plan mobility plan safe streets for all plan this plan Okay so that's long range plan That's a motion by Prisia and Cornell what we have right now Okay Mr. Eastman Yeah, so it's been 22 years since we last updated our bicycle pedestrian master plan this is I mean this is exactly what we need to really I mean to do corridors to understand so that we're not just building these sort of funny offset areas that have a bike lane here that might connect over there might not connect over here I yeah, I've watched this thing kind of build over time I was there for I think I try to be at every community engagement session but we've done I've done biking with a commissioner where we kind of bike around and look at these things we've done tabled with this stuff I have I think this is a really great tremendous plan what I really want to make sure of because if we built even a fraction of this we would have a much safer much better bicycle network that is coordinated across jurisdictions and really allows people to connect from their house on all ages and abilities roads so that kids would be able to get around people that are good at cycling would be able to get around it is not just our cycling system as it is now where it's just really made for recreational cyclists that feel comfortable in high traffic how do we make sure that everyone can feel comfortable getting to school getting to the university what I'm curious from Allison is so we it almost feels anticlimactic like we've spent years on this it's been 22 years since then what comes next after this so we pass this and then it's passed it is officially done it is to Ms. Dixon's point a flexible document which is good except also that like that could mean how flexible how do we what comes next after the passage here to make sure or maybe this is to Kittleson as well to make sure that this is that we are implementing it and being flexible but still you know remaining this as a ongoing plan Mr. Chair at the risk of sounding a little dry so for each of the agencies that participated that will be taking it to their boards requesting that they also adopt and for the county's part we'll be seeing if there are comp plan amendments that we should be doing to better align our existing comprehensive plan with this work and from the TPO's perspective I think it's how does this fold into the list of priority projects so we've got this very extensive analysis for bicycle pedestrian projects and we have the long range transportation plan which was recently completed but we have different modes and the list of priority projects is supposed to capture them all so that is something that Director Whitfield is going to be working on this fall with you all just kind of looking at how to incorporate that and then for I can only speak for the city of Gainesville but I mean obviously a lot of the TPO work is related to state roads things like that so you'll be coming to the Gainesville City Commission at some point and talking to us about this plan how it could be implemented into our city staff would do so okay yeah I mean I would like that there's also policies in here like the 20 is enough policy safety audits there's recommendations in here that go beyond just the physical infrastructure that I think is worth I think that would make sense to do across jurisdictions as we're you know repaving roads how much does this get implemented how much what I like about this as we go around particularly in the county you got and we in the city are going around paving roads putting in infrastructure how do you fit the bicycle pedestrian master plan so that it's you know just a marginal cost on top instead of trying to retrofit an old road how do we fit that into our processes this kind of starts us on the planning process forward not if it sits on a shelf and say okay great well we have our new bicycle pedestrian master plan now we'll move on to what we were doing before the implementation of this is as important as voting on it today but thank you to everyone for all your staff for all your hard work on it I'm very excited with how this goes up I'll say the greenways and trails you mentioned how enthusiastic they were about it they were very enthusiastic they said that they did not the intersections in particular are not something that you see implemented into this very much but as a cyclist you reach a high speed road it hurts and it's not safe to cross that doesn't feel good like and I think it takes Allison as a cyclist actually being on the street seeing how these things work we have a I think a very forward looking bicycle pedestrian master plan here that if we do implement it will go very far so thank you to everyone all right next I had Commissioner Cornell but was that just for the motion Commissioner Cornell I just had a quick question I noticed there's a number of segments that are within the University of Florida campus how are those coordinated those projects are really directly from the UF campus master plan and so the comment that was made a minute ago about updating some of the agency plans our plan would not need to be updated because those are just the projects straight out of our plan as it's adopted now and we just threw them in with the ranking just for completeness the ones on the map are on there yeah okay all right I was just curious well the yeah the projects are in the campus master plan as identified needs not necessarily funded I got you yes just to be clear okay I'm gonna I'm gonna have a couple comments and then I'm gonna get to a few more so on slide 23 I don't know if all those pictures are intended to be local but the one on the bottom right-hand corner has a colored shero that if that's the city of Gainesville one we have removed it FDOT do not get mad for us for a non MUTCD compliant colored shero that is not in not in its own bike lane is what I'll say so when if we I have a question about the kind of the recommendations are there there at the top one of them was about crossings the one to two blocks potential policies is that in this or is that just a recommendation and what I'm getting at is can we somehow does this give us some leverage or something to continue to talk to FDOT it's slide 9 number potential policies do these how do these interact what's the kind of the purpose perhaps because I my specific thing I want to talk about is the southwest 13th street where there's not a crossing between 16th and roughly 2900 blocks so that's 13 blocks and I know that's a state road but if this at all gives us anything to say hey you know to FDOT to say listen we really internally we're not just picking out one we have a policy yeah so I think the policies are not binding the TPO doesn't have authority over the roadways however they represent a lot of research and best practice survey from across the country and so there's a very good basis for those numbers and they can be used I think to leverage and have those conversations with FDOT okay thank you and then when they said the propensity to make short trips is that from like geo data phone you know yes or is this or is it are there other data sources or is this basically now the standard practice it's from a data set called replica which does use in part phone based data okay so that's real data so we know this propensity for short trips because I was also my next thing I was also Mystics and I was very surprised that that that one particular section on Southwest 13th like is not you know super high not up there because we know that the people use it the students use it and that it's a missing chunk specifically we've identified the university the city and this TPO has identified it as a missing chunk so this is got some questions about that and then Commissioner or Mr. Hayes-Santos was mentioning about bonding and I just want to use the example of where I grew up and went to college we have Arkansas when they had a tax you know measure they went to the voters with the list ahead of time roads they had some infrastructure but over the course of I think I think they're under a second or maybe third version of this they specifically had the trail list and so I think that's really this is that opportunity so that in the future if city or county or if they go to voters any way to ask about you know funding for it whether that's bond whether that's you know other portions of infrastructure surtax to have that list is important I know the school board when they did their half cent at some point they had a list I believe and I think that helped the community understand but while it faces public places countywide citywide doesn't quite have like the list ahead of time before you ask the voters so this is really important I think not that hey this is 492 projects but we could pick out in the future whether city is asking for money whether county is asking talking to the voters this is really good to have something to say on the pedestrian and bike side I think that's really good particularly if we need to pick some from each bucket because if it's a countywide kind of thing you can't just say oh it's just going to be sidewalks in the city of Gainesville it may be picking one of these very great long long distance trails that's going to be maybe a safe to get around but we also know it's going to be tourism right like great tourist draw so I really appreciate having this even if it's 22 years late or however late we want to say it is and so I had a similar question to I think commissioner book about how does this work you know kind of and we can get into that later about how does it work with the existing projects where we're at and maybe that's the question also for like city staff is knowing this when you bring when we're working on something because we have our own priorities or we have our own funding and how are we going to be referencing to say oh and by the way this fulfills part of that so that we can you know check that off the counties and maybe that's something for city staff to be aware of when things come forward when we say why are we doing this or or not just that the city wants it or some constituents but oh it also fulfills a part of this I think that will be helpful I think that's all I had and now I'm going to go back around remember hey santos thank you chair it has been a long time I think this board made the motion to move forward this in 2017 I believe it was long long time ago nine years and I very much appreciate the staff very different staff but I very much appreciate the staff for moving this forward and getting this done while the city that is one of the reasons why I think it's important we don't have to fund it in five years but just to it's a discussion point in five years look at it because things take a long time whatever gets brought about and our community will change tens of thousands of people move here and within five years traffic will change where the incidents all of these interactions that come across of how this list is being prioritized will be different so I think that's why it's important to at least have a discussion in five years and it's kind of just written down that hey we're going to come back don't have to fund it but just that that future board can make that decision if they want to relook at it again but at least it's on there also good to see what we did yeah there'll be one request to amend the motion again but not the fund thank you chair next with commissioner wheeler in the back yeah very just real quickly I have a hard time finding all the road knowing what all road numbers are but my concern of course is santa fe high school accessibility and the safety up there at that intersection and also rockborne high school and the kids that are trying to get over 301 is that there are projects for both of those I don't know exactly where it seems to me that they would be a priority you know anywhere there's a school with a big intersection and a lot of traffic going through that that should be a priority same with Waldo when we've got the little you know now the school that's going across and kids getting to the playground at the depot so I just didn't know where they rank or if that would put down further let's get yourself up here there's probably going to be a lot more conversation and while you're moving as Anat mentioned there will be an online map posted so it'll be much easier to navigate than this table that we printed just for discussion today but yeah you'll be able to zoom around and see specifically where every project is so are they high or no no I don't know Mr. Chair off the top of my head how those two projects rank I will say that with input from Commissioner Prizia a few months ago we ended up looking at the overall ranking and seeing that some projects serving schools were not ranking very high we ended up sort of adding an additional factor for projects adjacent to schools and that did elevate some so you know we put a lot of thought into the sort of model and the ranking methodology and so you know not seeing school serving projects up very high did cause us to want to go back and give those a little bit of a boost but we didn't sort of pick and choose we just uniformly if a project was directly adjacent to a school it got bumped up another notch so thank you I would add just lastly that safe routes to school is a grant funding source for which those kinds of projects are eligible okay thank you I just think there's a lot of traffic congestion around those areas if we can encourage the kids to walk or ride their bikes that would safely make it a priority thank you Mr. Chair I think this is probably at the big picture level just another example the way we've reimagined the MTPO the last three years it's a very different organization than it was before I think the fact that we have significant engagement efforts has been terrific that this is the culmination of a plan is very very important and the motion in particular I like essentially what I would consider the continuity between saying how does this interact with those others will be absolutely essential and it'll be important for FDOT too because they'll be looking for how did you come across this how did you value this why did you fund this and when you have all these plans not necessarily in alignment but show how we basically got to a particular area with factors and ratings and some of the categories that we've seen up here I think will be very very helpful for the planning and funding and for DOT and I think it'd probably be beneficial for them also Mr. Chair I don't know if they were interested in saying something but before we move the motion you may want to hear from I just think that the motion with the continuity and it's in a relationship with basically our required plans is really good and very important I'm happy to add to the motion that we annually evaluate the Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan so that we get on the agenda annually and we at least know that it's going to be on the agenda it's going to be looked at it's going to be discussed I think that if the seconder is okay with that and that might get to Adrian's point so it's not just a project sitting on the shelf but annually at least annually we're kind of reviewing it around hopefully aligned with our LRTP conversations and cost feasible stuff so we can be thinking about these projects in context with those projects but is the seconder okay with that it sounds like the motion in second is to update just to add that annual it's not a restudy but it is no just an annual review of the Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan and the evaluation of projects an update and that way it gives us a chance if it's really off base because it's been five years and we look at it and we're like whoa then we could then make that board at the time could make a call in case hoverboards have come in yeah we know and then I have Mayor Ward thank you Mr. Chair just briefly want to remind anyone who's watching at home and everybody around the table that every person who has an opportunity to use bicycles and pedestrian opportunities for transportation to commute to work is one person who is not on the road driving a car and we have we added just to the city of Gainesville I don't know about the county but according to Bieber over a five year period we added 10,000 people to the city of Gainesville so if you go back to 2017 we probably added a minimum of 15 maybe 20,000 people to the city of Gainesville that's a lot of cars that's a lot of cars so we want to and we can't we're not going to add a lot of streets for those cars right so we've got to do something differently one of the things we do differently is adding a reasonable number of bicycle and pedestrian opportunities for transportation yes they also get used by kids yes they also get used for exercise for being out in the world and that's a very good thing but these are transportation and the more we treat it like transportation the better our car traffic is going to be just wanted to put that out there of course Mr. Mayor and I'll say I ride my bike to the FAU football game for tailgating and only because UF has such kind of good facilities across it I was one less car on the mad rush to tailgate for the FAU game about a week ago Ms. Dixon I just wanted to actually respond to your comments Mr. Chair on 13th Street if you were referring to the gap kind of on this map on 13th Street between Inner Road and Archer Road that's one of the projects they mentioned earlier is kind of in that light gray because it's funded those are in the current DOT work program so hopefully they stay in there and they actually get built the ones I was referring to were kind of the rest of the pieces on 13th Street and the trail the shared use path on the campus side of University Avenue those projects were in the corridor the complete streets corridor plans and then some of the other that's what I meant as well the campus side 13th from yeah in that same section 42 yeah and also the projects on Fletcher and Buckman roads on campus which ranked high in your LRTP but we pulled them we all agreed to pull them out of the cost feasible plan at that point but they really extend the 17th and 18th Street cross sections that the city built with the one way pairs and the cycle tracks and that's really what campus was trying to extend those so those are some that I still want to make sure stay on your radar all right Mr. Engel I just want to say that looking at the website version of this the online map there's a you navigate there's a lot of information on it's a small bit of the work that went into all of this but it is very accessible that's really good all right and then if I can I'll go to any of our partner agencies if there's anything to add specifically to presentation or some of our questions whether FDOT I know there's been some of these questions someone was asking if FDOT could chime in right do we have a specific question if they were interested if not okay we also have a city staff with our transportation department in RTS but it sounds like we're good for now if there's questions from city commission I'm sure we will be pounding city staff about understanding where things fit in all right with that then I'm going to go to a public comment do we have members of the public who would like to speak to this much ballyhooed long-term work that we've been working on some of our members of the public kind of commented on some things earlier good afternoon my name is Dwayne I just wanted to piggyback on Miss Mary her comment of what she was saying earlier I think the recommendation that the FDOT have for A and B I think is good but also you know about the Santa Fe College those roads you can almost lay a baby in those spots out there and it's you know for bicyclists or pedestrians you know need walkway I did see where they was putting I'm going to say that's like southwest 16th where they started putting you know concrete but I think that it definitely needed more of a walkway bicycle for students to get back and forth to school and as she mentioned Waldo Waldo and southeast 15th street so I don't know exactly where it is on the agenda like far as like we know we've been having promises that it's going to get done but I think the community would like to know like a more specific date of when it's going to get done so I think you know like I said just wanted to comment on her comment and just kind of get a clarification of when it's going to get done for those two areas Santa Fe College southeast 15th street and Waldo those type of thing if there's a timeline for this new schedule or is some of that we've been looking forward to and then just for the public and also just a rumor I have to remind myself not all of these 400 projects are funded not all of them but this is about a prioritization and identification an ability for us to when funds do come available or we're looking to apply for funds we can go oh what is that first priority I'm very interested both on city and the county side and TPO is that when the next hope you know at some point if there's a federal push towards this kind of stuff in a recession and they have you know a building or kind of a roads bill that is not just the transportation bill the highway bill that when they say hey what do you need what do you have ready we say hey we got ideas and some of this at our last meeting we talked a lot about how far stuff has to be planned but some of this can also go into that the county having this beautiful document ready to say we do we do have dreams and prioritizations for some of that some of that funding I think it will behoove us to have this and as the commissioner you know the group you talk to they know that having plans like this is important not you know for vision but also for real like the ability to achieve later on should things change do we have any further discussion on this big big big multi-year 22 years just to update it about what eight nine years of active work on this endemic thank goodness Allison was here through all of this on the county side and on the TPO filling in the gap and to director Whitfield for coming in kind of a midstream on a very long process and thank you also Ms. Musselman and to Kittleson and Associates all right I don't see any other conversation speak now forever hold your peace for hopefully less than 22 years or less than nine years hopefully a little more frequently all right all those in favor say aye aye opposed say nay motion passes unanimously thank y'all all right on to now to 7.1 approval of annual operating budget FY2627 director so she can see faces when folks are talking Mr. Chair so item 7.1 is the adoption of an annual budget to coincide with the UPWP that the board adopted back in May I don't know if there was an annual budget prior to my joining but I felt like it's one is important so this is discussed in the proposed bylaws but I didn't want to wait on the bylaws being taken action on before we actually come up with a budget so this is the letter of authorization that we received from the DOT as you all know we had the obligation of $1.096 million this letter of authorization only reflects the $1.6 million that we get per our planning dollar allocation so because of that this draft budget well this first budget this is our PU UPWP PL funding in this line so it adds up to $1.185 in one year which we know exceeds the $830 that we get if you divide the $1.6 and a half so working off of the PL dollars this is $830,000 $65.50 and this is the breakdown as far as staffing for three employees total with the TPO professional development this number that is in pink is not added to this total because it's local dollars not planning dollars this number here is $6,000 is the total on an annual basis of the staff services agreement between the TPO and the county this $40,000 is not added to here presumably because before years end hopefully we'll be fully staff so it's money that's spent while the consultants are on contract as augmented staff but not in the official budget in terms of office supplies just the ballpark 800 that was what the board approved in the UPWP our subscriptions is the MVP marketing website update and our annual auditing it's in the PL funds now we are skipped this year from auditing purposes because DOT gave us a year for us to get our everything in order so that'll move over here for it'll just move into the next budget or if we adopt an amendment so that leaves us for tasks two through seven which consists of the LRTP update the data collection our maintaining our TIP online public participation ITS systems update and special projects for purposes of easy math I moved all of these to up here and then whatever is left over we just throw into special projects so based on the UPWP 19,000 is the contract that the TPL signed to maintain our CIP for the next year out of the $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 for systems planning $50,000 of it was what the board approved for congestion management planning so there is a task work order through an existing general planning services contract to do a congestion management process and ultimately a plan that is required federally for becoming a TMA and is also required to be updated annually so this big ticket number $50,000 is to set up the process with the annual updates hopefully it will be less just keeping an eye on the data and then using the same process so that's congestion management plan right a big thing is about how many people are in transit or bikes and pedestrians are walking and not in cars like how does the congestion management plan interact with a plan like the one we just adopted so the bicycle pedestrian management update basically identifies where there are facility gaps and what kind of strategies go into fixing those gaps the congestion management plan looks at the system in terms of how it operates where are congestion is separated into two categories recurring things that are bottlenecks things that happen on a regular basis where you know congestion is going to happen don't go there between these hours non-recurring is there's a crash there's construction there's a special event so it looks at the average daily trips crash hotspots where there might be identified deficiencies one of the tasks that we are looking at is beyond identifying goals and priorities which will align with the LRTP is looking at the data I've asked the consultants to look at the county's data DLT's data all of these plans that we've looked at so far and put them in a pocket and let's collate the data not just absorb the data let's look at it and tell us what is the data telling us and it may be that the congestion is because there needs to be signage or changing signalization or diverting traffic to another route is transportation system management operations is how can we utilize our existing infrastructure to move traffic without necessarily adding in lane capacity adding in lane capacity is like the last resort for a CMP so if we were to make bicycle improvements how does that play into how the system works is basically it it's how do we manage congestion so that we can lessen we can't get rid of congestion but how do we lessen congestion by manipulating the infrastructure that we currently have so there's a lot of data out there we just need to collate that data and sort of have it tell us what we're missing at the same time is looking at what causes crashes so looking at crash hotspots and then the rest of that leftover 250,000 is going into the last 35,000 possibly because the bike the bike pad mass plant update has I guess leaped into a piece of this fiscal year so the 35,000 is just a typical 10% set aside in case there's extra buildings that didn't get covered in the last contract and then planning for transit and then general consultant services for any studies so PL dollars can only be used for studies this helps us to identify if we only have $115,000 $200,000 left in our PL dollars we have all these needs and requests how do we spend that $200,000 so the next step that I want to bring back to this board in October is every task the consultant team because Ellerton have been keeping track of all the projects and requests over the years in the Excel spreadsheets that she mentioned I've shared that with them and anything that DOT already has so they've created an updated version of the spreadsheet what is the project segment to from who asked for it when was it asked what's the status and then we're going to compare that with the list of priority projects that's currently in the books and then compare that with the list of priority projects that DOT has funded and then compare that to the LRTP are we still going in the same direction so it's a bunch of little steps that hopefully will be like a final product that the board can see this is how these are the projects that we've got so far what are their statuses what projects are a priority at this point now that the city's vision zero is done the county's safety action plan is done this bike pit master plan is done and that the multi-layer cake that I mentioned as far as all the pieces together what pops out as being a priority in line with our congestion management study is will fixing providing a pedestrian and bicycle improvement here help to alleviate the congestion that this study is identifying or will it also help to alleviate crashes if we make improvements to this intersection will it reduce will it result in reducing crashes which ultimately results in reducing congestion so thank you for that update on congestion management we haven't talked about it much right so that was good commissioner cornell you had a question I'm just going to ask director we would be eligible for reestablishing that million dollars next year no it's so in the draft bylaws you'll see that I placed it with a november october september timeline which is the same as the counties and the cities and the federal federal government the july june timeline which is what our upwp is based on it's the state's fiscal cycle so we won't know until about the d-op until the federal government's budget cycle starts so we'll hear from okay as to whether or not we get the obligation back at that point I'll process a budget amendment to add those funds to our annual budget move approval of the tpo annual operating budget second cornell motion and engel second director ruffield do you have more to describe with this budget I do want to share one thing I so as you guys know I'm very familiar with district 5 and the metro plan orlando area district 5 has a group called best foot forward I don't know if you're familiar with them they are a semi public but they're publicly funded agency that their sole task is to do before and after counts pedestrian counts bicycle counts vehicle counts as it relates to traffic congestion and fatalities their whole focus is bike pet safety I reached out to their executive director before when I first found out that I am coming here to ask if they could extend their service to Alaska County at the time she wasn't able to do that but she reached out to me last week and said that based on the level of pedestrian and bicycle fatality the DOT has funded them to extend their services to all areas that have high bike pet fatalities Alaska County is one of those counties now so they are offering those services at no cost to us for two years so I'll be meeting with them in the next couple of weeks to see how best they can utilize their services we have a bike pet master plan adopted now next up for me in my mind is let's get some counts to see where are the activities happening whether they are on system facilities or where are they happening organically so Amanda gosh I just I just renamed her Emily Emily and her team can help us with that if they'll be the ones that scopes everything out they'll give their scope to DOT it gets funded through DOT and then they'll do the counts for it so that's something that hopefully I'll bring an update on and at the October meeting Director Redfield can you either now or later give us some definition on what that high fatality is because when that gets said at a meeting like this is that something new is that something old is it something we already know is it because of recent data that alarmed me a little bit not because I'm unaware of but you know when we define things like that people in the public are going to respond I'm going to pause on that and bring it back to the board once once I get the direction from the board with DOT's definition and how they arrive at extending these services to those other counties to the initial council thank you so much all right is there any other conversation about this item this motion from the board are there members of the public who would like to speak to this item our budget for 2627 our operating budget see any all right with that all those in favor say aye aye say nay motion passes unanimously all right next item item 7.3 is just a sort of a procedural checkbox approval of the roll board you all did this last August August 2025 basically these are projects that are in the state TIP that between hopefully I can explain this correctly move staff recommendation it's easy I have a motion I have a motion from Sporelli it didn't make it into the June cutoff and now we're putting it in there I made a motion and you had 17 seconds is there any discussion about the roll forward for 2731 TIP is there members of the public who would like to make a comment on this item seeing none all those in favor say aye aye those opposed say nay motion passes unanimously all right next item we are on to discussion item okay discussion item number one the draft bylaws so I sent you all the original draft back in like mid-August and I've had one-on-ones with all of the board members and we discussed this with TAC I also had Amanda Carpenter with the MPOAC do a peer review of our draft bylaws so she's provided her inputs so what I've sent out in the agenda packet is reflective of many of the comments that I've received so far so I separated the discussion on the bylaws to this initial bulleted list the other section of the bylaws relative to the executive committee I've added as I'm sorry the local funding contribution as a separate PowerPoint item line item so what I would like for to get from the board today is a board feedback on you know the vision statement the mission statement the rules of procedure I've had some questions from individual members with respect to our current rule which is Robert's rule which is very strict there was a suggestion to use the counties which is a modified and the cities which is also a slight modification and I believe the vice chair has also suggested Rosenberg's rules I've read that as well I've prepped our TPL attorney to provide guidance if he has any at this time for whether or not Robert's rule or a modified Robert's rule or anything like that I left Robert's rule in this draft bylaws because that's what's in the 2019 bylaws but we don't necessarily operate exactly in accordance to Robert's so up for discussion if you all decide to just leave it the way it is and we will continue to operate the way we have been that's totally fine as well so is your goal that we take this home read it and adopt it next meeting or are you looking for it's listed on the agenda today as a discussion item so adoption in October so I looked at the MPOACs bylaws and procedures metric plans Miami-Dade a little bit of North Florida's and preparing our 2019 and 2025 because 2019 had a lot stuff that 2025 didn't 2025 had things that 2019 didn't so it's transitioning from just bylaws to bylaws rules policies and procedures what I would like from this group today would be your direction on the formulation of the executive committee like how many members you want who those members might be so that I can work that into the bylaws themselves so as proposed is for members the reason being that the executive committee wouldn't actually make any votes the meetings will be sunshined of course or noticed but it's not votes it's just recommendations for staff let's say if there are five items that we're contemplating can we narrow it down to three that they think the board might continue with and then present that it's also meant for exigent items that require an immediate action such as a grant application or if DOT says hey we've got some money for a project do you have any projects right away I would just convene that executive committee really quickly to just get their feedback on yeah put this project in or offer up this project and then those decisions get ratified at the next board meeting and for everyone's reference these packets include the old bylaws the amended bylaws and then the new draft with the red lines so the executive committee would be made up of the chair the vice chair the past chair and then one regular board member appointed by this board right there was a suggestion that it be two regular board members appointed by the board or the MPOAC representative and the local transportation disadvantage representative it can be however the board decides just know that all decisions still lie on the entire board this committee would just provide guidance to staff as we're working on projects I like it I think it's a good working committee of folks that are vested in this obviously officers plus whoever else wants to participate I think it's a good I don't think we should add the other two members I think it should be kind of an act of three to four members I have a question for anybody who's been here a while who was chair in the past did you have normal monthly meeting with the planning council staff did agenda review typically a couple weeks beforehand was it pretty helpful it really wasn't a working board or what we're going to do right so what I'll say is my experience with working with director Whitfield has been though it has often been agenda review it has been a really good opportunity to dig in a little bit and to start to express some of just what I kind of know and understand of this board and so it has been useful but I do think a committee so that more people on this board are you know when when four people are super prepared it helps all of us and so that the director can if there's any help she needs and hearing some guidance and some feedback and be a little more prepared I know she met with a bunch of us recently and I'm so I'm sure she's super prepared to look at bylaws so I and then there's sunshine so if someone has if they're not on that committee if they want to come they can and yeah yeah page 21 it's okay I'll just oh here it is page 21 if people have preferences on who would be I don't if we include the past chair on there I have to be on another committee for you I mean it's ostensibly if it's a chair and vice chair we rotate back and forth so there would be a member of the county and a member of the city at all times it's just that third member you know being do we want it to be one of the small cities do we want it to be you know what I mean like how do we care if that executive committee I mean it's going to be more for procedural stuff so I don't know that it matters too much my preference is that just two members appointed it could be the past chair it could not be the past chair that's just my preference people people who are interested you know we really really are paying attention I mean the chair the vice chair makes sense in case the chair gets held up can't make it sure so Mr. Hayes-Santos yeah I do think having an odd number though is if it's actually agreed like okay we're going to move forward on this or not so chair vice chair and one regular board member so you guys do you want to shrink it to three or do you want to expand it to five no I think shrink to three yeah I mean to that same point I mean under traditional Roberts rules the chair can't make a motion so if you lose one person the executive committee your stuff yeah if one person's out of town that week I thought they were saying this board wouldn't vote and information only this is a non-voting board it's a non-voting board it it is voting it makes recommendations right so it's just like any of our advisory committees or subcommittees in a legislative sense where you're moving it forward but I mean it's votes it just can't take final action if you have five then three is a quorum so that's something to consider what'd you say five if you have five executive committee members then three would make a quorum so as I understand it we would vote on things like if there was a grant that came forward with FDOT suddenly got some money they wish they could spend it we happen to get a shot of that we're going to have to vote on instructing staff to do that and by the time it makes it back to this board that action will have been taken and this board will be they will be making decisions that will be signed off on this board eventually but like the fact that they made the decision and it happened based on their votes I mean I think having a five there so you can have a quorum so there's not any questions about that makes more sense to me than having three which again I think you have one person councilwoman taylor mtpo representative and then the transportation board those are two people we left already just don't leave the rural areas out we have some money that comes up and we just have someone that's sitting from the city and around and we don't have anyone from the rural area speaking then we're going to get left out again so please don't leave us out no you can be elected to any of those five positions you want to be named in that list that's what you want no not me per se but whoever you're going to have for the rural area just make sure you have a rural seat director Woodfield what was the we had a brief conversation would the intention be that these would be meetings in person this committee or would they attempt to do mostly an online meeting I prefer in-person meetings simply because we don't have all the technology in place really to have public input and engagement like this room for example is very difficult for someone to speak into so in-person is probably best my preference your experience as our rural member the past almost two years is like meetings if we put this on a rural member and there's an additional meeting once per month or twice per quarter or once per quarter or as needed an emergency comes up so I didn't know whether that's will this put a barrier on who gets appointed from what's our next city is Alachua our next city is that in January August of 28 I believe or August 27 okay it was from when we signed I mean to Adrian's point we could appoint the rural person as a representative to the transportation disadvantage so they would be have a which is that's largely in the rural area as well so what you're looking for is chair vice chair past chair and then the representative of the advisory council and the representative of transportation disadvantaged local board and then the representative for the Florida MPO advisory council and the transportation disadvantage local coordinating board that's my motion I mean do we need a motion or do you just need direction no I just need direction that's what the board wants does it address councilman Taylor's concern about the rural representative I think it does because this board can appoint the rural representative to any of those positions do we want to tie ourselves into these very specific I mean someone might want to be the MPOAC person I guess it makes sense for them to be on an executive committee of some kind but kind of like the flexibility before of saying anyone like if you know so that someone can raise their and say I'd like to be on the executive committee this particular obviously the chair the vice chair previous chair or we're just doing chair vice chair at this point right chair vice chair previous chair and then two members just anyone that we wanted to be I mean that way at the meeting someone could say I would like to be on this someone will say I'll take the MPOAC that could be the same person it could not be it just like for instance I think we don't have anyone from the city currently for the MPOAC because it's during city commission meetings right I mean so things like that can just be funny right like if we give ourselves a little more flexibility I would agree when you deal with bylaws the more flexibility is better the more tied into specific requirements the more difficult it is to get the group there that you want in any event so you might want to do just commissioner Cornell something like chair vice chair past chair and two and the governing board is going to make that recommendation and vote for that anyway and it's likely to be those categories that you indicate but it also doesn't tie us into something it doesn't tie if the person happens to have a day job and can't make the meetings and doesn't want to have to have that if they're the role representative they're not stuck in that role and messing up quorum all the time and looking further in the bylaws the executive committee meets when it needs to meet it doesn't have a regular meeting schedule clearly it'll meet if there's an exigent emergency circumstance there's some considerations in here for that but it probably be something like once a quarter or something or as the executive needs them for some guidance on a short term item but flexibility is good I wanted to get your thoughts on the composition of the technical advisory committee that would be if you could turn to pages it starts on 24 and it goes into 25 so in the current bylaws there are nine members three city two county the bike pit advisory board liaison the airport the two university departments and the school district in the 2025 bylaws RTS was added what I'm proposing is that since we are going countywide is that we also expand that to county environmental protection department and also representation essentially two states for the west side of the county and the east side of the county based on the environmental nature context of the west versus east as well as the population sizes of those communities so the west would be comprised of the communities of high springs alachua newberry and archer the east side would be lacrosse waldo hawthorne and mickinopi if the board approves this then my next step will be to reach out to each of these jurisdictions and find out who would like to take the first dive and then set up a rotation like how we do for the rule representative and then also a member of the transportation local coordinating board on the TAC since they serve transit dependent folks people who are in need of special social services and things like that were you first I didn't have one I saw it so I was looking at the two things that stood out to me for the technical advisory committee was the word shall on there it shall be comprised and 15 different you have to stick with that and then the second part was on page 25 it talks about municipality representative for west and east I would probably take out those words west and east and don't create division and if you informally want to have two municipal representatives then the board figures out who those are and you do them but I would probably defer to my county colleagues more on that one but why create division where it doesn't exist and say now it's west versus east county it's north versus south and just have two municipal representatives and eliminate that language I actually don't necessarily agree because I think that the west side of our county and the east side of our county are very very different and I think it's one thing to say or to creating separation but I don't think it's creating separation it's creating making sure you have representation right from the east side of our county which is very rural and very light populations and has a very different makeup than like over in Newberry and Jonesville and Alachua and what we're seeing with those so I feel like we really do need both sides of the county represented because they're going to have very different ideas about what's needed I hear what you're saying about the division but I don't I think it's more about representation than it is about division Do you like it? I like it Yeah Member Serden I was going to say I liked what Director Whitfield said about the differences in the community so I didn't see it as U.S. I saw it as representational so I think that the eastern quadrant of the county what I didn't want to see happen is that there was some quadrant because more people more development what you feel like they should have an outside say in two representatives and we leave folks out you know Councilwoman Taylor is always saying don't forget the role of person so I do think we having two distinct positions and I was going to I had my hand raised because I saw Alachua across that and I know Director Whitfield and I had talked about having Alachua in group with the western part so I was like wait why is that cross out and then I saw that's why I looked my hand down but I do think we should have two separate groups so It's originally it's Alachua County but that's why it struck Right yeah and when I saw it I was like wait you know but I saw it in the theater so All right Member Harry Santos Thank you Thank you Chair So you're saying it's nine right now? It's nine That's a big jump of going to nine to 15 I mean big boards are a lot of people these are staff members are trying to make like either technical advisory committees and trying to make decisions and moving forward it's a lot of extra people to harder to get forums harder to just I mean I don't know just figures not always better in terms of meetings and actually trying to get them to be productive because this is the board that's supposed to really get into the nitty-gritty So I have kind of the opposite spectrum on that is that we haven't historically reached out to the small jurisdictions in the past I'm not talking about just that you have to take four positions The other so with 15 we need eight for a quorum The I think there's an interest from the other cities and I think that there's also an interest Or there could be an interest from the transportation disadvantage I'll be speaking or talking to them On November 4th You know it's it's we hear concerns from folks about transit and access and how we when we do our meetings and how we take our actions and stuff like that I guess I will know more when I go to meet with them at their November 4th meeting I have a suspicion that they would want to be seated at the table to voice their concerns with the folks that they represent Yeah, I agree I have a question about just how many planners engineers and other technical staff are represented in the cities of La Crosse, Waldo, Hawthorne, and McEnoughy Or is this like it's gonna be a city commissioner because you know they've got a city manager and they and they are they consult they contract out for any kind of technical work So it could be that they all get together and decide okay Waldo you're going to represent us or the other western side is going to say okay Newberry you're going to represent us So could it be a but could it be a city commissioner that comes to these No it wouldn't be an elected body it would be a technical staff Who would who would an east municipality representative east end up being like in reality It could be because the way that if you look at the 2025 version look at the way the 2025 version reads now It says membership of the TAC must include whenever possible planners engineers representatives So it could be a very interested citizen who goes to all meetings who is reading all the TIPs though Will I give me a book yes we'll just have to see if they don't have a technical staff maybe they consult out or they have plan consultants who do their work or if they're saying okay we don't want to the county's going to represent us that's something that we could consider as well I just don't want to go to them without the board saying okay we want to have this representation Right because I don't want to set up any false expectations Right because I don't want to set up any false expectations My concern is just do they have a person who qualifies as because this says planners engineers or other technical staff Member Hay-Santos I just we should not have citizen like just this should be staff level Technical advisory Technical advisory Just because someone's very interested does not mean that they should be on this floor The Citizens Advisory Board for that but like La Crosse for example they have one employee but it's going to be rotating I don't know I feel like it's I understand representative like this is a very technical of planners engineers and technical staff I don't think any of the four cities I don't know does Waldo have that or do you consult that out? We consult it out. It could be a city manager that they're not elected. Well with what we got a city manager in one of the municipalities now this was once a secretary to High Springs not one of the municipalities she's a point of interim. The other thing too is like having I mean 15 we all need eight for a quorum but them having a seat at the table means that they can provide comments and the rest of the committee would need to consider their comments. They're still being represented in some way. You know but then you ask what is the purpose of that because if you're saying you need eight and the others don't have to don't really have to don't really have to be there. What's the point of just having a long whole list? I guess I just want to put the opposite perspective you know we spent a lot of time on our boards like talking about community engagement talking about not community community but technical community like whatever communities we're trying to engage and like trying to make a seat at the table for people right to create a broader voice. And like we've expanded this to the whole county and the only other like we have our county but this is like the technical stuff so we have our county technical stuff but giving those other municipalities a chance if they want to send a technician to the table to send one I think it's worthwhile. I mean like you said they might not have anybody to send and then they just don't send them I mean that's what happens with a lot of our advisory board seats is like I mean I'm so grateful for you showing up at every single meeting because so many times we make space for our smaller municipalities and they don't show up you know because they have other jobs and they have other things to do and they don't have time. But I think making the space for them to feel included is valuable and to understand that we do value their voice and we want to hear what they have to say and if they have technical staff and it may be that they don't come they don't come they don't come and then there's a big project you know like you know like I don't know something major is coming to like the Hawthorne industrial parks coming in and they're going to start a new rail line connection and it's going to make a big impact in the east and they've hired a consultant that's thinking about the way that's going to impact the 301 corridor and they want to come to the technical advisory committee to talk about it they have the chance to do that you know I don't know it just seems like it's not it doesn't hurt anything to have it there because it's not going to mess with quorum I mean it's all technical advisory most of them are staff that come anyway except for the on the east I think part of this is about that east because of the lack of having a lot of staff and I appreciate I like the idea of the representation I mean making up he's been doing a kick-butt job on their infrastructure and they're you know they've been their staff has been working really hard their city manager and the technical consultants that they have on trying to be like step up their game and stuff so I know what you mean Hawthorne as well and you know I they don't they may not have all the whoa they might not have all the gumption we that's what I get for being a fidget but I do think they're trying and I think they're expanding their capabilities it's not me this time does the county assign you have a plan east right the county has a forward focus are they assigned an engineer at all and that is it like a team I'm just imagining even like someone from that if there was someone who was on that technical side you know I just I do I have similar where I have worries about we we say well it maybe they'll solve quorum because we'll still have eight but you know it's eight instead of five you may have quorum problems at eight and so but um but I just imagine even on the forward focus like even a staff person like I'm not just the county person I'm the county person to vote yeah there are two on there now Commissioner Engel uh question and comment for uh for quorum if you have got 15 available seats but only 13 people have actually been appointed to them to get quorum you only need the majority of that 13 correct yes and so if they've got a small if there's some small municipalities that don't decide to send anybody it doesn't affect quorum nobody actually I'm kind of inclined to leave that on there you know we we changed our bylaws to 25 most of the organization I've been involved with every few years you want to take a look at your bylaws and kind of update things as they go anyway I'd say let's give these guys chance to participate if it turns out they don't do it and it makes sense to eliminate some of those positions moving forward so they're doing that but it seems to me that if we can open that door and see if they want to participate you're not doing any damage by making that miss miss Dixon you have some experience in this can you give us some feedback I think you're right on track with your with your comments and that was that was what I was thinking too when I looked at this list I think it is just really important that whoever is on the TAC is actually a technical person and if the small cities can provide somebody that would be great I know you know Alachua and Newberry they're very staffed up now they're they're developing pretty rapidly some of the other communities maybe not as much so but so I think you're asking the right questions and I think the conversation you just had about how it wouldn't affect forum if you leave them on here maybe that's your your key because the other communities as they start to grow more they may very well have that technical staff available Cornell you've got three county five city and two you have so that's ten technical folks from those you're going to have someone from the west Newberry or Alachua that's eleven but I think I think leaving it at 15 is fine I don't think you fill it initially with 15 it's probably only filled with 13 and to James's point so I tend to agree with him and James just leaving it the way it is I like it I like it too and I also want to make the point that you know if they do are contracting out technical staff that can be one of their duties to attend these meetings that they choose to do that so I think that's fine Councilwoman Taylor yes thank you for saying that Commissioner Alford that was something I was going to add because if we pay the consultants that's part of their job if we need you to go to a meeting and we need to go to the meeting because if you can go to dinner meetings and show we need you to be to these important meetings and sitting at the table this meeting for our smaller cities all right Miss Brown yes good afternoon Kay Brown transportation planning manager for FDOT consultants would not be able to be on the technical advisory committee board has to be state employees government employees essentially okay what else do you need what else do you need okay the question of the CAC so right now there's 15 members on the CAC that's all the county board manager identifies seven as being a full board but my I would like to propose to this board that we combine the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee or pedestrian advisory board with the citizen advisory committee and create a community advisory committee so that it's not just citizens but members of the chambers or members representing freight representing large distribution centers or the members of the business aspect of our of our road users and our road users get a chance to provide input in terms of how their transportation needs are met like maybe they're only choosing certain routes because that's the easiest maybe they have recommendations if they had this route instead it might alleviate or shorten their trip it might reduce congestion so because the CAC has historically had a difficult time getting committee members and BPAP I believe is full at 12 if we could combine BPAP I understand there's a lot of agreements and resolutions and other things in play to weave through but I think having a singular committee that provides input in terms of all the transportation modes and mode users as opposed to one just being citizens who may not be as first in transportation and another whose conversation is essentially limited to bicycle pedestrian improvements or projects and efforts to have a combined effort as a community advisory committee. So my thought is that the community advisory committee would have a two section in their agenda one being how they spend city dollars in terms of the bike pet projects and then another section on just the TPO function. So as an example we have CAC members who are having a difficult time serving in both boards so he's resigning from the citizen advisory committee and going and staying with just the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee because of his time constraints. So I think having just a singular community advisory committee to replace the two would be helpful so it will give us a more broad spectrum of our community. Community community. I agree with that. I don't have a problem with that. I like it. Keep the word bicycle if you're trying to get that many people come sit on the board. Oh. Yep. I was sort of saying. I missed that. I'm sorry. The success of BPAP is not the catchy you know four letter acronym it's that people know the B stands for bicycle. Well yes I don't know what the name needs to be but it needs to have bicycle on it. Okay. Maybe we'll have a whole session on naming the committee. Member Housantos. I'll just go over making a 15 member board with a lot of people to have around to actually move things forward. You're thinking about two boards or nine. That's a big board going to I don't think are better. I think they make it harder for actual things to get done and to have real conversations. Everyone gets to have a voice on that. If you limit that voice just a lot of people. One other thing too is just on how this is. So you move from 15 to nine. Well I think it's at nine right now right? Eight or seven or something. The TAC. The CAC has 15. That's 15. Yeah. I think we only have seven that actually ever show up or something. Yeah. I'm okay with nine. The other thing is it says that in here that the composition should be 20 percent of the individuals are hiding outside the Gainesville urbanized area. I'm fine if there wants to be a number but it shouldn't be set in stone at 20 percent. It should be I mean let's say Waldo gets 50,000 people move there. They should probably have more representation. So having it move not just based on a set 20 percent but just based on whatever kind of the census is for inside it out. If the population goes up outside the urbanized area representation would go up. It goes down to be the other way. So just so I'm clear the 20 percent is that it's saying no less than 20 percent of the CAC representation would be from outside of Gainesville proper and the urbanized areas of the county. So it's just setting at least 20 percent that the rest of the rural areas of the county is getting a chance at the table. Good luck. So just one thing if the Gainesville urbanized area expands to every single portion of the county except for one little 100 people they would have 20 percent of the voter or representation for 100 people. Because that could happen. The Gainesville urbanized area grows and shrinks and changes based on this the census. Yeah but I guess it goes back to what Commissioner Engel is saying we could evaluate our bylaws. If we evaluate our bylaws to keep in time along with the trends that may be something that we could. The 20 percent is just I kept the 20 percent because that's what's in the current bylaws. I just changed the geographic area but it can be whatever this board. I would say nine and not less than two outside the urbanized area. Something like that. That gets you the same place. I want to see a map of the urbanized area because I mean I know this is our current. Current out of 15 is a little easier to swing. Oh that's three. Three and a bunch of people don't show up but you got nine it's got to be two. I don't know. Maybe it all makes sense as well. They don't show up. You can try it. You can try it. Okay well. Do you have a if I don't know. The urban cluster is about 200,000 I believe. A little bit more than 220,000 to 300,000. I wonder if we get some feedback from Ms. Mosk. She has long-term experience with bike ped right. Some little. Yeah BPAP. If this I think this will work. Frankly I didn't think this part of the bylaws amendment was necessarily coming forward today. So I mean I think that there just have to be sort of care taken in terms of consolidating the groups. I think that there is a lot of passion for the bicycle pedestrian issues. I think that it's very hard for CAC to make quorum. I do think as former staff to the TPO it could be very beneficial because it is the same you know a lot of the same content presented multiple times. And there could be a sort of bifurcation of the agenda where TPO issues are handled and then bicycle pedestrian issues that are not TPO business. So part of this is cultural of just how it develops or. Yeah I think the challenge for the TPO and a notch can speak to this would be maintaining sort of a welcoming feeling for folks who want to weigh in on transportation issues and are not you know bicycle pedestrian. Advocates. I just had a question just to clarify is that the bike pet advisory board is still advisory to the city and the county and the MPO with all three agencies making appointments. Is that still the case? No. Okay. To my knowledge your bylaws haven't changed. Yeah. And you're wanting to combine the two? It's just a suggestion. I mean it doesn't have to. I know there's a lot of. I mean I think the hard part is that the bike and pedestrian advisory board does a lot more than what you're going to do. Than what you're going to need the CAC to do. Because it considers projects that don't have anything to do with the MPPO. Yeah. It's just for operational easiness. Like I was presenting this presentation three times to committees instead of it could be two and then the board or staffing. I think the TPO. I think it's a bike pet plus a section for other issues. Yeah. Because I mean the bike pet like Seth's position was funded by the TPO. But the projects that they vote on are not just TPO projects. The 10,000 I believe was what he said from the city of Gainesville are for Gainesville bike pet projects. But his time is funded by the TPO. So again it's a very colorful sweater that's been woven. So we just have to decide whether or not we want to alter the threads and weave a more common easier to enforce and implement and report kind of board. But if the board decides to leave it the same as it is now that's perfectly fine too. All right. I will say from the city side I know that I've had some conversation on the dais that we have a lot of advisory boards. It's asking a lot of staff. The city has been on a we've cut over 100 position over the past three four years closer to 140 150 and just the staff required to then go staff committees. So if there's the idea of combining a couple and you know if amendment three passes asking fewer staff to continue to do the same amount of work is insane. And if it's not fair at some point you're going to have to have combined committees or committees. You know advisory committees are just going to have to disappear because you did staff doesn't have time you know when you have fewer staff. So that's a larger amendment three issue. But like eventually you have to tell staff it is okay to do less because you have fewer staff members. Commissioner Alford. You're going to be talking to the bike pet advisory board. I would really be interested in getting their feedback on this. I think you know since we're not deciding on this today I think I'd really be interested in getting their feedback. The conversation about the CAC composition sort of evolved since the BPAP meeting. So a lot's happened in like a couple of weeks time based on feedback that I've kind of gotten as I've had my one on one. So I can bring it to the next BPAP. I can add that to their agenda. I mean case in point just changing the committee name the board name from bicycle pedestrian advisory committee board to committee is has gotten super complicated. But I feel like it would be less complicated if they only had to present the change to one board one body as opposed to getting the BPAP to agree. Then getting to the governing board to agree and then getting to the city commission to agree going to the county to agree. So I will say that according to statutes the TPO is only required to have a TAC and CAC. The bike pad is just something that this particular TPO adopted. Other MPOs have dissolved their bike pad BPAPs into a citizen committee. And then they replaced their bicycle pedestrian advisory committee with a municipal advisory committee full of elected city commissioners that aren't sitting on the governing board but rather on a municipal advisory board. So other MPOs do it different ways. We're also open to doing it different ways. Most of the bike pad issues are in the system. Sounds like we still have a lot of conversation perhaps about this. But should the next meeting of the bike pad advisory board. So continue the conversation. It would probably be helpful if some member of this board attends that. It probably would be helpful. Yeah. They always have a great conversation. I may have to volunteer myself for that. I like how that works. Okay. So. What more do you need? It's the vice chair. This is something. So when we went from a county, before we became countywide, the 2019 bylaws didn't really have any, didn't speak to attendance, participation and membership attendance from the governing bodies because pretty much all of the governing body were elected officials and the term ran with their elected office. In the 2025, there's language in here that basically sets some parameters for the school board, the airport and the rule of the municipality in terms of participation. And I just wanted to ask if the board wanted to keep that language that sort of basically takes attendance for the three of its 15 members. What page? 33. I mean, I think the reason we have that in there was so that if the rural member wasn't attending, we could reach out and have a new appointee. And the same thing for the airport, like if someone wasn't showing up, then we would let the airport kind of be like, hey, airport, no one's showing up. Do you want to appoint someone? So the board they represent would be the one to recommend. Yeah, that's fine. So we're going to cut that language? I'm looking, yeah. Okay. The other thing is, and that's not on my screen, I apologize, the position of secretary treasurer, it was in the 2019 bylaws, but it's removed in the 2025 bylaws. My question to the board is that since there will be an executive committee that helps with looking at the annual budget and looking at the quarter reports and the fact that our banking, the county's banking folks only requires the chair's signature for checks and whatnot, does the board still want to keep a secretary treasurer? I can say in the past eight months they've been here, the secretary's not signed anything. No. No. I don't see any head shakes yet. No. We'll keep them up. Okay. So we're keeping it up? Unless anybody else, I don't see anybody saying they want to keep them up. All right. Unless chiefs. Vice chair just told the chair he has to go to the bike head. We'll see what the minutes say. And it passed unanimously. It was unanimously. With Casey Willis out of the room. Next item is 8.2. It's also in the budget in the draft bylaws, but I pulled it out as a separate slide. The annual membership, it says assessment here, which is a little confusing. It's not a tax. It's just a local contribution. Currently the TPO receives 24,000 from the two large agency partners. I would presume that that was before we became countywide. So 14,400 comes from Gainesville. The other 9,600 comes from Alachua County. Since we're now countywide, I've done some research. This is a table. Sorry. Can you pull that up at all? Yeah. Better? Yeah. So these are the other MPOs and TPOs that I looked at. And their populations are here on the third column. And as you can see, some of them based it on per capita. Some of them just did a flat assessment. I tried to normalize it to be based on their population. So our sister TPO, which is North Florida, their system at $0.50 per capita for as long as they've been around, I believe. Metroplan Orlando is roughly at a dollar per capita. And there are others that are smaller. This one, Oklahoma County, their population is very close to ours. And they're at $0.09 per capita. This is what they get. But then there are others that also have a small population, a large population with a small assessment. Ocala Merriens, $2,000 fiscal year. And then there's this one, Martin MPO. Their population is almost half hours, but their local assessment is $130,000 for year one and $133,000 for year two. So they're at $0.79. Yeah. So it's sort of all across the board. So what I'm proposing is something per capita. What that number is, it's up to the board or what the ratios. This is based on the Office of Demographic and Economic Research. This is what the State Land Planning Agency uses. Total county population. This is as of July 2024. Gainesville population in green. Uncorporated Atlantic County also in green. If we were to apply $0.50 per capita, this is the local contribution. So for example, La Crosse, $1.52. McEnoby, $37. The small town cities aren't going to have that money. So the option is that if the county absorbs like Waldo, McEnoby, and La Crosse, for example, since their populations are less than 1,000, if the county is willing to do that, that's for this body to ask the county to do that. Based on this set of numbers, lessing out the 24-4, this would just be the net increase in the local contribution. The bylaws provides a bulleted list of what the local funds can be used for. So this is not a tax that the TPO assesses to member agencies. This is the member agencies' contribution to the TPO for the services that these municipalities receive. For example, we've done some planning work with DLTE for Archer's request. We are starting conversations with DLTE for new various requests as far as whether or not can or can't be funded by PL dollars. So their benefit that they get back, now that they are served for the TPO, is tenfold more than what they would be paying for. So $150 for a $15,000 design, for example, is 100% of return on investment. I feel like this is, you know, totally reasonable, but given the fact that we have this property tax referendum and we have small towns that are going to be basically broke if it passes, I feel like we need to table it until we know what's going to happen. Yes, so in the staff report, which I forgot to include, I apologize, is for the board to decide, one, whether or not it would do a local or increase, because it's doing it now. Deansville and the county pay local now is to, one, increase it or not. And if you choose to increase it, what that rate could be. And then once you decide that, when do you want to start it? So it doesn't have to start now. It's just, we can start this in, it's like 30 at the next census. You know, that's also an option. Commissioner Barr. Actually, I disagree with Commissioner Alford. Every budget is now set. Right. So it would require, or it's just about to be set by law. It is an excellent conversation. The context of the information that you have here is very good. But this, to me, would probably be a spring 2027 conversation, so that every organization sitting around the table can include it in there, at least their budget conversations within their respective things. So it doesn't have to happen now. It's just conversation. All right. Commissioner Chestnut. Yeah. But then, but why wouldn't we equalize the county and the city now? We could do that. You said the city is at 14 and the county is at nine? Currently, 14,400 cities. Yeah. You could equalize those, but I'm not for doing anything with the, with the smaller municipalities. Essentially, if the county picked up all the cities, we'd be the same. Yeah. Right. Which I don't disagree with. Well, so, yeah. That would work. Since we've moved, since we've moved county, why? Yes. Yes. So I want to get it equal. Yeah. Member Hayes on those. Thank you, Chair. I think there's the school board and the airport authority, but also, I think it's like a, you get to be enough $2,000 from each one wasn't your proposal, right? Right. Yeah. I mean, it's kind of. Which is fine. It's fine. Well, they're actually, they're not real. They're not. They're not. They're not. They're not. You're real. You're real. You're real. But I do think it's kind of, as you are a board member, you need to pay some to be a board member in essence. I think. It's a phenomenal. Yeah. I mean, $160, $152 is the one there. I just take that. 10 cents a dollar. Any other comment on this? But it does sound like this is perhaps something we want to, this kick down until. Next budget year. Next budget year. Like in time. Budget year. Is it that we want to incorporate, incorporate this into bylaws, but then there's a decision to be made later or. Yeah. The rates will be outside of the bylaws through resolution. I'm okay with it being in the bylaws. The draft bylaws would say that the CFO board can assess a local contribution. It doesn't speak to who's paying for it and how much. Okay. Do our current bylaws have anything about local contributions? Current bylaws doesn't have anything, but it's, there's currently a contribution from the city and the county. Sure. Okay. So one version is we just put in some language that future vote could. So then it's in the bylaws. And then there would be potentially future action. I would be okay with putting it there so that structurally it's available in the future. Commissioner Eastman. We have a very eager attorney sitting here. Oh, I wouldn't say eager, but. Ernest at least. Yeah. As far as the assessments go, or it's essentially a membership due. Your membership qualifications are already set in your interloperability. So if somebody didn't pay, there's nothing you can do to enforce that. So this is all voluntary. So the numbers that are there, it's kind of a wishful thinking that somebody will contribute. But if they don't, you can't kick them off without a minimum. Thank you, Corbin. Thank you, Corbin. Yeah. But we don't have to listen to them either. Just kidding. I did ask Corbin to look into it because, you know, I want to make sure we're following the requirements. Even if someone, even if Micanopia or La Crosse don't pay because we are county-wide by the governor's office, they're still represented by Councilwoman Taylor. So. She can put the pressure on them. Okay. Commissioner Eastman. Oh, that was. That was just. Okay. You, that. Commissioner Parizia, you had no. Okay. Director Whitfield, do you have enough feedback? This is just a, it's just like one of my first meetings, just throwing something on the board and getting your reaction. I knew going into this, there was not going to be a vote and that you guys aren't ready. But I just wanted to have the conversation because it is a language now in the bylaws that says that this body would have a local assessment, a local. I think we should read into this in April. Commissioner Eastman. And I think it makes sense. It seems like this is pretty standard for other TPOs and it's unrestricted funds in a way that the TPO tends to be bound up in a lot of federal dollars. And so a little bit goes a long way to give flexibility to our staff to, you know, be successful as we make this newly independent. So it makes sense for us to talk about it. Yeah. And I, I'll be, I'll be in favor of us figuring out something that gives you guys that flexibility when we come back about it. Yeah. This could be an item that the Secretary of Committee gives guidance on as far as what to look for and things to consider. Okay. Amendment. Why? It's about this. Sorry. It's about the bylaws. On page 17 of the meeting or about the meetings, when you're saying we don't have a quorum but we're still talking. I don't believe we still, it says we wouldn't take minutes. I think under Florida law, we have, no, no, not executive committee, regular. I believe we have to take minutes under Florida sunshine law. Is that correct? Where's an earnest attorney when we need that. I can certainly make sure that it says that we take, we're taking notes and minutes on all of our meetings in a way. So. Well, in here it says minutes will not be taken. So. Which page? Page 17. 17. Corbin. Yes. As far as if you've got a sunshine meeting and I'm page right, this is the quorum not present time system. Yeah. So no official minutes are taken. Yeah. If this is going to be a sunshine meeting, then official minutes have to be taken. Okay. I do have some comments on that and Anach and I can talk about that. Yep. And I guess on that same one where it says we have to have seven days notice, there might be an emergency or other things that you may have. I don't know if Corbin can answer that as well for emergency meetings if we still need to have seven days or 72 hours. Generally you would give as much notice as possible for an emergency, but you need to kind of keep in mind what the emergency is, if it's self-made, if it's actually an emergency, that kind of thing. So our bylaws say we shall not, never have that chance. So I think basically make sure that we have to remember folks point that we should have flexibility. There's a lot of shalls in this I think maybe. I'm also getting some guidance from the city's city clerk, Ms. Bryant, on the language for emergencies. Okay. Are we ready to move forward? Yes. We'll wait. Just one quick things also on 4.3.1, which seems like it's a little in the weeds as related to website communications. It says that no GACPO social media accounts exist or are authorized and then it also states that TPO staff governing board members and advisory committee members must not engage in online exchanges related to any matter that may come before them for official TPO action. That seems – I already broke that. What's that? I mean I think – I don't think that's a by-the-lot letter that it's sunshine law. But also I don't – I don't – this is called bylaws policies and procedures. And so I think some of the procedures are kind of falling into bylaws. I don't see why we would have a bylaw that says we can't have social media accounts. We don't have one now. That's fine with me. But I would – I would take a look and make sure that that fits what we have for sunshine law. But also as a whole like if we don't need to have it in the bylaws for something like this I would just – I would just take it out. The – What section again? 4.3.1. This is page 32. 4.3.1. Website communications. I'm not leaving it to the commission from the county. That's why I just don't feel like it's appropriate to police individual members on what they put on their social media platforms. That's fine. I'm not allowed to do it. I got this from the MPOAC's policies and procedures. Okay. Yeah. It might make sense as a policy and procedure because this is bylaws and policies kind of merge together. I just think it doesn't make sense as much for a bylaw per se. But that was my only feedback. The rest of it looks good. Okay. Maybe refrain from – Are we ready to move on to – All right. 9.1. 9.1. Good afternoon everybody. I'm Laurie Santana. I'm the FDOT liaison to the TPO. This item does not need any action. It's mostly just for your information. The DOT has processed an administrative stip to include project 207668-4 which is CR241. It's a shared use path that goes from Newberry Road to Northwest 39th Avenue. And you can see it up there on the screen. The reason that we were able to process this stip administratively is because we're in a kind of a gap time where the state's fiscal year stopped at July 1st and the federal fiscal year doesn't start until October 1st. But this project is in the new tip. It's in the new 2731 tip that you have already approved. So in order to just get some preliminary engineering going for this project prior to October 1st, we were able to process the administrative stip by just having the TPO director sign the amendment. And that's – That's great news. It's well needed right there. Got a big soccer field out there. Maybe a library is coming. Is that number two on our bike pad? Big sheer path out of Jonesville. No. No. No, is that not? Is that not? That's northeast. I doubt it. Northwest 43rd? No, 143rd? 143rd? 143rd. That's Jonesville. We got some project on there that says a big number two on it on the long distance connectors and rails to trails project ranking. No, that's the – This is a funded project though. Yeah, you're talking about long distance connectors. That's way further up. That's the high springs. That's the high springs rail trail. This is Jonesville. Take a ride at Jonesville like you're going to the park. To Jonesville Park. Connecting all the way up. You say that. That solid green line goes all the way to Newberry Road. So that's what I'm – that's just kind of the one thing I'm wondering. Yeah. Number two. All right. Yeah, that's good. You might be right. Yeah, it is. Yes. So this in lies the importance of – Yes. That was my point. Yeah. Yeah. Bring some more steps next week. Thank you. That's good. Thank you so much. Yeah, that's real good, dude. All right. Thanks for making it a bike and pedestrian project. Yeah. That's huge. I mean, that's a huge – So then 9.2. 9 – sorry. I can number it. That's my bad. 9.2. I'm – so this is a – So this is a little old and this is an informational item from DOT and I believe there are printed copies that Tia is passing out. We just got the new concept a couple hours ago. So Tia's printed those out and she's passing them out. So back in 2017-18 time period – That's another big one. Yep. Yep. The – this segment of Newberry was going to be resurfaced and then the TPO wanted to stripe it. Strip it. Strip it. Strip it. Strip it. Thank you. So forth and so on. But I guess there was discussions about the on-street parking and short story is that the resurfacing proceeded. These improvements did not happen. We're now nine years in and so now the resurfacing is like 2030. So moving forward with this project, the TPO will be absorbing the cost of resurfacing any restriping that happens here. Okay. Do you have those numbers? I think she's passing those out. I have the numbers on my – no. I made this PowerPoint last week. She's passing out the latest ones. The option that – I apologize, it's not on here. Do you want to do the presentation or do you want me to just point? What's your numbers? Yeah, you can point it. Today the decision that we're asking from the board is to complete the improvements from Northwest 43rd through Life South, Life South Blood Centers. That portion of the project is going to cost about $1.8 million. That's a sidewalk, a 10-foot sidewalk? Yes. So the sidewalk, it consists of 12 and a half foot sidewalk on both sides, media modifications, and some driveway concrete improvement to level out the driveway with the sidewalk. So from – and that also includes the resurfacing of the network from 43rd to Life South. Awesome. I don't – But in essence, we're asking to also for you all to decide for from 43rd Street through 38th is to complete that segment, that widening here, and the resurfacing through 38th. And that would be a total of around $2 million. On top of 1.8? On top of 1.8, to complete the network. This project essentially was to close the gap and just complete the network that is west of 43rd that has an existing bike lane as well as east of 38th has existing bike lane. So this project was essentially to make that connection. So if we were to proceed with just doing the 43rd through Life South, you still would leave that gap from Life South through 38th. So in essence, we also have been working on design. We've been spending a couple hundred thousands on the several iterations of the project, working with the city and county staff to give the best design that we have here for you today. And DOT does recommend that you all proceed with completing this project as you see before you, rather than just having 43rd through Life South. Irregardless, DOT has spent some funding as well as SU funds. We will proceed with this part. We think it's a good project, but we think it's even better if you all were to proceed today with that. So the area 38th to Life South? 43rd to Life South? Yeah, 38th to Life South though, it does not, they're on-street bike lanes with unprotected? Yes. So I guess we just passed a plan that says we shouldn't be put, this is a high traffic road to put unprotected bike lanes. I thought the multi-use path would be the bike lane. That's only up until Life South, due to some, when we were doing the design and essentially how we got here was because of some drainage impacts that would exceed the NPO's budget. And it just, you know, was decided to leave the sidewalks. So the sidewalks from Life South through 38th, we are proposing an extension to the utility strips. I don't know if it could vary between, you know, a foot here, two feet there. But yeah, we were not able to complete, as shown in the 2024 concept, the widened paths from 43rd to 38th. So you're asking us to basically FDOT will pay for that section as it is now, but then you want us, and then, but because of the overage, we'd now be spending SU funds for that second portion? Am I understanding this right? So from my understanding, what we gathered that you all wanted to propose two options, which was just a complete 43rd through 38th and defer the Life South through 38th to align with our resurfacing timing. That doesn't happen until around 2033-ish. Because again, we just resurfaced the network in 2018. So for, and it also is based on pavement conditions. So if it looks good, it can go a little bit longer, all the way to 36th. And then at that point, this, this network would have been discussed for about 20 years. If we wait and we defer it. So, you know, we tried to meet the city and county's request to widen the path to support the shared use, but we did up until a point that wouldn't so much impact the need or affect the drainage. So, okay, if I may, in looking at the email that you sent, option one, 43rd through 38th, with the wide walk, you know, the wide walk and other median improvements from 43rd to Life South, and then just doing this portion of it to 38th would be 2.4 million? Yes. And then just this portion from Life South, all the improvements that the TPL originally wanted in 2024 would be by itself 1.8 million. Yes. Yes. So about 260 or so different. 2,000. Commissioner Cornell. Ikea, could you add a raised bike lane protector? Like, instead of it just being painted, could it be like what we just passed? We did have a discussion with the county that was a request, but because of maintenance and the maintenance of like those domes and what now, the separators, we did not decide to proceed with that. The other thing, I think Mr. Knight had mentioned that if we were to have like a, you know how they have the raised nose of an intersection to keep cars from going because of the number of driveway connections, putting those raised barriers intermittently could probably cost more of an issue with traffic. Traffic. I mean, having a bike bed lane is better than nothing, which is where we are, but it's a busy road. One of the busiest roads. Members are the best sidewalk. Will on-street parking remain? Yes. Yes. All on-street parking will remain only for the parking from Northwest 43rd to 38th. All other parking is being replaced with a bike lane. On the sign that area, that parking will be retained. Okay. In the public right away. Okay. Member Hayes-Santos. Thank you, Chair. What about, I mean, that's the full, but I'll just do the plastic baller. I'm sorry? I'm sorry. The plastic ballers, I think, another COT have done that. They have a much reduced cost. Yeah. District 2 decided not to move forward with those types of barriers. So this, let me get this right. So coming from, my brain is usually east to west. We come off of the bike there. Is it bike lanes to 38th? Is that right? 38th? That's over safety. And then they would go bike lanes. And then roughly at life south, people would have to switch to, and I assume there's kind of a ramp-ish to get them onto the side, to shared paths, sidewalk, basically, large sidewalk. And then at 43rd, you have to get off of the sidewalk and into traffic, roughly into traffic, into a bike lane. Right. Past the 43rd. Correct. As a cyclist, those transitions are weird and tough when you come up to a stoplight. Are you a pedestrian on a crosswalk? Are you, where do you, are you a line of traffic? Do you get out? Do you take, when we talk about intersections being a problem? And I know there's sometimes not a lot of good solutions, but. Yeah, there's not any. Only because it's like multiple changes in this course of, let's say, a mile, multiple changes. There's always going to be changes. Cyclists are pretty nimble, but then I know that the focus has been on off-road facilities on this. That's been a request for years. So I'm not going to complain too much about 43rd, you know, because if we get our off-road facility, great. But the multiple changes, probably not ideal. So I hear some of this, some of this concern. Commissioner Cornell. Yeah, so I, so I want to move forward because I want the, the 12 feet of sidewalk in front of Slymed to 38th. But I would, I would move this recommendation and, and that we ask DOT to look at, um, some other solution for safety from 38th to. What's that? 34th. 34th. 34th. And prioritize safety over maintenance. Second. Yeah, I think the two things I've heard on the two solutions is they, you know, they're concerned about maintenance, but I'm, I think we're all concerned more about safety. So I have, do I say a motion for Cornell and a second from member certain. So what does, what does this bump off of our projects list? Cause we're adding this $2 million. So it's bumping projects, right? You currently have three, it's already programmed. Okay. It's programmed. Okay. It's just finally done. We're ready to do it. And the, uh, numbers provided were the construction dollars. So currently the original concept from 24 was around 3.3 million, um, for construction. So now with this new design, depending on, uh, it looks like commissioner Cornell has made a motion. It looks like, um, you all will proceed with the, uh, the completed network, which is around 2 million. So essentially under a million for your budget back in your fiscal year 29. Yeah. And I think that it may be a little bit more than that if they prioritize the cones or the whatever. Sounds like our DOT does not do those. The ballads. Well, but in our motion, we're asking them to look at it again. Cause we're, yeah. Yeah. This is a, this is a section that we've, we've had quite a bit of conversation about. Right. This is very segment of road. And so we just, um, repeat for me. I was a little bit confused about the funding sources for the money for the entire project and where that's coming from. Yeah. We don't, we don't delay when we have that, even if, even if it's not a perfect solution. And as you said, there's some, there's some, some tricky aspects of the road and there's not great solutions for those, at least at a, unless there was a much greater ask for money and the DOT would have had to be willing to consider those also, which both would probably get down. We drop in my class. Cause I know this, this is an informational book, but we do have a motion, um, to ask again, I guess. Um, well, you, you asked the director, you asked which one of the two. Let's say it's great. This is approval of the project with a request for some more information. That's all to, to review and essentially research a couple other aspects of, um, multi-mobility. Specifically, we asked the DOT to prioritize safety over maintenance. I have to send a motion. That's good. So is, does this count as proceed with minor modification or does this? This was us today presenting to you the latest and greatest concept and just to take direction if you all would want us to continue with the design and, and, and the, and rearranging the construction dollars to now replace it with this project. Yes. Cause the, the original one, um, I've maximized it. That, that CPO since back in July, July of 24 had all of these improvements, like what basically the wide walk in the north and south sides. But since that time with their engineering, there are utility conflicts that the DOT is not going to absorb. So what would have been possibly a 3.4, 3.5 million dollar project, uh, 3.4, and then it would just be, well, there's no, there's no white walk here. The bike lanes would just go there. So I, okay. It asked me to put it on the agenda as an informational item. And then we had a bunch of comments and questions from TPL, the city and the county staff. So we had asked the DOT to provide some different funding costs and the breakdown for the board to make a decision on how best to proceed, whether it's just south, live south to 43rd with the white walk and everything that they asked for, or the entire segment with just the bike lane on the other side. So I'm just, the motion we have on the floor, does it align with option B or A is what I'm asking just because our, as in our agenda, it was either A, proceed with the project as proposed in concept A June 16th, 2026, or B, proceed with June 16th concept, but with minor modifications. Is this a minor modification? I mean, is it an ask? It's a modification to basically go to your 2024, I mean 2026, would you send? Okay. Because I thought today it was, you know, from, from 43rd to life south, if you all wanted us to just do that segment and leave off the resurfacing and the bike lanes from life south to 38th. And you all, I'm essentially, we're going to come back during our resurfacing cycle to save money on resurfacing dollars because that was. So, so that's the question. Yes. 2.4 million. So, the way it's presented to me in the email that I got earlier is LRE 1, 2.4 million. That includes 43rd to 38th. It includes 12.5 foot sidewalk widening from 43rd to life south driveway, median modifications from 43rd to life south, milling and resurfacing from 43rd to 38th. Um, any additional drainage improvements, assigning and pavement markings. Does that include the bike lane or no, just resurfacing? That is the widening path from, I'm sorry, that's from, yes, from 43rd to 38th for 2 million. Yeah. Does it include the bike lane? Yes. Yes. Okay. That's, that's what you're deciding on. Because originally it would have been 3.4 to have the wide walk on the north and south sides. So, we're now at 2.4 instead of 3.4, just the bike lane in the long street park. Okay. Does our motion. Yeah, that's what I want. And then I want them to look at adding on the resurfacing from 38th to 34th. Again, what Commissioner Hayes-Santo said. Some additional protections. Um, prioritize safety over maintenance. Thank you. Um, I think we should only move forward on the portion from 43rd to life south and not do the portion east of that. We are putting in a bike lane that we know is a lot of traffic. You are very fast on ladders. One, we should not be putting in facilities that I think are dangerous in that sense. And we know they're dangerous. And, uh, I know it's either having a bike facility or not, but I think having a bike lane on that grows tens of thousands of people driving on it. And people are driving very fast on there. Is that why we had the bike path? I mean, the sidewalk widen though, so that someone could get all that? Well, that's the area west of life south. I think it's great. That's a good area. But right now it has parking and this is adding in bike lanes. We're paying $245,000 to add in bike lanes. Yeah. I don't. So you don't want to do that? I don't like putting in unsafe infrastructure. Yeah. And that's my personal. But west of 43rd is bike lanes. Yeah. Currently, right? And I don't think I said that either. But don't. Okay. I just want to. This is that whole. We're cutting this up into sections and making it by Frankenstein. So different from what was originally proposed. Yeah. And so I agree that I don't like the bike lanes. So our real decision here is we can, in essence, delay decision on that other part to when perhaps resurfacing normally would happen. But we would, so, but at that point it is, let me see if I get this right. 23rd. 23rd. 23rd. But it's, I'm just, I know it's bike lanes up until coming from the east. It's bike lanes until you get to 38th. Then it is theoretically nothing, but people, or people are going to be jumping on a narrow and insufficient sidewalk. And then they will go to a sufficient sidewalk. And then they will go back to bike lane at 43rd. And so that is four methods, whereas the proposal here at least shrinks that down to three different, you know, bike lane, bike lane, large sidewalk, back to bike lanes, you know, like the transitions. So that is part of the conversation here. I, I, I lean towards saying let's only do the, the chunk from 43rd to, to, um, play south. I agree with the commissioner Santos, but the, the, the downside of that is we do leave a section that is no solution besides, uh, cyclists getting on. Not just cyclists, electric little kick scooter, you know, micro mobility. Right. And that's what we've been talking about. Micro mobility on the sidewalk as well. So that's problematic because then we've got this chunk that is not really good for anybody. For, for pedestrians, for cyclists, for micro mobility. I don't know. Are there that many pedestrians using the sidewalk as opposed to people on a vehicle or motorized something? I just, I didn't know if, you know, if you're focused so much on the sidewalks for that stretch when it's really not used that much to the point where you could actually use a large sidewalk all the way and get people off the road with their motorized vehicles and not really impact people on foot. I don't know if we have paid on that. I will say one of the things that it's been my concern is that, uh, Banyan hammock built on the north side of, um, the movie theater is like 300 units of affordable housing that come up, come up on. Okay. And so like, there's even kind of more, but the question is, I, I, I understand your question. Commissioner Book. Uh, just kidding. Anecdotal, non-scientific, non-vetted, non-count. I travel it every day. Very few pedestrians use that area. That's what I'd love to. Yeah. I like doing the whole facility. I hear you loud and clear, Adrian, but again, I'm asking that they, DOT, prioritize safety over maintenance. So maybe they come back with something. So certainly they wouldn't want an accident to happen in 2030 because they didn't. So, and so the marginal cost between these, you said it's 200 and? 60,000. 260,000. 260,000. And you get a full, you get a full to 34,000. I'll say that when I've biked this in the past, what gets spooky is that you're going down the bike lane and then suddenly, if you look up, there is a sign that says, um, uh, bike lane ends. Which I never quite understood why we do it that way because when you're a cyclist, you're looking down at the road in front of you. You're not looking up here. It's designed for cars that are looking down. How do we design all of our, all of our signs? And so suddenly you're, there's a car in front of you and then there's a curve to your side. So you can't jump the curve on your bike. So you're stopping in the middle of the road, picking up the bike, putting it in there, or you're thinking real quick and swerving around that and getting in there. It's, um, it is, I mean, significantly better to just have a, I, I, I hope that I, it's hard to tell from here that the design of the bike lane ending makes it clear. You can, you can do design changes that make it clear that there's a curve off of the bike lane and in, but certainly the worst of all the options is what we currently have, which is that a car, what looks like a bike lane suddenly has a car parked in the middle of it. Um, and, uh, so, I mean, my, the bike lane is, is connecting to 38 network. So this project isn't, doesn't have an end point for the bike lane. We're essentially filling in the gap. Yeah. I mean, I think realistically we're unlikely to get delineators. I mean, does FDOT, I know district two is every district's a little bit different. Yeah. Do you guys have delineators in other FDOT areas? Is that a thing that you guys have done to do protected bike infrastructure? Um, I can't speak to that. I'm not sure. Right. Um, it is in district two. Do you guys, have you guys done? I'm sure we have some, but that, that could be like old projects and then just learning from those projects. Um, the cost of maintaining, I think DOT is kind of looking at a different, you know, there is a, I know it's not much, but it's very tiny here. But it is, you know, essentially the bike, the bike lane is five and the, the strip is about two feet. It's not protected, but it is for the distance from the vehicles. So that, so the buffer, there's about two foot of buffer. Two foot of buffer. Yeah. Okay. All right. Yeah. I'm going to share some more information on the possibility potential to add delineation. So, um, staff talked to FDOT district two staff about potential, you know, mechanisms. And I think plastic flex posts are a no go from a maintenance perspective. Um, we also propose there's like a concrete separator that can be kind of a pin on solution. And the response back from district two was that there are too many driveways, um, to implement that in this location. So I just want you all to have the information. Um, there are a lot of driveways. You'd have to look at peeling back that concrete, um, within certain distances of driveways. Um, and you can look on the aerial. Um, there are very many. So I think what you would be looking at is how much, what percentage of the corridor is served by separation versus which has to be buffered because of the multiple driveways interrupting. So I think it's probably less than 50% of this corridor, just eyeballing it, um, could have some sort of vertical separation. So it never will. Um, so we, the motion's on the floor because we're going to vote, we're going to vote on this. I'm going to call for public comment. Any members of the public who would like to, um, comment on this issue? Seeing none. Is there any further conversation from this board on this item? And we shall have a quorum, right? Yes. I believe so. We've got, we've got 10. Um, all right. Those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed, I'm going to be a nay. All right. I think that is a nine to one with commissioner Willis and the Senate. We're a hutch. We'll talk against it and say I don't want to do this or we're going to do this. Aye? Good. I like it. Great job. What? I do that sometimes. You convince me. Um, all right. Um, we're, I'm sorry. Director, where are we at? It's been quite a minute. All right. Jesus, wow us or give us some, some, some good, exciting stuff. You're just gonna talk off your. Just gonna talk off your. Yes. Any more action items? On your reports, uh, basically we have, uh, May, you have May and June. Um, this is the last, uh, that's summer A. Uh, last year we have, uh, we have no changes on that, um, because of the University of Florida. We started on summer B and we started having the, the cuts. But compared to this year, we have 3,000 less in May of hours of service and 2,000 in June. Road period remains, it remains the same on both months. So you see some right. You face according to, to that. But, um, then you're gonna see in the next report in July and August that the right. You start going up because we compared the same level of service. You know, no many changes on the routes and you're gonna see that. When you see, um, 76% usually student ridership. You saw on the, during the summer it's 50%. So of course it's, uh, because the students are out. Um, really no, nothing different compared to, to regular reports. The, you see the, the boardings are pretty much the same at the same locations. And the, the other 18 and over 65 problems are working well. Um, I don't know if you have any questions that you don't wanna take too much of your time. These reports are really repetitive. I don't know if you wanna include this next time as an information item. And then I can, if you wanna take it out of consent, we can always, uh, report back to you. Thank you, Jesus. I, I think we always wanna hear about RTS Plus. Yes. So it's always gonna be, it's gonna be a question for quite a while, so. RTS Plus, uh, is, uh, also decreased a little bit on the number of trips. Okay. But we're still about 2,000 more compared to previous, uh, providers, service providers. Um. Does it have a seasonality to it? Yes. It even, it does. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So we went down from 6,000 trips to, from last month and now it was 5,000 in May. But we're going back up, but we just, last week we have a, a record of 285 trips per day. Hmm. So we, we'll back up. And I just, the, the note about the concert, the number of hours, note on page three about hours for concert, 147 hours from concert. Is that just some special routes or? We, we, we, yeah, we provided some extra service for, on those routes to, to help, uh, the university with the concert. That was, uh, Fridays and Saturday. First two days. Any comments or questions from this board? All right. I would just ask that, uh, maybe send them so that we could look at them before the meeting. Cause I got them. Dustin, did you back up? Was it? Oh, so I was looking on the iPad and wasn't able to access it. So I'm sorry. That's my bad. I'll look on that. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Point four. I was just going to share with you. I think she's already stepped out. Um, some of the, as Councilman Taylor and I have been meeting one on one with some of the small jurisdictions. Um, some of the requests, uh, example I gave before was the city of Archer. As far as the freight impacts on their, um, in their downtown, I believe it's US 41 and 24 that intersects where it's an acute angle. The freight traffic is cutting through neighborhoods. Um, so DLT has looked at, it has prepared a redesign of the intersection, utilizing all of their right of way to help hopefully make that radii for the right turns safer. Um, so this is just an example of how the TPL and the DLT can help support the small jurisdictions, you know, when they do their, their contributions, whether they pay for it or the county chooses to pay for it. Um, say Newberry asked about whether or not the TPL could assist in doing a, a planning study. If they have contractors to do the construction of roadways, it's PL dollars can be used for that. Um, they've just instructed them to submit it as part of their, um, projects during the call for projects, which is going on right now. Um, although the intersection on US, um, 441, or 301. 301. 301. 301. So DLT has prepared some concepts for improving that intersection. So these are some examples of how we've been working, um, Councilwoman Taylor and I have been working with the small jurisdictions, um, in, in the ways that DLT can assist without necessarily using TPL's dollars. We don't have any informational items. May I? Yes. Mr. Chair. Commissioner Wheeler. Have you checked with the High Springs people too? Because, you know, we were talking about bypasses, trying to get trucks around. We're trying to get on their calendar. Okay, great. Thank you. Yeah. She's been sending out emails to the city managers and mayors to try to get on their calendars. I think we're trying to get on Hawthorne, um, for next week and McAdelby. I had someone contacted me, um, the manager of the Walmart, um, center, um, what is that called? Distribution center. Distribution center. Yeah. And I had a discussion with him about the trucks that they were using. He called me to complain about the condition of the roads. And, um. Yeah. That they tore up. That's right. That's right. And so we had that. I said, well, are you complaining about your workers? You know, the people that you are using or your actual trucks that are using the roads? And, and anyway, the discussion came down to that he was going to be discussing it with some of the other distribution centers. They were going to have a meeting the very next day. And I sent him to Ramon to see about the possibility of one of us going there to that meeting. And Ramon didn't hear back from him. He did contact him. So I will pass that name to you because he was on the city council in Lake City. It went for this commission. So he understands the impact that these trucks have on our back roads and our, our little rural areas, 235 a, you know, I mean, in all of these roads that are being impacted by these trucks, he understood that. But I think, you know, if we could follow up and I'll give him his name that we can try to be a part of the conversations that will pull them in because I was suggesting, you know, that perhaps if their roads were, were problematic because of their impacts that they should probably be working with us more for impact fees or some kind of monetary impact. So I'll give you that. So I'll give you that. I mean, too. Oh, I'm sorry. Councilwoman Taylor. And to add on to what Commissioner Wheeler said, when we had the meeting with Archer, that was one of the big issues, as you said, what they have out there at that intersection that she was speaking of with the trucks that are turning, turning out. And it's ironic that the guy from the distribution center called you to let them know that it's their truck for the turning of the road. Well, kind of did. But yes, man, we've, and thank you guys for opening up the rural position because we've hit almost every rural town. We have High Springs to go. We have La Crosse and Hawthorne and, of course, all those. Some of them had to cancel out for changing dates back and forth. But we are hearing from our rural communities and they're happy that they have a voice. Like they had a voice before, but as they say, no one was really listening. So they're eager to get their input in as to what their transportation needs are for this city and for their residents of the city. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. So we're on to our next upcoming meetings and items of interest. I'll be flying out in the morning to vote for that. The next governing board meeting is October 5th, right around the corner. The MPOAC director's meeting and FMPP, that FMPP is a training, is very, very informative to MPO staff and directors and DLT is a collaborative meeting. And then a reminder that the November 2nd board meeting has been moved to November 9th. Director Woodfield, when will we be doing bylaws? When do you foresee that? The 5th, but if I can't get enough, like another draft, then it'll be the following. Okay. Member Certain? I'll miss the 9th meeting because of CTAC. That's a normal meeting. Got it. So myself and Ken will be out. Okay. Two to go. All right. Are there any other members of the public who would like to comment we offer? It's at the end in case there's something that we missed or you showed up late. We've had this on here. I don't see any other members of the public to speak. Sorry. Are there any member comments? Commissioner Wheeler? Very quickly. I was hoping that somebody from the airport would be here because they had made the request that... They presented it. Oh, they did? Early? Good. I'm so sorry. I was late. I had the wrong date. I had the wrong date in my phone. Good. So they're going to get a little bit of light. They just need little light, right? Did they say that? Um... So you can see it on Waldo Road going in that it's lit well enough that they can have access. They talked about light. Oh, good. They talked about potentially needing a change to sign ordinance if they want a bigger monument sign. You guys got the full thing. That's a full thing. Awesome. Awesome. All right. That was it. Thank you. I just pointed out the fact that I was late. Yes. The CEO was here. Good. To talk at the very beginning. Good. Good. Good. Good. Thank you. Thanks for covering. Was it commissioner Alford? Yep. Yeah. We got a... I don't know if the city was copied. An email from the Jordan Glen parents about... There was a really bad accident at the turn to Jordan Glen school about a year ago. And they had... The DOT... The FDOT has left, but they came in and painted some confusing arrows on the road that don't really do anything as a response to that. But the Jordan Glen parents have sent 108 petitions that they're sending by mail, but they sent an email talking about it that... But asking that we work with DOT to do something more substantial for safety because they're... They've had a number of close calls at that same intersection where that bad wreck was. So I'm just sharing that. I don't know what we can do since DOT isn't here except share that with them. They're aware. I've been exchanging emails with Achaia and Matt Nance in terms of... We can't physically install a left turn lane at this time because of budget constraints, but I'm pushing for some better signage. Alerting the drivers from both directions of a... Or a flashing light or a school zone or anything. Well, it doesn't qualify for a school zone. So my argument now that I'm trying to press forward is that regardless of the time... Whether a school zone is present, it's just maybe something from both directions that alerts drivers that please be prepared to stop between these arms, you know, a.m. and p.m. Just so they are aware that there might be some cars stopped waiting to make a left turn. Okay. Still working, trying to get on the traffic ops calendar. I do have one. Okay. And then I have another item. We've had a number of also close calls due to potholes out in the country. And there's been multiple requests from citizens about if we can't get to the potholes in time, is it can we talk about lowering the speed limit temporarily on those roads? Is that an appropriate thing to discuss in this meeting or should I... It's counting. It's counting. Potholes and speed limits will be counting. Okay. Because I told them I'd bring it up. So I'm bringing it up. But it's... They're saying the car flipped in, not Windsor, out that way due to a pothole last week. And there weren't any serious injuries. But, you know, it was due to a pothole. So it's starting to become a serious issue. So we need to talk about it sometime. But do you guys have issues too, right, in a few places? Ours all get fixed when they put them into the app. MyGNV. No, we do have a pretty rapid response through MyGNV. We're not perfect, but I've never heard of a car somersault thing. Well, you're doing really don't have a go on 7000. We try not to. Member Certain? The school zone markings and evaluations, is that like a request for us? The TPO board had asked staff to look into it. And I believe Allison did the research that she shared with the board a couple months back. In terms of the location, the driveway going to 158th, going to Jordan Glen. No, not Jordan Glen. I'm talking about a district school. To Williger on Parker Road. Did you? You know, there are more kids there now that are walking. That is already in the queue to be studied by Alachua County Public Works. Unfortunately, even though we knew there would be more of a draw from the local area, the way the process is set up is we have to wait until school starts to then count people walking and biking. Thank you. Councilwoman Taylor. Don't leave, Allison. The question with the bike thing that was done that you bought us the last time. Are they going to do an updated one? Because I believe that one was from back in, was it 90 something or early 2000s? I know it's been a while. It's like over five years old or 10 years old or something like that. Sorry, the what? The, um, when I asked about, uh, you to run out, well, you to check into what Ms. Certain's just speaking about with the school zones and different things like that in Alachua County. I think it was two meetings ago. And you brought us back the information. I responded by email with the information that we had. Yeah. That study was, as I said, I believe it was from maybe about five or 10 years ago. Are they going to do anything new? Because. A specific study for Terwilliger or. I believe it was for all of Alachua County that we did. They don't do, do it in that manner. Um, so for specific schools. We were talking about Waldo and, and, and looking at the data on it again, it was maybe about five or 10 years ago. Okay. So, um, if it's, yeah, if it's a school, um, within the county, then you can submit a request and our public works department can add it to their queue to evaluate it. If it was done very recently and there are no, you know, sort of context changes that have occurred, um, they may not go ahead and do that. Cause that takes staff time and money. Um, I think we're moving along cause the, the, um, we requested from the city and you guys gave back the information for us to get the lights turned on that we had previously there in Waldo. So I think you guys were just waiting on us when we voted last, um, month. So yeah. So we would love that money from you guys. We see if we can get our stuff on. I'm familiar with what you're talking about. Um, and there were comments from members of the board. All right. Then we're adjourned. Thank y'all. Thank you. Thank you.