Fort Collins NFRMPO Planning Council Meeting - June 1, 2023
5:11PM Jun 7, +0000
Speakers:
Keywords:
projects
model
weld county
year
transit
work
counties
larimer
region
list
greenhouse gas
growth
included
state
pretty
plan
forecast
meeting
weld
rtp
This conference will now be recorded. This conference will now be recorded and I'm wondering so much smaller however works
Sweet Well
Well 14 One we might have more than that but
I think there's 12 or 14 that was said on the interviews I couldn't tell you exactly how many there was. There's about 600
land planning and land use probably gets the most heat transportations pretty good. Because historical
got some pretty active buildings. Well, you gotta say that.
You recording? Okay? Yeah.
Recording. Good. Okay. Good evening, let's call the regularly scheduled meeting of the North range, transportation air quality planning council to order. It's June 1 2023. It is 6pm. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, we have a court that is good. Let's open for public comment. Please like to open our meeting for comments up two minutes on that which might be on or otherwise not on our agenda. Any comments from the public this evening? I'm concerned that you've not seen Mr. Keats. Burstein. Okay. Seeing no public comments, we'll move on acceptance of the meeting agenda. Hopefully you've had a chance to review the agenda. Are there any additions or corrections, please? Okay, let's move the chair would entertain a motion to approve the agenda please. So I should say to approve the agenda All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed same sign. Motion carries. Number two is approval of minutes same. Well, hopefully we have a chance to review those. Any additions or corrections to the minutes please. Not chair would entertain a motion to approve. Motion and second to approve the minutes of the made for 2023. Meeting further discussion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed same sign. Motion carries. This the lead planning agency for air quality agenda under Reports number three air pollution control division from Jessica. Jessica. Good evening, Jessica.
Hi. Oh, can you hear me? Wonderful. So happy to provide some verbal updates, um, happenings about the air pollution control division. So right now we are heavily focused on ozone season and ozone planning. I particularly like to highlight that we have recently revamped our ozone forecast emails. So they are a lot more too accessible to folks including myself who are not meteorologist but I want that more plain language daily update on the ozone forecast, including when we're forecasted to have high ozone days. And our handout includes links that y'all can follow to sign up for those updates. On the planning front, the division is undertaking efforts to reduce ozone pollution the Front Range in alignment with the governor's directives, we are particularly focused on strategies related to oil and gas drilling and pre production operations as well as engines particularly diesel engines, as well as natural gas engines under 1000 horsepower. We are intending to propose regulations before the commission this fall to reduce emissions from those sectors. We'll be continuing to hold monthly technical stakeholder meetings along with broader public outreach meetings between now in the fall. And I can put a link in the chat or send it over to Becky or so folks to get more information on when those meetings are and sign up for them. I'd also like to flag that we've been engaging stakeholders and I propose Colorado Clean cars program, which would advance the adoption of low and zero emitting vehicles in the state while So pursuit of preserving consumer choice and we are targeting a July rulemaking request before the commission to advance that. Additionally, we've also been engaging stakeholders on potential fees associated with the emission of greenhouse gases and in accordance with our statutory requirements. I've under House Bill 2112 66. And I can provide a link with more information on that as well. In commission related news, last month, the Commission approved the divisions request to hold a rulemaking focused on reducing emissions of greenhouse gases from the industrial and manufacturing sectors. Any folks who are interested in becoming a party to that rule can file for a petition for party status through June 15. Last month, the Commission also approved the divisions proposal for enhanced permitting requirements and disproportionately impacted communities. This was a really involved role. And we are incredibly grateful for all the stakeholder engagement we have that informed how that that rule books, and I'm happy to get into the specifics of what's included if folks are interested. If not, I can kind of pause for any questions or take my virtual seat. Thanks, y'all.
Any questions, please? Are Jessica. Jessica, we appreciate your time. Thank you. Absolutely. Before regional air quality control Council Report is a written handout that's in your packet with revenue GPO air quality program updates is written and that is in your packet as well. I'm sorry, you're gonna do. Forgetting sorry. There's a report. Okay, I tell you what to come up here. But she felt the need to talk, which is unusual for her. So I all right. That's the Metropolitan Planning Organization agenda now. Under reports chair as a is going to take a little liberty with his report first, after discussion with staff. We would like to propose a new policy and would unless there's great consolidation oversight policy and more discussion as needed. I just like to kind of adopt this in the fact that, wouldn't we take a look, we've had this conversation before about how many members of the council would take to direct staff. I think any of us who have sat on a town council have ever on a board county commissioners know that. There's a lot of money, a lot of time that's involved in staff input. And so if we have research projects are requested, otherwise, we have proposed it to other council members would concur. So we would need three council members in order to send a stamp on a mission of a researcher factfinding said if you'd like to comment further, I would appreciate it. But we think that's that's proven to the fact that Septime is valuable. And I think before this council sends them on something that could be heavy and workload, three of us need to agree.
Yeah. And I think that was a conversation that we had. And even though I think three it's been sort of a number, no matter the size of the council or commission, and you know, we have a team members, and so the three seems to be workable. I mean, it just was we as staffers thinking, one person says things that mean that you need to go do that or not. And it was a little confusing. So I think by having three, it helps give us the step direction. Appreciate counsel, considering.
But so have we had situations where somebody? I don't know. I mean, I think that's odd. I mean, on our council, you have to have a majority consensus to move something forward. You don't have to have a vote. Much
moving an item forward. This is more like giving staff direction to do something.
But that's the same with us. Yeah, we don't I don't get a go tell staff what to do unless I get Council's approval. Yeah, that's a that's the kind of way
we want to be. This way.
I like to think I can.
And so my request of counsel would be that it's, it's perfectly viable. In fact, it's the reason staff exists for us to make requests formally of staff, but it needs to be three of us in concurrence with that. And so if you have a question of set, certainly fall in the chair, or bring it up at the end at a meeting. But I will at meetings look for concurrence of three before we send staff on a on a major research project or what
but it's pretty, pretty easy to get.
The rest of my time I am going to yield to the deputy director of Colorado Department of Transportation in the fact that there's no need to Herman sit here until 830. We're not here for permitted we appreciate you coming up I mean, it's a lot when you don't do the zoom thing. And please take the time you need I know you have a presentation you are we're going to move your agenda item which is down here. are at the very end of the reports. Yeah, they've been around a period. We're gonna move via TPR boundary study reports all the way up to just kind of under the chair report. So I see my time to user.
Well, first, let me just say I appreciate that thoughtfulness. I listen prepared to sit down. I wasn't excited about it, but I wasn't prepared to. So I appreciate you're willing to do that. So I just want to talk a little bit about the TPR gounder study that CDOT is is undertaking now give you a little little background about it, and how we expect to proceed forward. So I think you all know that Senate Bill, telephone bill house, Bill 1101 was the legislation that was related to reduce or free transit rights. legislation was passed a year ago, and they updated to provide a little more flexibility in that state funding for transit agencies included in that bill, as it was introduced was a provision that that was related to TPRS that says, if if you have any transit agencies in your TPR, then if you have one transit agency, the mass transit agency will select someone to be a voting representative of that TPR. If there's multiple transit agencies in the TPR, then then they would those transit agencies would get together and decide who they want it to be the voting representative from from transit agencies. So that was, that was in the bill originally. I think many transit agencies already do this, some of them don't. But in but then when the when the bill moved over to the Senate, we included language and CDOT. To request the sponsor included language, to do a boundary study of the TPR boundaries. So it generated a lot of controversy. It's not often a bill goes to two conference committees, it went to two conference committees. Before really I had Senator winter, the sponsor and Senator Kirk Meyer, who you all know, well compromised and worked out what that language should be for the study. And, and when it did finally pass, the Senate passed unanimously, and at this, it has since been signed. The final version did include quite a bit of changes to what we need to look at as part of the boundary study. It also removed a one important word for lapbooks. The analyzing the equitable representation on step that was was expected to be related to population, the view was we shouldn't be looking at equitable representation, we should just be we can look at the representation on stack, but that word was was of a lot of concern, particularly for girls. A couple of the key points, we never intended in this amendment to change the number of rural TPRS. From the current number of 10. We now have a statute that says when CDOT makes our recommendation, we will not make a recommendation that that reduces the number of rural TPR. So that will regardless of what happens, that number will remain the same. The compromise also included some additional criteria related to to the things that we need to look at when we consider boundary changes, such as lane miles, freight traffic truck vehicle miles traveled some things that were more specific to rural Colorado, when those legislators were reaching out to the Rural Assistance. That's what they said they wanted to see as it also codifies the requirement that we have a public process and I'll talk about what we expect that public process to be to receive public comment from around the state. And then also important to note that, that we only as the CDOT staff make recommendations, and in this case, we'll make recommendations to the House and Senate Transportation committees, the dlrc. But perhaps more importantly, the transportation Commission's these are the Transportation Commission planning rules that lists which what the boundaries of each TPR TPR would be, they have the authority to make those changes, they'll be required to obey the rules, they'll be required to consider the recommendations from from CDOT. They're not required to adopt those recommendations. And that will be an entirely separate process that adheres to the State Administrative Procedures Act. So the statutory requirements, what we need to look at will look at the boundaries of transportation planning regions, we'll look at the membership of stack and the membership of track. And then also the consistency and transparency of the transportation planning process across all TP Rs. Conducting the same as I said, we'll have ample opportunity for public input. We'll report this to the transportation commission by November 30th of this year, following us completing the study, the Transportation Commission is required to act on my opening rules and begin consideration of the recommendations by June 2024. We think that we should be helpful ask the commission to be done with that process by June 2024. Because the statewide plan and regional planning processes, at least at the TPR levels will kick off right around that time. Last thing we want is to be considering boundary changes at the time when TPRS are developing the regional plans. So we think that if we present our recommendations by November, the Commission can potentially open the rules December game or to be done with it by June 2024. And not start with the factors for consideration on the boundaries. There's a whole host of things here highway and transit corridors, di communities, vehicle miles traveled truck vehicle miles traveled through, I won't go through each of these, I think you can see. And I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Some of these were things that that came out of the first or Senate first or second conference committee, some of them were things that seemed off and suggested the order of some of these have changed as n and these are listed one through nine that was suggested my last meeting, they sought to be bullets because they aren't in priority order. So we'll go ahead and make those make that change because they're not intended to be in priority order. But these are all things that we need to consider. Moving forward, we've already started gathering data, we're creating a mapping tool to assist in our analysis. Our GIS folks are great and, and can make a map at least for most of these factors can make a nice map that shows the TP Rs, the counties, and then each criteria that we're looking at, and then have a publicly available tool where if you want to look at population and Les Miles together, you can do that, or truck VMT and regular DMT, you can do that. Because it may be informative to see each of those factors separately, it may be informative to be able to layer them and we'll have a tool for any of us to be able to do that. I think that will also be helpful when we do kick off our state plan and original plans. I think having that information already, I think will be helpful and informative as we develop our long range plans. Let's see, we've already started attending we've since the legislation passed, we have attended every TPR meeting, we've attended a couple of the MPO meetings like this one. And we will expect to continue to attend in person every every TPR meeting in any MPO meeting. We're asked to attend until the study is done in November. From that public input standpoint, we're at this point considering five, five meetings, one for each seat up region for like five meetings, hybrid meetings, either I think we're considering hybrid at this point. But five meetings in the late summer, we will have gathered a lot of data, we can then present that to the public. I think the public is the TPRS the MPOs other elected officials not part of the MPOs or TPRS. In any other transportation stakeholders we can identify the general public is invited to attend as well. We'll outreach to them. I don't expect this is something that's high on their radar screen.
Like it's football with you there though. Yeah, I could be on stack at my alternate was incredibly helpful and informed me in fact, online. But he didn't for me. I heard from somebody else back here. That Commissioner Hickey said that she would also welcome other TC would also welcome comments from the communities from the general public on boundaries. And they could submit that I'm assuming he's part of this public process.
Yeah, that's absolutely, yeah. So we think we think well, we will gather data and present that data without recommendations in the summer. And then in the fall, once we've developed some recommendations, we'll go back out and we'll let you all know MPO TPR meetings and at these public meetings, what we think our draft recommendations are. Hopefully that gives us a sense, still a month, two months even to go back and take that public input potentially refined the staff recommendations before we present it to the Transportation Commission. I've already talked about desiring to finish the rulemaking by June 2024, and up startups. Let's see. We've already talked about developing new mapping tools. We're assessing the TPR IGA is and bylaws so MPOs due to federal requirements, like y'all are all set, but there's some TP RS that have intergovernmental agreements, but they don't have them all signed by their members or they have IG A's that form them but they don't have why laws that potentially is a concern, especially if they're doling out now multiple state multimodal option funds at risk involved in not having a set process for how meetings are run
would have premacy. They're curious as to who governs who. And I'm trying to be polite, not saying what gives you not the right to do that, to intervene between an agreement signed by two governments.
So we're required to look at by legislation at the transparency and consistency of the planning process across across all TP Rs. So we're required to look at that that may yield recommendations if there's a if there's a and I think I think one of the particular areas of concern is if there's a you're you're doling out state funds MPOs do that state and federal funds TPRS typically haven't done that. Now. They're doing that with multimodal options, funds or some fiduciary responsibility that I'm a little bit concerned about that, that we can't say you can't operate if you don't update your bylaws, but I think I think everyone that I know in the transportation planning process wants to do it the right way. And if we think that and if they then agree, we make a recommendation, maybe you shouldn't, then I suspect they probably will, and then we'll be ready to assist with that, if
they want them with the organization could still be free to adopt them in their their own model.
Yes. Yep. So I might be foggy on this because I'm getting old, but MPOs are usually ran by a board similar to this. And then TPR is are usually facilitated and managed through Sita. Is that not the case? I
think interestingly, no, it's not really the case. Okay, as I've started to attend more, that was the case. Meetings. Now we certainly particularly the regions, not as much headquarters, but headquarters participates to, we certainly help oftentimes where 90% of the agenda, its transportation planning, we the region's talking about the projects that we're building, receive input on what the what the needs are, and what the priorities are for local elected officials. But interestingly, in some cases, there's a county staff person that manages the TPR, or a city staff, person, steamboat, the same ginger, the same person has has effectively managed that TPR for 20 years. In other cases, councils of government that may or may not have matching boundaries, just another thing we're looking at, doesn't mean that they have to match but why don't they match and oftentimes it makes sense that they don't match, but calm employees may manage it. And and see that's there to assist, but not to not to actually manage from the minutes in the call for agenda items and things like that. That's typically either a cause or a
city or county checking for consistency and policies with meet the state and federal standards. I've seen us responsibility, right. I mean, typically.
I don't know that it seemed ops responsibility to determine except for transportation projects. This is the transportation planning process. We follow the transportation planning process, we all do that. But when it comes to things like bylaws, I think we have we have not taken as proactive approaches is making. So in addition, real quick to things that are active right now. We formed an advisory committee, and I'll show you those members here in a second. And we're looking at doing maybe a survey TPRS NPO MPOs, elected officials, general public, to see what folks think about are you familiar with your TPR? Are you satisfied with your TPR? Those those kinds of questions? So this is the advisory committee, there's I think, 11 members, it's a selection of current staff members, former staff members, elected officials that have never been part of this. TPR before I've never participated in the TPR process, staff people in this room, Suzette, for for this area, we've asked to be on it and she's agreed and and Commissioner Stevens is agreed to be on the committee. We have a variety of folks from around the state to help advise us to clarify, I don't think that we're asking them to create the recommendation for us, but we are asking things like if we go to public meetings, I don't want to see that staff to do that in a in a bubble and figure out what that should look like. Let's talk to the people who probably would want to attend a meeting like this and find out what how they think the meeting like that should Go are what they think the survey questions might be. And it's the same conversation, I'll have it stack, it's the same conversational habit, the TPRS, to see what you all think the survey questions should be or how we might run up, run a public meeting, it's just one more opportunity to get a little more in depth with with a variety of folks around the state that are not seeking out staff to engage them. I think that's my last slide. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you might have
questions for the Deputy Director, please.
Um, and I don't know what slide this is, is like back on slide two. Okay, I think we get a little hung up on the conversation of the boundary. But there's other things that we're talking about as well. It's the makeup of the track, that is the makeup of stack. So I think just to make sure we're all understanding what we're talking about here. It's not just the boundary, but it's those other things as well. So that's what the recommendation coming to transport Transportation Commission is going to be an all of those. Yeah,
definitely. And we may we may think, or make a recommendation that a particular TPR needs to update their bylaws. That wouldn't be a reason why we say and therefore, because you don't have good bylaws, therefore, we need to change your boundaries. That doesn't make sense to fix your bylaws, we don't recommend changing the boundaries, we're not going to recommend changing the boundaries. So it is two separate and distinct, distinct thing. So appreciate that clarification.
Additional questions. You gotta get home for TV dark. Before the game stuff. Before that it's important for the year my favorite stat. Yeah, for the next five minutes. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Okay. That concludes my report, to the executive director report, two
things that I have on my report tonight. The first one is long as and Rose long as you're up there. We have been talking a little bit about the SS four, eight grants. And so we decided not to go after them. As far as you know, we've been talking about for arrows, it's just gonna give us an update on thinking about why we're not going to go
up. Yes, so we had a couple of discussions with the technical advisory committee and also separate stuff from the TAC to talk about whether or not it made sense for us to pursue an SSP grant for an action plan for the region. And ultimately, the staff decided that now was not really a good time for us to go after that as region, a lot of our individual communities are pursuing those grants. But given the different timing that people were at in planning processes for safety action plans, said that it didn't really make sense for the MPO to go after it at this time. So just wanted to provide that update and answer any questions about that. And we still will participate in any of the action planning process that our local agencies go through. But we just won't be developing that plan through that grant at this time.
My question is, and that's helpful to understand, but my understanding is that in order to apply for safety, implementation funding, an area or community has to have done the action plan. So it's, is the north or major area pretty much covered by the action plans that are going forward? And that's why it wouldn't make sense for them to do that. I'm just worried about communities in smaller communities that might not be able to do the action plan independently. Right to cover some, yes. And
that was part of the discussion. And so it had came from some of the smaller communities as well, that now wasn't a good time. And so they understand that that is a requirement to be able to apply for those action plans. But given the request for funding that we'll be asking for, to complete that action plan, and still decided that now it wasn't a good time. So there will be areas within the region that wouldn't be eligible for the implementation funding. And the local staff were aware that. Okay,
that's just concerning, in terms of, again, the focus that I've been trying to raise around safety and the importance of having the resources to go after that and the assistance to smaller communities to be covered by an action plan. So necessary. Yeah.
And we can still revisit this during the next funding cycle that might, at that point, make more sense and also, maybe at the times that some of the plans from our local agencies are completed being able to fill in gaps places, but that's where we're at right now.
Just in case you're curious mares are allowed to arrive at I'm
sorry
I just said hi, that's
that's what you get when you get a smart ass as a chair.
who is applying for the grant though, as far as communities go, we applied to every candidate applied and we got, I think it's, it's actually pretty easy to get a grant because there's a lot of money out there for it. And for the planning grant and what we heard at the Neko Transportation Commission meeting was that there was still quite a bit of money and a lot of communities happen upon it. So is anybody here?
I do know. So Larimer County really got it last time Fort Collins has an action plan in place already. Weld County is going after it. This time. Loveland and Windsor are possibly pursuing it, or might complete it on their own.
For the communities that haven't like a Fort Collins has it. They have if you have a plan in place already, you can act still access. So safety, you have to prove that you have a plan and to show the plan before you Yeah, it
has certain qualifications to to contest that plan.
Issue comments on SS four A.
The next thing I wanted to talk about is we have a program that we're running this summer called pledges to ship your ride. It is on our Bango website. And that's the website that has the Anna Rose has. This is gonna be running from today, June 1 till the end of August, August 31. And we're asking people to log in and take at least four trips per month to be entered into a prize drawing to get to be determined. This is to shift out of single occupant vehicle into some other mode of transportation. So you can shift from a car to a bike walking, rolling, transit, carpooling, vanpooling teleworking, so we're all doing the telework at least part time you can you're eligible for that. That's utilizing the tools that are on the backend of our bingo website already. So we just had that essentially refreshed and turned on. And this is a partnership with our local communities. And we're promoting current events to get people out. And about. So just wanted to make you all aware of this challenge that we have going on for the summer that it is being done regionally. I guess that's a better term than that. Any questions on that one?
Question? What are the prices?
I don't know how it's being very.
Right, I usually get that I usually have to pay for that. I have to get to have questions. How do you prove that you've done this? You log into the website, and you information in the website. And so then you like if you say, you know, I'm teleworking two days a week you put in the days of the week? Yep. Wonderful. Thank you. And then the next thing that you want to bring up a presentation on the wreck. I just I prepared a brief presentation about the our working relationship with Iraq. And I wanted to talk about that because last month, we had a lot of discussion about the additional funds that direct was requesting for modeling. So without money in the mix, I just wanted to talk about what is the relationship between North Koreans and the rack and why we're why we have them as our partners essentially. Go to the next slide please. Okay, so this is the ozone nonattainment boundary we have this started as an eight hour ozone nonattainment area that is designated by EPA. We have to have a state implementation plan to perform our conformity determination. I think all of you that have sat on on this council for any length of time, you know, we do a new tip or we do a new plan, we have to do conformity determination and that conformity determination is insane how was our plans and programs doing against the budget and that budget comes out of the state implementation. That is what RAC prepares for the state or the non attainment areas within the state. So the rack has been designated by the governor and the BRAC has been around for many, many years. And I'm willing to give you the history from from when we started with the ozone nonattainment area 2008 But it is the governor of that has established the RAC has the executive orders that So this is how the rack operates, and this is what they do. So that's what this is. And if it's not the rack, then then who then who is going to make these state invitation plans. So it could fall to MPOs, it could fall to the state. In any case, I will just say it's a big lift, because the work that they do to develop a CIP is complex. And I'll show you some of the table of contents from the state implementation plans. And I know we have a couple of RAC members. So if you guys see or hear anything I'm saying incorrectly, just let me know, speak up as Commissioner brekkie fish receiving some repetition, getting more involved directly market, okay, one thing at a time. Okay, next slide, please. Okay, so this is, this is just a summary of the different executive orders since 2008, when this area became pulled into the nonattainment. area. So the first one was in 2009. And you can see if you look at this, and it says it is it created was created by the governor in 2009. And they set the rack of the lead planning agency for the Denver metropolitan area. But it really did cover the North Front Range area as well, that have to add to your expiration date. And to set it includes the local government representative from your for range metropolitan area, and they were tasked with reducing transportation related ozone emissions, and that was their charge back in 2009, then 2011, it was extended and amended, in this to prepare air quality plans for the region to demonstrate ensure long term compliance with federal air quality standards. So at this sort of, at this point, the governor is saying it doesn't make sense to have a lead planning agency for Denver and the lead planning agency for the North range, you're all in the same non attainment area. And so that's this combination where they made the racket just the one lead planning agency for the whole area. And then finally, we get to the executive order that was in 2013, that stays in full force until amended. And then expanded, expanded the participation of the RAC. There's now a member of our brain to PA which is Commissioner Stevens. There's a representative Larimer County, which is Wendy counting from their park. And then also Alicia Johnson is Weld County from the city of Athens. So this is the list of representatives I'm sorry, small, all this stuff rack slips. But yeah, this is the membership makeup of the rack, and on it that represents this region. Next slide. So a few definitions that I thought might be helpful, since we have so many acronyms, of acronyms and transportation. So now we have more acronyms in air quality. So the first one is the state implementation plan. And that is a document that is prepared to go to the EPA. For that says, This is how we're planning to get back into compliance with the standards that we have for ozone or whatever other pollutants that were out of compliance with the Clean Air Act is just that it was an act that was passed, I think the last amendments of 1990. And there are some people that think we should take a look at that. But people are definitely afraid to look at. But I think that's that's what the Clean Air Act, the CVP. He is the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. That is who Jessica Perico for the presentation early on. That's who she works for. And they do run a lot of the air quality work, they do a lot of the technical analysis and things like that state, then we have the regional air quality Council. They are a nonprofit, Colorado Corporation, and they shall perform only the duties and functions that are specified in the executive order. So that is their charge they are they are charged by the governor to do those specific things debated in the lead planning agency itself is responsible for making the state implementation. Okay, next slide. So this is just the chapters in the CIP are some of the chapters, this is not all the chapters in the document itself, just for our region is 245 pages long. There's a lot of stuff that goes into this analysis and this work. They do the background, and if you look under number four, you can actually see it, which is pretty small, but they have 123455 different models that they create and run. So that's one, you know, they say, Can you help us, you know, spend some of the money on modeling. These are the models that they're talking about. There's several of them that they do. Coming out of the CIP the highlighted one that I put on here that says the motor vehicle emissions budget, that is what we are most concerned with in the transportation world coming out of the CIP because that is what separate budget that we then use to run a conformity for our tips and our plans. So the process for the ACIP approval is the rack develops it, it goes to the Air Quality Control Commission for approval that it goes to the state legislature for approval, and then it finally goes to EPA. So it's a pretty long process looks like. And then this one i, this is I did, I scrub the racks budget off of their website, and I went through this, this is their budget, and in some high level of detail, obviously, they have salaries, benefits and administrative costs. And then they really have sort of two different things. They have ozone modeling work that they do, and then they have programs. And I think as you've heard from different presentations, over time that the programs are sort of optional, you don't have to participate in them. We don't have to have money to go into them. But they always are modeling is something that the rack does do for us. That because again, so I just wanted to give you sort of this highlight about what that working relationship is that we have correct. could answer any questions on that?
Is the rack swinging away? They're doing consultancy style work? Or for the appeal? Are they a single source supplier? Are there other people to do that type of work?
That while a lot of so they hire consultants themselves? They are a planning agency that then would hire out the expertise on the modeling work. So at this point, I would say I think it depends on sort of how you define us. And maybe they're thinking about it, we give that they do the work. And then they hire the consultants to actually physically do some of the modeling work.
But bottom line is we're reliant on a work product from them a product that could be it could be producing red bear mark. Yep. might be appropriate to put out a bid on the product that we need.
Well, the challenge I would say is, is that it's not just arrange the whole team and area. So the whole non attainment area could go out for bid.
Interesting. Yes, it doesn't
have to consult. Yeah, so there's a free market component of
there's also a middleman that is
just doing that. I think this is a how you describe this, it's really helpful to understand the relationship between the RAC and the work for the North rep range in the metropolitan areas. Really. I think it sounds like the effort years of Atlas to try to streamline the work. So that there's one agency doing that for both for the whole nonattainment area versus multiples. Streamlining, and I think at one point, the state health department did this work. And for whatever reason, I don't know it got through peeled off to the, to the rack. And I don't know why that happened. Well, when we were asking these questions, I mean, are is there? Are we just satisfied with the work that they're doing? Or we feel like or you're just saying we weren't? I mean, I'm not but I'm on the rack. So I don't I mean, I feel like you know that they're not saying anything. All I'm saying is I'm not saying it's good or bad. All I'm saying is that we have a lot of questions sometimes when the rack so I just wanted to give everybody circle reasons why we even engage with the rack and why we have sitting on the rack. And so what what they do for us in that modeling realm. So that was my whole intention tonight to talk about took that relationship with
us, though, is the non attainment areas, or is it specifically for North rent range as well.
This way, when they do the, when I was saying they need the motor vehicle emission budget, they produce one hole and then they split it up the north area, budget and then the southern area budget. So yes, they do have a hole and then they split it between them. Okay. And then I have one last thing if there's no other questions. The last thing I wanted to say is that this is Bundoora ops class, again with North range. So
what are we going to do so her last day with us is tomorrow. Next week, getting herself any time off, which I think is a big mistake, but that's
starting with CDOT We're doing a lot of
transformations right on I have set a strongly worded letter to Director Liu, she brought the trash but your work with the MPOs for exemplary and
Johnny speed, it's all in there. Great. Okay, thank you Suzette. Next is the tech report, which is written in your packet, as is number nine that mobility reports and the community advisory committee report is written in your packet as well. So let's get on to agenda item 11. Under presentations, that statement, presentation is Ms. Garner. Here she is. She's online. Okay. Let's go.
If you're talking, Elizabeth, we cannot hear
you can't Yeah, we can't hear you.
She's here? We're not hearing.
For a brief second.
Can you hear me?
Okay. Yes, thank you. Okay, great.
Hi. Sorry about that. So thanks very much for inviting me. I'm sorry, I didn't
get up there for it. I had another presentation with a water of water presentation with the Colorado Water Conservation Board this afternoon. So worked out better to do it this way. So apologies for not being there. But I appreciate the time. And I'll just I guess I say Next slide. Yeah, so what I what it perfect. So what I wanted to talk about was really, what are some of the biggest trends impacting the state and impacting North's Front Range, and potentially things for you guys to be thinking about, in terms of the future for Colorado. So some of the weird things, or maybe things you wouldn't really notice is the fact that Colorado is growing at a slowing rate. So we're slowing down. Now I say that as a state as a whole. Okay, so take it as that because within your region, that's not necessarily the case. We're seeing that bursts are down, deaths are up, migration is slowing, mobility is slowing across the country. But we have been seeing that we've seen this concentrated growth along the front range, and really a lot of concentrated growth in the north Front Range, both jobs and people. The other piece that we're really seeing is aging, and the fact that we're aging really fast. And that actually will also impact population growth and type of growth and maybe type of needs for certain areas. Some of the fastest growth is in the 65. Plus some of the slowest growth is actually in the working age population. And the fact and we're also seeing even a slower growth in the kiddos in the under 18. We're also seeing that we're becoming more racially and ethnically diverse. And that's important to know in terms of client base, for example, next slide. So just to kind of prove the points is the fact that over the last decade, it was the second slowest decade for the US. And so if the US is slowing down, that's going to impact it states, it's the second slowest decade compared to, and the the most the slowest is was the Great Depression in the 1930s. So that's important to see in terms of population slowing down. Colorado actually grew twice as fast as the US over the last decade, and we were ninth and sixth in terms of total in percentage change. But the last two years, we've seen a pretty significant departure for the state as a whole. Instead of our growth, on average, around 70 75,000, it fell to 26,000. So about a third of the growth than we normally see. And not only slowdown in the total numbers, but also a slowdown relative to other states. So it's both slowing down and slowing down to roll it relative to other states. And at the same time we've seen that both over the last two years 17 States lost total population and then this last year 19 States lost total population. Next slide. If we look at the graph back showing where that growth has been on the left hand side is over the decade over in the right hand side is over the last two years. And the first one on the left hand side, we can see that concentrated growth along the front range. And like I said, it was both 95% of the total jobs as well as 95% of the total population, they go hand in hand. And that is an important, you know, understanding is that job growth really creates and drives a lot of the population growth. But interestingly, the last two years where we've seen this pretty big departure is that we did see kind of a Halloween out of the city center. So we saw total population decline in Denver, Boulder, Jefferson, some of that has to do with other pieces like aging, but important to see that piece important to see that total population decline along the eastern plains, as well as in the central mountains. And that might surprise a lot of people because people thought, oh, everybody's flocking to the mountains. Well, they may have been flocking as visitors, but not necessarily as residents. Next slide. So when we look at total population change and the components, what are those drivers? Well, we got three pieces, births, deaths, and net migration, births minus deaths is known as natural increase. It's the blue component of this graphic. This chart starts in 1970. And one of the things that you'll see with that is that we peaked a natural increase in about 2007. And it's been slowing ever since slowly, because we're seeing a slowdown in birth, and an increase in deaths, not just COVID death, just also because we're getting older. But on the net migration side, we can really see in the red, this business cycle that's in there. And the fact that we've seen a net migration slowing basically since 2016 2017. So pre pandemic, we started to see population slowing down. And really that pretty big slowdown in the last two years. But again, you've seen this business cycle over time. Next slide. So what does it look like for the North Front Range? So if we break it up, and I'm focusing just on Larimer and weld, we know that it also comes down into, you know, parts of Adams County, but I'm focusing on the total counties that I know doesn't include all of Larimer, necessarily, as well. Just it makes it easier to do it this way. On learners on the left hand side weld is on the right hand side. And same idea. So the natural increase is the blue component. Orange is the net migration, we can see that both counties really driven by net migration, that's a big foundation of it, not as much of the population is actually from the components of the natural increase component, the births and deaths. You can see on the right hand side or the left hand side with Larimer, you can see the same slowdown, both in net migration as well as natural increase. Oh, but alas, you don't necessarily see that on the Weld County side. It has held pretty steady with that natural increase and net migration with the Weld County. And that's really important.
To really understand I think that weld is going to be a little bit different. Next slide.
Now, I've talked about the slowdown in birth, and that is really significant. We've seen a slowdown in births in the United States, because, you know, just birth rates have fallen over time. It started way back in the after the 70s. And it's continued to fall in the United States. The total fertility rate for women is at 1.6. In Colorado, it's 1.5. And replacement is 2.1. So significantly below replacement level of birth. That slowdown in bursts in the United States, with ended up in a million person decline in the under 18. Over the last decade, 27 states had an absolute decline in the under 18. Population. For Colorado, we actually had an increase in the under 18. population of about 38,000 of the 744,000. So only 5% of the growth was in an under 18. In Colorado, that's what this map is showing. We saw 43 of the 64 counties had an absolute decline in that under 18 population. And it doesn't matter where you were Eastern Plains San Luis Valley western slope Denver metro, we saw declines in the under 18 population. Weld County represent ended 43% of the total growth in the under 18. Population 16,000 of the 38,000. So this is really
why you're doing this presentation, Weld County actually ranked high in affordability for families is why I think that comes from.
Absolutely, absolutely. And you can also see that, you know, there's a huge correlation with building housing. Right. That's the reason why it's more affordable because well kept up. So locked.
I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I've seen this in your presentations or if I've seen this, this elsewhere. Can you comment? I believe that Weld County has Weld County school districts are one of the few counties in the state that are actually experiencing an increase in enrollment. Have I seen that from your presentations?
I don't think I may have been the point is the the population in the under 18 continues to grow. So there would be no reason to see a decline in school enrollment. That would be continued growth, because again, you're continuing to see the growth in that under 18 population. And it's really one of the only counties in the state where it's also seen growth in Larimer. Not as fast but it still hasn't seen a huge, like a big slowdown. The other county is El Paso, that you've seen continued growth in that under 18 population, but at a slower rate, both Larimer and El Paso. But in well, that stayed pretty solid. And I agree, I think it's has to do with a housing that is more affordable. Because typically, that's what families want, when they you know, they don't want apartments with kids that's hard and noisy, and too many kids too close. So it makes sense. It's something though to be aware of is that you do see this growth in kiddos. So thinking about you know, everything from you know, new licenses, as they age into driver's license. We know more drivers are all going to be part of that mix that you will continue to see in wealth. Next slide. So if we then look at migration, that's what this chart is looking at is migration rate by age. So it's done as a rate so you can compare the counties to the state equally. Otherwise, there's you know, it doesn't make sense. So this is a rate per 100. The blue is Colorado. So you can see Colorado's really bread and butter is that kind of 22 to 37. That purple one with the star is Larimer, and you can really see that very highly concentrated at the college age because of the university. Now we know that weld also has a university. But we don't see that spike like you do. For Larimer. What you see is in well does that kind of reddish colored one is a smidge older, but you also see a higher share of the kiddos so not only migrating in families, but maybe also attracting families with children. So it's not just births that are creating that increase. It's also migration with children. So it easily could be you know, the family moves from Larimer to weld or from atoms to weld or Denver to weld, or even out of state 12. But you can see that as well as older age groups, as well. So important to see, you know, what I like to say is that weld is pretty popular to most age groups. So that's something to be aware of, as well. Next slide. And the biggest thing and I mentioned this in the intro is why do we see migration and the most important thing to understand is if there is a huge correlation with job growth and net migration, when we see stronger job growth, which is the blue bars we tend to see net stronger net migration which is the red line. When we see weaker job growth, we see weaker net migration now. It holds very strong except in a place like weld, where weld also is a strong area for net migration for jobs in other counties as well. So if We go to the next slide. And talk a little bit about the economy. I want to talk what's kind of driving the jobs. Next slide. If we look at the map, this is really looking at quarter two or quarter 320 19. So pre pandemic levels of employment compared to quarter 320 22. So how many counties have made it back? Well, we know the state as a whole has come back in terms of total employment. We also know though within that not every industry and not every county, red, orange, yellow are the counties that are back to pre COVID levels of employment, all of the shades of blue are not. So if you're following employment in Weld County, for example, we know that they're not back to pre COVID levels of employment, a lot of that is the oil and gas jobs. But that really doesn't matter in terms of migration, because there are these other counties that you also that will also help support in terms of labor force. So we think the Denver Metro area, we also know, Larimer County, as well. So, if we look then on the right hand side is showing job growth by the different counties in the front range that I wanted to kind of compare you guys to and we have well, they're in the purple and we have Larimer. They're in kind of it's a funky green. Lammers back to pre COVID levels employment. Well, this still below but both counties really doing a lot of growth pre COVID In terms of jobs. So you've got these factors for both Larimer and weld dry. Cut out the most important part of the presentation.
Elizabeth we lost you
shrill voice is gone.
Am I still there?
Yeah, you're back. Yeah, you cut out. In fact, you dropped out right when you said drop.
Okay, so my, what did I say? I
said it's dropped in Weld County, Larimer County, but we're starting to see that.
Okay, so I apologize about that. I'm sorry that I went away. So I guess the big the big point is, you see this job growth in Larimer and weld over time. And you can see, you know, this is anchored to 22,002. So, strong job growth, some of the strongest job growth in the state. Yeah, sure, well, it's not back. But that doesn't really matter. Because weld also feeds a labor force to a lot of other counties, and the front end the Denver Metro area. So all things that you're well aware of, but knowing that weld is, I don't want to say it in an pejorative way. It's really a bedroom County for a lot of counties, so not negative. But that means that there's going to be a lot of drivers, maybe less than what we've seen historically, because of COVID. And people aren't necessarily all going back into the office. But certainly, you're, you've got drivers, you've got transportation problems, not problems. You've got transportation issues, that are going to be part of that
question on a data point as far as how they register it. We have seen the exponential growth from a residential standpoint in Weld County. I'm curious as to if somebody is commuting now, one or two days a week down into the metro area where their job is, is that job still listed in the metro area, even though the bulk of the work might be being done remotely in well?
The State Demographer? She's like that again.
Hey, are you guys I'm sorry. Yeah. Okay, I can hear you too. Like you guys went away as well. So go with the question again.
My question and I'm curious with you, I'm a Weld County Commissioner. So therefore, I'm bedroom community. We're gonna work on that. But I am curious. And the fact that what happened I talked to constituents two things ring true in Weld County. One is the regulatory environment that surrounds oil and gas and swelling and permits from CO GCC, dramatically impact employment in Weld County just does. Secondly, we hear a lot of jeez, I used to live in the metro area couldn't afford to live down there anymore. My job remains in the metro area. But I'm living in Weld County now. And I only commute one or two days a week. So my question is, even if their job may be with a company that's in the metro area, the bulk of their work is being performed in Weld County out of their spare bedroom or office in the basement. I'm just curious as to that. From a recording standpoint, is that job still? Is that still accredited to the county in which it's created? Not necessary to the work for
right now? Very good question. So jobs are recorded by place of establishment. And residents are counted by place of you know where they reside. So if you've got a person that lives in Greeley, but works for a company in Denver, that shop job shows up in Denver, not in Greeley.
Honestly, would probably attest, that's something we've heard a lot of from constituents is we moved here because we don't have to be near a job all the time anyway.
Yeah, absolutely. You guys as well as Douglas County, we see a lot of growth in both places, really driven by the fact that they don't have to show up in the office. Thank you. So next slide. So let's talk about housing and households real quick. Next slide. You know, we one of the biggest challenges, I think, with housing is that we continue to see this boom and bust cycle. The orange bars are new housing units, the black line is household formation. So basically think about new households. And one of the biggest things that we see is that housing and building and construction kind of goes through this boom bust cycle. A lot of it has is outside of our own hands, because it has to do with sometimes financing, and other macro conditions. So but it's a problem, right? It creates a challenge. When we stop building, which we did in Colorado, we were building more than 40 50,000 units a year we fault fewer than 10,000. That creates a problem that creates a real tight housing, then, and price prices escalate. And it's not great for a lot of folks when that happens. And then it's not great when we go through the bust cycle, as well, because firms crumble, employees lose money. So it's it's not good. So there's got to be something that we do to improve that piece. But what it's done for Colorado's maybe worse than other places, it pushed us to having the sixth highest median home price, the fourth median highest median rent, yet only the 10th highest median household income. So basically, it makes it harder, you know, for the lowest income side. And it's not a problem for the more wealthy people that come with money from, you know, California in New York or Boston. But it does make it harder for the folks that have been here for years and maybe aren't making those same salaries. Next slide.
If we look at, yep. When you
look at this housing boom and bust cycle and the growth of housing and the things when you guys look at this, maybe it's going to be a little bit farther down, or maybe it is maybe I'll wait. Our supply versus our demand for housing.
Right. So I say that again. Not a lot of homes
that are in Colorado. I mean, Greeley. I mean, I think we got about 100 homes on the market. We got 1000 people looking for Yeah,
right.
After 2008 the supply didn't keep up with the demand.
Right? So if go go back one slide. And that's what you can.
This is a state of Colorado. And if you noticed, weld and Larimer are growing like crazy. And so this is averaged out on the guest. Yeah. And so we're on the wrong side of this equation.
Right. You know, definitely a supply demand. problem where population is continuing to grow. But we weren't building housing. You know, the great recession was horrible. And well, they actually suffered pretty significantly. So did Larimer during the Great Recession, because we weren't kind of overbuilding. I don't know, if you remember just the number of homes going into foreclosure. In 2009 2010, it was pretty horrific. You know, so it makes sense we stopped building than we continue to grow. But then you all probably are well aware, it takes, you know, probably five to seven years to start a business cycle back up again and getting builders building getting pyramids, getting all of those things done. So, you know, we've always had this mismatch with supply and demand. And it's, and it's bad. Next slide. But we have started making up in terms of those permits on the left hand side is Colorado, the blue component is single family, the orange is multifamily. So we have started building, or started permitting, we actually had one of our highest years ever in terms of building permits in 2001, higher than we even saw in the 90s which is crazy to think about. And if you look at the left hand side or the right hand side, then we've got Larimer and weld weld is in the blue Larimer is in the orange, same cycle, we stopped building significantly, you know, and then starts back up again, in terms of permits. And you know, any of you that are in business understand, when you start and stop a an entity, it really is not easy on a lot of folks. But at least what we're seeing right now is a lot more permitting going on, we'll start to catch up, because we do see population starting to slow down. So on this end, we'll start to see supply increase demand slowdown, and that will hopefully start to put some downward pressure on price appreciation. Next slide. On top of all of this, we also have this aging thing where we're pretty young state, and both counties are pretty young, but we're aging pretty fast. And that's having an impact, especially on the labor force. And that's what I want to mention right now. Next slide. This these two graphs show the age distribution of both counties left hand side Lerma right hand side weld. A couple of things that you can see you can actually see on that left hand side with Larimer, the slowdown in the bursts. So pretty significant slowdown. You know, weld or Larimer County probably will start to see a slowdown in the school age population this next decade, not last decade, but this decade. Weld, you can see maybe a smidge of a slowdown. But I was looking at this more more recent data from this year. And actually there's a pick back up in the bursts in weld. So maybe we'll only see a little bit of a trough. But the bigger issue is live we look at the black lines that's at age 65. What we do see at the same time now is a lot of people aging into 65 plus and what do they typically do as they age into that 65 Plus they tend to retire. So for the state as a whole what we've seen is last decade, about 500,000 people retire this decade, we're expecting about 400,000 people to retire. And we don't necessarily see a net out migration of the older adults. So compounding the challenges that we've got filling new jobs is we're also going to have a challenge filling old jobs. So pretend me I'm going to age into retirement this decade. I'm not going anywhere. The next state demographers not living in my house. So I'm going to be constraining supply because I'm not going to make this house available. And it my job is not a new job. I'm an old job. So on top of any new job growth that you see in Larimer and weld, you've also got old job growth caused by retirement. And again, this is going to hit both counties but especially well, for anybody that might be living in weld, yet they hold jobs in other places. So it won't show up as a cause from a new job. It's just tends to be from retirement. So think about this compounding issue. So next slide. If we then look at kind of the forecast over the next decade, the top Up is Larimer. The bottom is well, we're forecasting about 50,000 and growth in Larimer County. But if you look by age, almost 50% of the growth in Larimer County is actually forecast in the 65 plus. So it's not actually forecast by necessarily people moving in, that are young, like that typical migrant, it's actually that older adult. And it really could be not necessarily from migration, but really just by celebrating birthdays. On the Weld County side, however, we're forecasting about 95,000 in growth this decade, so about 9500 a year, which this last year you met that in, supersedes who preceded it. But only about 25% of the growth is in the 65 Plus where really the majority of the growth is in that working age population. So different kind of scenario for both counties. Next slide. So I guess the biggest point with aging is to really be aware, and in terms of percentage change, we really see the fastest growth in that 65 Plus and slower in the younger ages. Except for maybe, well, well, there's got a little bit more balance, and more growth at that younger end, but still 25% of your growth in the 65 Plus, is pretty significant and fairly new. So well, there's gonna see it at both ends at the young end and the older end, where Larimer is going to see it primarily at that older end, but still in that kind of school age population. So kind of a word of warning is that you're gonna see actually a lot more older adults on the road, as well as getting driver's licenses. So that could be a lot of fun. labor force, labor force, you're gonna see a lot of commuting, still, but hopefully somewhat downplayed with COVID. And the fact that more people are doing the remote. So they're only doing it two days a week instead of five days a week. Really thinking about it in terms of housing and households that a lot of the growth you're going to need for new people coming in, like think about my scenario, people retiring, but aging in place, people create community. And so thinking that they're going to leave is not likely, they're probably going to age in place, because that's what traditionally, traditionally older adults do. And then we've got millennials coming into home buying and second Holbein. So think more in Larimer County, being Be aware of your second homeownership, especially on the mountain side, have that and I know that's probably not part of the MPO. But still impacting the county as a whole in impacting commuting patterns and driving patterns, Gen Z aging into renter ship and and homeownership. So just be aware that this big issues, big changes coming forward. Next slide. So what are we forecasting for the counties? Next slide. Really, it's this idea behind things is that we've got a both two models that we run one is an economic model, we really are looking at jobs, and what are the jobs that are forecast to grow in your region. And then on the other side, on the right hand side, we've got the demographic components, we look at your current population, age people through time of reply, birth rates and death rates. And so that population side is our labor supply. That job side is our labor demand. And then where there's not equilibrium, we ended up bringing in net migration to fill that next slide. So I've said it now probably a gazillion times, just keep an eye on job growth, job growth really does equal population growth. And so when people come in and say, yeah, no, we're going to cut we're not going to build homes anymore. But we're going to build, we're going to allow more commercial and industrial growth doesn't make a lot of sense, right? Because a job is a person and a housing unit is where that job sleeps at night. So it's having to look at all of those bundled together. We are seeing a slowdown in growth. But it's not going to impact especially Weld County as much but it is going to slow things really for the state as a whole.
But North Front Range even in that scenario is forecast to be our fastest growing region in terms of percentage change in the state as well as fast growth is in our 65 Plus and what is that 65 plus growth going to do? It's going to drive more growth due to retirements and needing people to fill positions. And housing is going to be key and all of that, and understanding how do we create this balance right between housing, job labor force people retirements. Next slide. So if we look at all of that, if you look at the bar chart on the right hand side, these are the forecast over the next decades. So between the in this last decade between 2010 and 2020, we saw about 60,000 in Larimer, about 80,000, almost in weld, slowing for Larimer for the next two decades, and then even more so in the following between 2014 and 2050. In weld, we actually see it picking up over the next several decades, and then slowing down in that out decade between 2014 and 2050. In terms of that total change for the North Front Range, as a whole forecast to increase by about 415,000, between 2020 and 2050. So over these 30 years, for the state as a whole increasing by about 1.7 million, it's actually going to be a little bit closer to 1.6. Within that about 95% forecast in the front range as a whole, with very little growth in some declines in the San Luis Valley, Eastern Plains northwest part of the state. Next slide. Lots of uncertainties in that. And you know, all of those, the top four there are probably equally weighted uncertainty in terms of international migration, we've seen some impact since December at the border. We don't know what the national policymakers are going to do in terms of international migration, with so many states actually losing population, that they could change policies to allow more international so that other states, I mean, we're doing pretty well filling labor force compared to some other states that are not doing so well. But I think water beyond a doubt is probably going to be the number one factor and could be our number one constraint. And certainly for the North Front Range could easily be be a constraint. We typically, when we're doing our forecasts, we talk to counties, and we ask about water, and we ask is water constrained. And to date, we're still not getting a water constraint that is within our forecast horizon for either County, but we're always open to listen. And we'll obviously take that into account, housing, boom, bust cycles, all of those others listed. There are also factors. So any other questions that you guys might have?
I just have a question. So you know, thinking about like Europe and Japan, who've already experienced some of this slowdown of growth and lower birth rates? Are there lessons to be learned? Like, you know, I guess I'm curious, like, what what they learned is they experienced the same thing. And I mean, you know, clearly you're right, older drivers on the road, morning, maybe for transit and stuff like that. But are there things that we that we can, you know, learn from with what they how they've had to adapt in those kinds of similar situations?
Right, no, I think it's a really good question. And so what you know, they definitely saw a significant slowdown in economic growth. And that is going to be this other side is as we slow down, we will start to see a slowdown in economic growth. And we have to be okay with that. They have a very low tolerance for any international migration. What they are pushing in Japan, for example, is actually more family friendly. policies. So a lot of places are providing you a free house, if you get married and have kids. So they're trying to push growth from a fertility side. They're covering, you know, maternity leave completely. They're making it easier to work and have a family. They're not necessarily changing any of their migration, international migration policies. Canada, on the other hand, had started to see this slowdown. And they've actually increased their international migration policies as well as family friendly policies. So easier for daycare, health care, maternity paternity leave. But they're also being very strategic in their international migration policies. So you can see, you know, what I always say is, I don't know if there's a best answer, I say that there's situations and then consequences. You can have a lot of population growth and continue this economic growth, but at the detriment to maybe water supplies, the environment, congestion. But if you completely slow it down, then you've got constraints in terms of economic growth. And maybe you like right now they're super tight labor force, maybe you won't see people filling positions for not just regular jobs. But what about for city jobs or for regional jobs? What about daycare worker, you know, daycare workers, health care workers. We will have to then find options on that other side if we're constrained. So it's, I think it's just this question of how do we balance
visual questions for this garden? This aging angry baby boomer, thanks, you know, the old man was shaking his fist at the club. Thanks, Elizabeth. As always enjoy your presentation. Thank you. Okay, we got all that course. Nice. We are on to presentations number 12 North bred range MPO models presentation for final time with the same Did you just get it up all.
Over we wanted to do tonight is given an overview of the two models and upgrade to teams. We've been working on these for the last year and a half. And I've wrapped the out of Africa summit and now to inform the regional transportation plan that you all are scheduled to adopt in September. And on the call, we do have the consultant to work mostly on travel models. If there are more technical questions Sean McAfee from Cambridge, systematics is online to answer. So first, we're going to talk about the land use model. And we'll talk about travel demand model. Because we have so much on today's agenda, what I'm going to just go through tn Z their questions to share if you want to stop in between. So the purpose of our lease model is to forecast the location of people in jobs and a very well deserved from Gartner to review because we do use the same demography offices projections to set up control from its early use model. And then our travel demand model takes those outputs or release model along with other information and forecasts our travel patterns go into the future. Every time we update these models, we extend out to the next horizon here the mask for this next RTP we're going up to 2050. And these models can be used for other purposes to projects or transportation plans. It's not just really starting to get requests all the time. So it needs to inform an RFP we do major updates every four years, which is our cycle for updating RTP and then we convene a model steering team develop guidance process, so we invite the land use planners, which is environmental agencies to review the model inputs and outputs to ensure that they are reasonable. The basis for this set of model athletes is 2019. And you can see here our model area outlined in blue covers most of wealth a lot of Larimer extends the amore Murray genteel boundary because we do that ozone conformity assessment with the entire northern sub area of those mountain area. On this matter, we see the jobs and population in 2019. So those are based your data set we're working from and we are expecting a lot of growth as you heard from Elizabeth. So for that entire modeling area is a 60% increase from 2020, up to 2050. And we need to determine if these three lanes call where all these additional people and jobs are going to locate within my model. We do that we can improve in sin location choice model. This is a model that's used by a lot of MPOs across the country. And they calibrated specifically to each region looking at development patterns in early 2010s. And he calibrate the parameters for the model for that region. On top of that calibrated model, there are four sets of inputs that we gather to better inform the forecast. So we've talked about this and control totals and your current state demography office and determine the total number of people households in jobs that are expected in the region. Then we look at each census slop, you pull the land use plans, and in some cases, the zoning code for all the communities in the modeling area and use that to determine what's the most highest number of households and a job that fit into each census block. So there's a bit of translation there for a million if you speak to this model speak of what's the highest number that could fit into each block in the model and respects that. The third item is the past what developments have happened recently, or are anticipated, and then you can plug those into the model, and it will fill those with pastels, jobs. And then we know that there are other factors that are going to influence development that are being directly captured through these inputs, then often take more of that expert view to determine if these results are reasonable or not. So we know things like slope of the land, floodplains. Whether redevelopment of an area is likely those are all things that aren't directly captured that we need our milestone team members to review these results. And let us know where results are reasonable or unreasonable adjustments. So this is another way of seeing those sort of goods being fed into that calibrated location choice model. And then the output is a population and jobs. He says luck, we're our forecasters. Our model stereo TV has mouths your team has been eating for the last year and a half or so they help us develop the inputs. And then they provide review of the outputs and immersion reviewed a 2050 lease rent and provided column staff that we've addressed. And they provided another round of edits in May that we are in the process of implementing. And this is the current draft results that we have for our forecasted population, the light blue dots, our population in 2018. And the dark blue dots should have growth from 2019 up to 20. So a lot of growth in the center of the region, the outskirts of our communities. Same type of map for jobs with light green showing the jobs and 2019 dark green showing the jobs added by will have more. As I said, we're still finalizing these land use forecasts. And so there's going to be community level summaries that will be available in the RTP. But we just wanted to bring high level review of growth in our lease model and how that works. So now we're going to jump to the travel demand model. We have or set travel demand model. If you've heard the lingo, are two main types of models or set of model activity based models and other kinds of activity based models to more inputs to develop and they can they mostly answer the same kinds of questions to test the model to base models can answer a few additional questions. And consider trip chaining is critical when you're being asked to testify meaning whereas in a four step model, we should have considered sort of independence. There are four key questions that are answered in the Forza model versus how many trips are generated, where are those trips will go, what mode will be tainted, what bracket will be used for those vehicle transit trips. So are one of those look at all modes, non motorized modes as well those just simply aren't assigned to the network mode share with estimated buyer capital. And then you can use those outputs to see what is the expected volume on a short segment and what is the X up to speed. Now much congestion will be occurring in different time periods in our forecasters. As part of the greenhouse gas rule that TC adopted in 2021, there were a set of modeling standards that were established. And TC recognized that this would be a lift for the MPOs to levy standards, and they awarded $250,000 of the state's and OOF funds to the Norwegian ACU to enhance our model to better meet the standards. So that was awarded last summer, we expanded scope or contract with Cambridge to address these models enhancements. And so this is the summary of this work on this slide, we are looking at personal level demand instead of looking at households. So it's a more fine to assessment of the travel patterns of the population in that region, considering the age person tied auto ownership and income. Whereas our previous lease model just looking at household characteristics and didn't have information at a personal level again. One thing to clarify, this is all synthetic data, we don't have actual data on the individuals in our region, we've synthesized population, molded ice overseas for the first time for our model. Data from cell phones is about transmitting behavior and not biased, but that provide uptake travel patterns that you could then use to inform the model. Work From Home was enhanced. We had assumptions, pretty basic assumptions about promoting our previous model, which we need to flush out we'll be able to adjust those and have worked become really better integrated into the way the track model was looking at attributing behavior. And lastly, induced demand, which is a complicated topic. So the next few slides are going to go through the different elements of the deduced domain and talk about how. But the key thing here is that consideration accessibility, our previous trouble model did consider many elements of induced demand, but it did not have this consideration of accessibility says something that was added to this model.
So if you define that the increase in the overall amount of trials such as person mass travel, or vehicle miles traveled in response to improvements in transportation capacity, or level service, there are five main ways that induced demand can work. That is by shifting the route shifting mode, shifting the destination, adding additional trips, or new development, spurred as a result of these changes in transportation capacity. And for three of these, they are included in the model, they have been included in past models. For one of them, it's somewhat included through this research that our consultant has conducted. And the last one is nothing which I was planning to go through each of these slides through each of these elements. And I do want to say there is also a sixth element. I am forgetting that's the way how Oh, she didn't have a she didn't have a date and also results for genes and capacity that doesn't have a substantial impact on miles traveled or miles traveled to I've left it out of this presentation that is a system
of induced demand.
So Rochus This is where travelers choose a different route and it changes the volumes on a particular facility. But it has very little impact on overall regional beauty. Do you really care about this summer regional perspective so in this example from really wants to try to prefer Collins and they are going to be five and 14 and then in my 25 minutes improved and it's easier to get that raise to propose and so they changed direct so that's a wrap shift looks like and as I said it has very little impact usually on the model does a hell for this because it's looking at the congested travel times so the different routes and choosing what makes the most sense for the merchants this is when a traveling choose a different model and it's changed over aliotti But if it's not significantly change your personnel strangle because the person so in this case someone is traveling by bus from really to Fort Collins, and after some improvements I 25 They may choose to drive their purse All vehicle instead, increasingly end. Destination ships this is when a traveler chooses to visit a different destination, or chooses to limit it further or closer to frequent destinations. So in this example, someone who is traveling to Loveland, because although they want to travel to Fort Collins, it's just too difficult to get there. And so they perhaps they do their shopping in Loveland, Fort Collins. But after the improvement, they make that trip to Florida with adding some additional VMT. And this is captured in our travel demand model. Additional trips, this is when a traveler chooses to make a trip they would otherwise go, which is pretty challenging to find in the data, our console, looked at the accessibility of destinations and how to influence travelers making additional trips, and found very limited evidence that that was occurring in the region. But in this case, someone would make additional trips if the facility has improved versus fewer trips. Lastly, new development. This is an example where developers may locate in different places because of that capacity. The model does not capture this, this is pretty tricky to do, because each model needs to calibrate it. And once you the way to reflect this in your modeling is to have a model speak to each other to read, an intern year could feed it into the travel model, those results back and the way these model. And that way you can get the integration, but then it's very difficult to calculate the results. So that is a barrier in addressing this element of induced. So in summary, our model captures three of these types of elements. Not having scored, it didn't capture three. But as I said that research conducted by our consultants should have very limited impact of accessibility to destinations on. So we'll have this concept on this, the term you may hear is elasticity of demand. This provides an assessment of how much change is happening across all these types of induced demand is calculated by looking at the percentage change and being t divided by the percentage change in lean mass. And we're looking at it from a regional perspective. So now on a particular facility, but across the whole region, change the lane miles by a certain percent. What's the change in VMT? The literature is very vast, or very, there's a wide range show in the literature from equate one plus city of 2.9. Through the enhancements that we have in our model, our model is now showing somewhere in the range of point one to point two, which will vary based on the projects that are being representative the scenarios, the location of those projects. This is not just one set number, this is it's somewhere in there, when we do a test we'll get a number is probably somewhere in that range, although it could go beyond that range as well. This the scenario that we wanted to share that we ran was adding a general purpose lane to add 25 It adds 62 lane miles to the region. So that is a 1% increase in the number of lane miles across the region. The output that we saw was a point 1% increase in regional VMT just 30,000 increase. So you divide that out. And that's an elasticity of point
one.
So there is so much more we can say about vocalese model and the talisman model, but we wanted to give that tiny little summary of what is in there, how they were developed the major changes to those models, so that I can back to the chair. Is there any questions?
on that? I'm smart enough to ask questions.
Sure. I liked the model. It's helpful for trying to make predictions. But how are we actually trying to drive this to something more concrete? And by that I mean we know which cars are registered and learned. Welcome those up. We know how much fuel is sold in Burma well counting there's a tax accountant a gas tax, diesel and those numbers could be added on all that fuels turning to gas If that gas is burned, we know the vehicles involved with miles of burning. And so that kind of concretely gives you a more accurate how many miles have been driven in Weld County just as a guess. And if you could accurately put it to a gas station, you could also get a general target where people are. But I'm just curious if you took something like that, which is concrete data, and use that to reference your model. If that would help, in some ways to take some of the guesswork or trying to tune model to actual air quality.
Yes, then maybe Shawn can speak to this as well. But the air emissions aspect of the modeling does have its other set of inputs that CDPH in the current environment runs the moves three model from EPA, they actually take our travel model out of us the volumes and the seeds, they and add other inputs such as vehicle classification counts, and a whole set of other inputs. Vehicle age, because the vehicle age will influence how efficient is the animals are in using the gasoline and how much emissions are coming out. So I think some of them would see you described in that air emissions modeling. On the on the treadmill side, one of the I did not see too involved with the validation process of the model, which is we gather all of the traffic counts from communities over a five year time period, and use those to validate whether the model is safe for the base year. And so that probably is the closest to the what is the volume happening on these rows, the row three count accounts. And then we can extrapolate and see other similar facilities to make sure our model is representing the travel that's occurring as best as we can. You like to have a
majority, I think you did a good job of explaining, you know, kind of the basic validation process. Similar in concept to the example of knowing how many vehicles are in the county how much gas is sold, we take a different approach. To get a concrete value for the base year, we look at an extensive set of traffic counts. So those two counters you see on the road, the permanent counters that see that has, we use this location based services data or mobile device data to understand how far people are traveling, traveling. So we could get a good sense of not just how much VMT is happening, but where it's happening. We use information like transit boarding data so that we're also capturing that transit travel, we look at non motorized travel to the extent possible. And we also have a household travel survey that helps us better understand why people are traveling. So we take all of that information together. And we're able to get a very solid, good understanding of what's on the ground today. We then calibrate the model to match that existing condition that we have, where we have a good data set.
I wasn't actually complaining about the modeling, because I think that's a necessary element. I was just suggested looking at the gas sold and just going is that the gasoline will return the gas. And that is that what the model cars.
And that's, that's not a method I've heard used. But I actually find that kind of like a fascinating way that we might want to look into doing things in the future as another data point we could potentially use
this so first of all, I love that the 250,000 from TC, it's been helpful in the modeling part is that is really important is making sure that with the new rules that the resources were created to help support the needs that were out there. So not that that's helpful. My question has to do with the modeling area that you showed at the beginning. And recognizing there's the north, the north area and then the south area. But at least what I see and because I live it is there's a lot of travel happening between Larimer and Weld County and the Denver Metro area for Job Access for health care for whatever. So how does your model and the DR cog model and the CDOT model? How do they all talk to each other
What we do is the coordinate waste car on track accounts where all areas overlap between their outcomes up to eight, which is another region do we go further south to say, highway 66, just to get a better indication of what's going on in our region. So we do coordinate on assumptions of growth, one of those major corridors across the region. And land use CDOT uses our land use forecast, because the state is not maintainable and use model. And so the the model that we've developed for our region is much better than what they could come up with. So they actually take our beliefs and put them directly into Stateway model, they think are going to works.
And
I do think the Lanius elements is always something we need to have a close eye on, because our land use model doesn't see the Denver region, and doesn't really get to that as a draw. More hospitals want to locate in the southern region to access the Denver Metro. And so that we need to go in and adjust the as the model just not natively, recognizing that that's closed.
area. Right. Thank you for explaining because that's my concern, because that's the same answer I got when I asked in the Dr. cog area. So there's these two closed circles, they called it like in the metro area, it's like the flat earth, right. It's like nothing exists beyond the metro area, like, Hello, people. There's a whole lot of Northern Colorado out here. And so it's really worrisome to me, because this body is making decisions about this circle of influence, and then the metro areas making. And yet there are a lot of what I would call customers that are trying to travel back and forth. And so it helps to hear that there's work being done in that space. Because those are the trips were missing, and yet listening to the demographers presentation, that's where our growth is occurring. And I loved her comment about the houses where the job sleeps at night. So I mean, that's really important. So I appreciate the work you're doing. And I guess the more that can be done to look at that integration, I think about how, how is CDOT, using your model to forecast busting ridership, and how was that used to size service planning for inter regional transit? So I just I appreciate the work. Can you explain how it all works, but it just raises those questions for me? And then my last question is, how was the model used to create scenarios going forward? Because it looks like from the induced demand one, that example of why 25 it's generating VMT, and yet we know our larger goals around trying to reduce VMT, or at least reduce emissions associated? So are there are these models used to create those scenarios?
Yeah, that's a really good point on the scenarios, because one thing you also tested was building out the network, as we are envisioning, and which we'll get to later. And the impact theory as we, as I said, on this slide, so what is the impact of one project versus another project versus a set of profits in minutes. So just because in isolation, this product is DMT. That may not be true being added with our transit investments and our other investments to the collective is different than the sum of parts, which can be really tricky, but that is also the fifth. Try them all, because we are always faced with a wide array of options where to win with travel, and that's what is capturing.
This shows if you had nothing if you did nothing, you didn't have any more trails, you didn't put any more transit and you're still only seeing a point 1% increase from VMT. Its ministry. Now you add some of these other components, that point one changes drastically. Potentially, you could go higher. We hope to put transit in. He goes yeah,
that's how I guess I'm just trying to understand how it pairs together this strategies to achieve the outcome and how you do that scenario building to look at this combination.
One of the sort of take on discussion is when you run a model, and the model is only as good as the assumptions than the input you put into it. And you can't ever predict none of the things that California or any other state does try to predict human behavior. They spill drastic, we can't predict human behavior, we can only predict what we know today. And what we're assuming is a model that's going to predict a future outcome. It's not going to give you so building scenarios. And building strategic plans around it is only as good as what the data and assumptions are. So predicting human behavior is difficult. It is very difficult. And I think the mobile devices, the mobile things that you're using, origin destination, where time of day they travel. I mean, she just gave us a report last month that we have no congested areas, but one and the entire region. According to the congestion index model, am I wrong? It doesn't seem like we got a congestion problem according to the model. Right? So this, this is this, that's why models are so difficult, and you're doing a great job. Because models are not easy to do, and you put a lot of data, but we got to understand the model is only as good as the assumptions from the data that's put in, and the human behavior you can predict.
To add a little more to the scenario of conversation, the RTP plan is we'll have several scenarios included in the analyzed in the document, including in an unconstrained scenario where we have all the products that communities have identified as a need, what does that interest and no bills scenario? Don't do anything? How does that impact travel patterns, and then also hide it Excuse us. So as I talked about, in beginning, we have this forecast of what we think is a reasonable potential for our land use. And what we can do is change the dials to increase the ability for households to locate in dense urban areas, and see if the model puts additional people there, and then feed that into the witness model, we did something similar for the 2045 RTP. And it made a very substantial impact. Travel counts with more people in discussion. So we'll do something similar for this small.
Thank you, I think it would be interesting to see because that is the driver, so to speak, is where are those jobs sleeping at night? It's not just how many but we're in are they concentrated and co located along? efficient transportation corridors? Or is it just more in different locations? So what is the relationship? And thanks for doing the work?
These are questions from Dora. Do you have Sim City on your phone? And if so how big is your city? Thank you for keeping in mind over 55 minutes behind our schedule. Let's move on to consent agenda number 13 is 2023 congestion management to process
I will do my best to keep this very quick. So we identified the issue in the CMP that was brought forward. So this is an action item not a
tickler clarify that. The issue is when we looked at crash data, we considered all player wealth counties, not just the NPO boundary. So we reduced the number of crashes. And so
we just changed the graph is the major change. So in the consent Council,
yesterday, we included a link to the updated CMP.
And so we also included all of the changes that taxing Council recommended at their June meeting
was time. So we are looking for approval of the resolution
on the approval of the consent agenda.
Second. Motion and second to approve the Consent Agenda further discussion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed same sign. Motion carries. Thanks, Alex.
Okay.
Number 14 action items that are actually on a 2023 tip amendment process or amendments. This is resolution number 2023 Dash 11 on page 70 endoscopes
All right,
the May 2023 admitted to the fiscal year 2026, tipping loose eight revision requests. This includes one revision from CDOT region four, which is adding 37,000,870 857,000 Tiffy alone in fiscal year 2024, to the ITV five second pilot project, revising to Greeley projects for the funding exchange that was discussed five months ago. So this is removing federal funding from the tennis three access control implementation project. And reality reallocating that to the 83rd improvement project. The project was to be with all local funding, adding additional funding to the to the rest regional planning and modeling analysis, which was discussed last month. And that is 25,000, SVG and 5000. Local in each year, fiscal year 2004 and 25. And then also incorporating the three week program of projects for their 5307 FTA funds. And this is adding to what he said that's into their operating assistance project. And in 646,002, the ADA operations projects decreasing by 23,000. The preventative maintenance project adding one new project, which is the get capital projects with 2.5 million FDA and local ones. The 30 day public comment period for this amendment began on May 10, and will conclude on June 8, contingent on no public health, no negative public comments being received. Before the end of the public comment period. The topic discussed and recommended approval of the reading DNA
questions random road space, not the actual resolutions on page 24.
And this is just a clarification. I'm looking at the resolution. I do see the crack title on the resolution.
That is a good catch. And I can add that before it's signed but as
an option. We need to include that emotion.
Like we need to amend the resolution to include the rent. You better go there Mayor
Oh boy. I moved to approve resolution number 22. My honor in one year
20 2311.
Going on sorry. I moved to approve resolution number 2023 Dash 11 With the addition of the rack. Tip amendment There we go. I'll second
motion and second to do with the medicine. Intense further discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed same sign motion carries. All right arrows. Let me get back to my We are now on number 15 is in 2018 RTP goals objectives performance measures and targets. Drum. Thank you sir. Good evening. So the April council meeting just as a reminder, council did approve the 25th. The RSP goals are another objectives and targets the main cost of meeting appeal staff to receive feedback on adding a safety goal so based off the council feedback, we have done that so the only poll change that we have toward our view end is adding the safety goal with the corresponding objective of reducing fatalities and serious injuries within professionals. It's a good career move sir. Took quite the length of time we didn't add safety we moved it up.
So far to the safety was not its own goal it was housed within it.
So we did pull it out. But there was a good chance I will also know that there is not a corresponding resolution and it will be improved with the resolution that adopts the DRDP okay. So this is part of what's next in
council needs to approve This just just fight not by resolution just by saying yes, you agree. Yes, we agree.
Snap the agenda. Thank you.
Somebody do a motion I'm sorry, I'm picky about best, proper motion would be to move to approve the RTB goals and objectives as stated on page 26 of our packet. So motion and seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Thanks, John.
It was pointed out, but we didn't move that I didn't move Herman up. So yeah, we'll catch up. Yeah.
All right, the discussion item 16 is the 2023 public projects that's on page 27 of your packet, and arose.
At the last Council meeting, we went through an exercise for prioritizing such goals as it relates to the scoring criteria for the 2023 color projects. So just as a reminder, we have for funding programs that will be awarding in about $22 million. So as we went through the process of taking the goals from Council, and looking at the scoring criteria for the color projects, we did pull out that safety, this safety goal to create its own category. And so that'll be reflected in the scoring criteria that we are showing. And so what I would like to discuss with council this evening, is the draft goals and proposed rating the scoring criteria matrix that we have created based on a few different factors that we took into consideration when building out this scoring criteria. So following the council discussion last month, we have a workshop with the task to look at all of the sorting criteria and how we can calculate that and made some adjustments to each of these categories. Based on some technicalities, a few of the things that we're taking into consideration when creating this matrix where the prioritization that council went through, but then also looking at the requirements for each of the funding programs, the intention of each of the funding programs, looking at the previous scoring criteria, and how to incorporate that into this new scoring criteria. To do all of that information to create this matrix here. One of the things that we didn't discuss last month was that last line there, which is the discretionary points, during previous calls for projects, the TAC had expressed an interest for creating a more objective scoring criteria, that's a lot more data based. But then also there is something to be said about local knowledge of the projects and kind of more of that subjectivity of a project is a good project, or if it might not be a project that sets funding program. So that's why we had created this discretionary points so that when people are winning the scoring, scoring committee members are submitting their scores for each of these projects, they have kind of a little bit of wiggle room to be able to incorporate some of the things that are not exactly captured with the data. So I do want to pause there to see if there was any initial reaction to this proposed weighting of the scoring criteria are good. And so I am not going to go into a lot of detail about each of these different criteria and the calculations, but I am happy to discuss based on the if there's anything specific that counsel would like to discuss, but wanted to bring this as a topic of discussion with counsel to make sure that as we continue with this process, and as we look to opening this call in August that we are in agreement on what the scoring criteria will be. So I will open it up for any questions on any of the scoring criteria, but really just wanted to ensure the reasonableness of this matrix to cancel.
So, the way we read this in the packet is that you have 1234 slides and you're reading them all down like a column Correct.
And so the so like on the blue, that's for C math and carbon reduction, the green is for the TA program transportation alternatives, and a purple is for the StG program. So there's different scoring criteria for all three of these programs.
So under the economic or the Regional Health, I guess it is, with it was a scoring on equity, it's a bigger percentage in ta G than it is in the CMAT. Is that? Is that? Why is that?
Right, it's mostly related to the fact that the majority of the Regional Health Points are going towards the air quality emissions, in fact. So then breaking out the rest of the points based on that. additional damage questions.
Just one more question. So is this this all up to us? Are there federal, or state and federal kind of guidelines for some of this, too, that we're also kind of incorporating into the, into the makeup?
Yes. So the main, like federal guidance that we're incorporating is for, you know, for receiving carbon reduction, requiring that they show emissions benefits for TA and SVG and actually cover production. There is a specification that you have to have equity in corporations into scoring criteria. Those are really the federal requirements for scoring these projects. The rest of that is based on the priorities of the regents.
You should get this question.
I will also mention side safety was is one of the other considerations that is maybe not exactly required from federal government, but very strongly recommend so.
So the John
Oh, no, no, I'm thinking of you.
One last thing I just want to point out is that there was a criteria that we have moved from operations we had originally proposed the leveraging funding sources to be a benefit to different projects with discussion with the task, they recommended removing that and increasing just the operational improvements because they saw greater benefits of more of the immediate impact of operational improvements rather than leveraging funding sources.
So the Ashley staff requests Planning Council Review and be prepared to discuss the grant 2023 corporate project scoring criteria matrix we've discussed is there an approval needed by us and that would probably be next meeting
not next meeting, the cultural projects guidebook will be approved at the August meeting. So we will bring it again other parts of the copper projects next month, but as long as we get the head nod this month, we will proceed with that sort of criteria. What will be the projected deadline for the call the project closing is October 6, so it's open for about two months. And final approval of projects is scheduled for January.
Everybody good? Good. Thanks.
Okay.
Number 17 is the number orange MPO priorities list. This is on page 36.
there any way to make that bigger please
I've been having trouble with a lot of information. I reviewed it earlier today but I mentioned the betterment.
Projects with TCP string theory was created because what you're partially seeing right now and the projects have began moving group by corridor as meeting will notice that the US 3045 project has been removed because that was actually funded long tenure list is under a berish funding but it is on our list but it hasn't been removed from this list. If this was presented to tack it, there'd be in May as well. And they had one recommendation, which was to add a project descriptions, because there was a confusion between projects. So that was added in. So just as a reminder, this is a list of projects solely for CIS tenure, listed projects, tenure funding, which again, is first eligible for any projects to go into for new projects and 31. So this is many years out, this is at least eight years now. So just keeping that in mind, nothing that is on this list, not on this list. That doesn't preclude
us from going forward and requesting funds
from state sources or federal sources. This is solely. So as you can see the project's over here. So you can see which projects meet the various criteria, that's on the next slide, but I'm afraid without
the Zoom side,
because it is your hacking. So this list will be included five references when he appears to be so no action is needed from counsel, in regard to approving this this week, as I said, for firearms into the 25th Gear Up, and it is being approved by reference so that if anything does happen, but it's also setting priorities change, that we can make changes to this list without having questions.
So I look at counting up 17 into more better operational safety improvements. I think it's right there. And yet, it's not. Because there will be setting the rules to be is that not a strategic nature?
Not based on what the price description, and not based on what you're teaching me here and how it is defined? Here, based on the private instruction, that I
have questions?
I think for earlier version we saw had dollar amounts, and I'm just not seeing them. And I don't know if it's,
do we have the dollar amounts for these. So the dollar amounts are not part of this matrix, they are part of the other list that you saw, which was just our priorities list. This is a matrix that is from that list. So no dollar amounts are not included on this.
But, but this list is intended to roll up to vote to seat up to be considered for the 10 year plan.
This list was a request at a council meeting. So this is solely for council members at the list that I brought and discussed last month with the dollar amounts and all that that is the list that would be forwarded on this is solely
for this to see where these projects and where do they follow these criteria? Like we asked last month, right? Well, these are
the RTP scripts here, these are TC right?
I remember that I guess I just didn't realize it was only for a subset. So it it's hard not having the two lists side by side to understand what we saw last month and what we're seeing here. So I'm just trying to understand the relationship of those. And so I get, and I appreciate the additional work you've done to identify how they aligned with the guiding principles. That's great. I'm just trying to get I was trying to get an understanding of one. What kind of price tag are we talking about for this, what I understand to be a subset of the top priority projects. And so we can understand the magnitude of them. And then would the main matrix that you created apply to the other projects that are on your top tier list. So I don't think the projects are the same. I don't think they've changed. These are the projects. It's not a substitute. This is the top two your projects. They just got reordered a little differently by the corridor instead of just by listing each project. So that's why
this is the tier one.
Yes. Okay. So that's helpful that this is the full tier one list rolling. Yes.
And what we've been told is that for the north part range piece of region four piece of tenure list, tenure funding is about 5 million a year. So none of none of these. So 50 million over 55 million, but tenure. So,
yeah, I just think it's helpful for people to see the full picture and to see the magnitude of the dollars that we're talking about. And you're right, the tenure plan. amounts are never the full amount to fund the whole project and to create leverage opportunities and partnerships, all of those things. So just for me, it would be helpful to see the costs associated with these, as well. And it would be
and that will be what is incorporated by reference.
And then what happens to the transit list and the
the all of the list sorry, this is just solely the tier one list that this has been dealt with, since those are the projects that have risen to the top regionally significant projects. These are the region's top priority. So that's why these were put into the standard.
What I'm not seeing. So I see I get this now it's the top tier roadway list. And I'm just curious. Often, it seems that the transit lists or lists fall to the wayside as these things percolate up. So I just was asking for the rest of us. So all I'm saying is, it would be helpful to see the price tag and to see the other modes included along with the roadway. We have, we have it, it's all there. And the reason we were just focusing on this one, just on the roadway is because the transit list and the non motorized list are pretty short. That's why we didn't do the Gulf of this exercise.
And the other thing is, is we want to shore these up so they they meet the TCS requirements. And when you look at this list, and you see that we don't have a checkbox of a COVID Misal chart, right, and we don't have a checkbox in there, are we going to be able to compete with the doctor cogs? Or the Colorado Springs cogs? And I think our job is to look at this list and see if we need to improve our scopes, right tell the story. And this was this this was for us are we meet the TCS requirements are two one which you look at go to go back the other way, a little bit. Almost nothing under yeah, there's a lot of things go to boxes missing that I think we got to short these projects up and see what kind of story and what we can do to tell a better story on these projects. The best way is if they're all checked, and we're looking really good,
because there's not a single one that has all of them, does that dressing them up to check the box, but what's the nature and scope of the project, the scope of the investment, I think the other thing we can think of and again, as this gets closer to five of the confidence, the next several years is going to change. But you know, the number one transit projects, story board, that's the number one on that list. So 34 is the top priority highway list. 34 Transit is the top trends in the fleet, it seems to make sense that we have sort of that working relationship between those two lists, I don't remember off the top of my head with a non motorized list. It's also long before so so that would be a really great opportunity to combine the scope of that project to describe that it's got highway transit, like pet provements with it, versus isolating out the modes, I guess, again, if you're trying to create a compelling investment strategy that's going to use a phrase check all the boxes, then it would have all those pieces. And so that's the suggestion. And I thought we talked a little bit about that last time about how do you roll up the scope of these projects so that the other multimodal components don't get lost. So that would be the suggestion. So so just to move forward with this is the list that we're talking about is gonna get incorporated by reference into the RTP. Again, none of these have been the tenure list has already been sort of listed or set your all the projects through. So our first opportunity to move anything on this list of tenure pipeline is 2031. So we'll probably have a lot more opportunity to blend and talk about how we're going to actually show these things, I think maybe by reference, the lead list from last time, and again, is showing some of this, this matrix to go along with it. And then as we get closer to the next funding opportunity on the tenure pipeline, that's where we need to really start thinking about how do we fill in more of these checkboxes? How do we tell a better story and started really ramping up the efficacy and then combining the modes into one overarching scope so that it's not bifurcated tight. Yeah, I think that was a requirement when we first did it was to bifurcate it and I think that's why as I said, models. If you look at the current 10 year plan, there'll be a corridor project, and it'll have all those components in it that has dollar amounts associated. And then my understanding the new legislation that passed will also save, what's the total cost of the project. And then what's the piece from the 10 year plan, which I also think is a helpful story to tell, because if it's $100 million project, and there's 5 million available from the 10 year plan, it makes it very clear how much leverage is needed for that. So kind of paints a whole picture. So just trying to be helpful in terms of how to position these projects, so that they are competitive, and get a spotlight overall spreadsheet as it goes forward. So that's the intent behind the suggestions. Well, in the multimodal, and the transit pieces, I mean, you know, when I think about the Napanee dollars, payment dollars, I mean, there's millions of dollars that are. And I mean, I think that BRT is one of the projects that we're gonna be looking at, so we have projects that, I mean, obviously, I'm served with me, so it's hard for me to say our projects are the best, but, I mean, we do have good projects, but they are they are. And so, you know, I think that as those dollars become free, that that really can make, you know, we can we have some additional dollars that are in some of these state state laws that are not that these pots of money are
taken back to the burden purpose of this evening's conversation, what you need to us to accomplish that would be just, we're aware. Okay, thank you.
So can I add something really quick to this conversation
on credit boost?
I know you're one of the things that really upset me stat today that I haven't talked to you about was they're doing town hall trips to town halls around the state in northern Colorado. So I made a pretty good point today that we're sitting here doing transit and we're pretty involved with get with transport with coltan, we have a very active regional connectivity with a lot of this stuff. But for females said, for a multitude of reasons, they decided not to do one in northern Colorado. So two of the reasons is they can't get out there Denver vote Republican, I will make that I will reflect, I wanted to let you know that. Suzette sent an email and I articulated I think you're on
it. Yeah. Yeah. I agree with you 100%. I mean, I informed last week that they were even doing transit town halls. And I learned that at a seat at 4pm meeting. So it's like what the heck, there should be more engagement. And obviously transit is central to the work.
Well, here we are talking about our plan and transit and all the things we're doing. But northern Colorado doesn't even get the town hall to talk. In Denver, they think we're close to Wyoming. I would advocate right now to let your Commissioner know, it was your chair in your executive director and I will
raise this and you can read did respond to the email I've sent out and said we're not for the Friday cruises, we were going to have a meeting of the North Koreans but if you really want to talk we will schedule this.
And it's best. There's one email and then we all send it No, copy a sin and then we can also send it. So we had our name whatever, well, I'll just say my name.
And I'm your transit coordinator. So I'm really upset about it.
The other suggestion would be if you do want to write a letter have it be for the Transportation Commission in June, we're getting an update on transit is my understanding. So that would be really good timing. So So should we write a letter or should we just try to set
up I would just see if we could get I don't think we're gonna I didn't read we're gonna do the town hall, but they're more than willing to come up and talk with us. And I mentioned coming here but I I personally think it's pretty, pretty advantageous that we're in
attendance expressing my opinion, sorry. Okay. Cheering you've lost control of your own. If we were at number 18 2050 RTP fiscally constrained budget and arose. Thank you
all right. So I wanted to bring to the council tonight another piece of this thing 50 RTP. As we get close to finalize During that process in the next few months, the regional transportation plan is federally required to be fiscally constrained, which means that the total estimated cost of maintaining and improving the transportation system cannot exceed the reasonably anticipated forecasted revenue over the time horizon of the plan. And so that few of the things that means for our plan is that we have to create system level estimates for for the cost of the projects and the assumptions that are incorporated into the plan. And so the cost to operate and maintain the Federal Highways and public transportation, and then also all of the reasons we anticipated revenue, whether that's public, so state or federal funds, and private, so like, develop our policies like that, and then we have to find that all my funding source. So the another federal requirement for this land is the identification of funding for projects and programs within the RFP, and that that's all reflected in your of expenditure dollars. So any of the funding estimates that we have the forecasts ours with an inflation rates 2050, and we have used a 2.5% inflation target over the life of this plan. So we have compiled the revenue information from a variety of sources to create our fiscally constrained plan, the first of which is the SI debt setup program distribution. So for those of you who are involved with sector that we are, they are currently working on developing the next round of program distribution. But as we have to complete this plan by September, we will be using the 2045 program distribution that was created a few years ago, and then extrapolated out to 2050 to cover those last five years. We also look at local jurisdiction budgets or any of the local revenue for roadway operations, maintenance and improvements. We use FTA funds and get the information from the National Transit Database. We also get input from our Technical Advisory Committee on roadway operations and maintenance and intersection improvement costs. Transit agencies provide the information for transit maintenance, local bike, and ped has provided the information for trail operations means construction costs. And then we also look at the local plans for anticipated projects, costs associated with that. So few of the assumptions that we have in the plan for roadway operations is an amount per to operate and maintain per Roma. And so for operations, we're looking at $27,000 per lane mile. And that includes mining, traffic control, snow and ice removal design planning. Sorry, actually, design planning and engineering are not part of that. It's just the that first part, like we try to control snow and ice and then roadway maintenance costs about $30,000 per lane mile. And that's for resurfacing costs for transit operations and maintenance. We're looking at about 23 million per year, which includes the operations and maintenance of vehicles, General Administration, facility maintenance, and the state of good repair vehicles. So when you bring all that information together, this is what we're looking at for the cost of maintaining and operating our site, the revenues that we have to go to maintaining and operating our system. So what you see from this chart here is that the bulk of the money that we have in the region comes from the local sources. So that's looking at taxes, and fees and things like that, that come from the local budgets, followed by the state funding is the next highest source. The NFIP only controls about $363 million in funding over the life of this lands, and it's looking 2024 to 2050. And then there also is the developer funds to this private funds. And then the federally controlled funding. So what what that consists of is mainly going to GA funds, and then a lot of the discretionary grants that come out of federal
government are included.
We take that information from all revenues and we categorize them based on different expenditure categories. So this is something that we had developed during the last the last RTP and we have carried forward so we have funds that are dedicated to certain project types that can only be used for those project types. And then we also have this last way that is category that is flexible funding so that can be used for a variety of project types. So that helps us allocate the revenue to the types of expenditures within the plan. So this is just looking at the proportion of the funding that we have by that expenditure category. So the majority of the funding that we have is that flexible funding. So then when we look at how the funds are allocated to actual projects in the region, we look at the different expenditure categories that are listed on the left hand side of the screen here. So we have things like revenue operations and maintenance. And we have a certain amount of funding that is dedicated to that project type, and then the remaining is filled in with flexible funding. So with some of these categories, we ensure that they are fully funded. So things like rolling operations and maintenance, so that's maintaining our current system, we want to make sure that we have complete funding for maintaining that system. Also intersection improvement costs, building out our regional corridors. So that's the active transportation corridors to transit corridors, and are reasonably significant, though brokerage projects like capacity projects. Those are are kind of the first priority when looking at allocating these funds. The column on the far right of the screen is the unfunded amount that we have when we look at these projects. So for instance, under the regional transit corridors for regional, so that's not part of the local system. This is that connects throughout the region, that $1.3 billion that you see there that is unfunded, that is the amount that is from each passenger rail. So wanting to reflect that, but not actually having identified the dedicated funding sources to be able to fund that project. One of the topics that Medora will discuss after this discussion is the projects that are that the local communities have submitted for incorporation into the RTP. And there's a certain amount of those projects that are fiscally constrained. So the funding is reasonably assumed to be available for those projects. And then there's a certain amount of projects that are under constraints. So that's what that unfunded request in that right hand column is. So we have that for the capacity projects on the regionally significant corridors and then also non regionally sifting border capacity projects. And what on earth? Yes,
I just want to make sure everybody's understanding that dollars that you're looking at here, this is 1000. So you're looking at some unfunded amount is 3.9 billion.
Yes, this is year to date, or is this 2015? This is 20 $15.
Yes, this is 20 $50, the year of expenditure. So we pointed out
Johnny thought he was going to stop now because I just know the Front Range passenger rail is well above $1.1 billion today. And if you look at 2050, and you multiply that times 3.5 in place relation, your future present value future value is going to be more than a billion.
So the Front Range passenger rail assumption was from the the cost assumptions that we have 2045 RTP, that is also only the proportion that is within the NFR NPO. If that if we do have better cost estimates, we can this is a draft of this. And so we can, we can look further into that to make sure that that is that that current cost is being reflected. But that is also only the portion within
your range.
Just thinking a lot of numbers a lot lower for 2050. I think they're too low. That's just my die
for more than Front Range passenger rail
for a lot of like when you when you showed the cost per maintenance resurfacing, you had like 24 But that's to 240,000 or 2.1 million that a mile because we haven't been 20 I don't know what it is, but pretty well.
And so, we will also be discussing this with attacking you to ensure reasonableness of these assumptions, the that 24,000 per lane mile 1020 $23. But when we look at the total costs of operating and maintaining through the life of that plan that would grow over the life of that plan. So that was in 20 $23 There's so when you look at what that cost per lane mile is in 2015, we are adjusting for that. And that's being reflected in that cost for roadway operations
and maintenance,
you definitely need to look at the numbers. Because if you look at 24 feet wide, or let's say 12 feet wide, times, three inches times the length, you're going to be looking at $150 at a time, it's going to be more than 20,000, even if you just put in too much overlap. So I'm pretty confident the numbers are going to be a little bit different. But I'll let it go. That's okay. Just to play? Well, I agree with you.
Yeah, and we will take this back to tech as well to just ensure the reasonableness of that. And the the operations and maintenance costs that we received were averaged over the data that was submitted to us. So we can we can make sure that that that that does look reasonable to, you know, per lane mile and things like that.
A few of us assumptions that I wanted to talk Sorry, there was one other thing I wanted to just point out here. So the revenue that we have identified is about $13 billion. And then you can see that the costs that we have identified is about $17 billion. So there is a certain amount of unfunded projects and programs that will be included in the plan. A couple of things that we are assuming, as I had mentioned, build out of the regional active transportation corridors by 345, which was identified a number last time to keep the week Noho priority quarter. So those top three priority corridors to be an operation by 2050. And then we had included the GHG strategy category, when we did our 2025 RTP. And we have carried that assumption over into this RTP as well. So those greenhouse gas strategies include things like TDM related projects. So for instance, the the TMO incubation funds that the council had approved last month, those types of programs would be included in those TDM related projects. This can also include additional local bike and ped system expansion. So not necessarily looking at those regional corridors below, and then additional operational improvements that are identified to reduce greenhouse gas. We have created an assumption for how much of each of these expenditure categories also helped to achieve the greenhouse gas reducing strategies because there's a lot of CO benefits for different types of projects. So that's what this table is illustrating here. So of the the funding that we have identified for the funded projects, about 24% of that will go, we assume go directly to those greenhouse gas strategies. So the question that we have for the Planning Council is looking at the priorities of funding projects as we do have a certain amount of unmet need. But we also have an amount of remaining flexible funding that can be allocated to any of these project categories, expenditure categories. As I mentioned, this is a draft so that 254 million that we have still available might change, depending on finalizing some of the numbers here. But the question would be for council is when we look at where we want those reading flexible funds to go to what the priority would be. So some of the categories that have the unmet need are the regional transit corridors of permanent passenger rail, regionally significant corridor capacity projects, the non RSC capacity projects, those are the three areas that we have identified, an unmet need for. And then another option that even though it's not reflected here as an unmet need is to be able to allocate the remaining flexible funding to those greenhouse gas reduction strategies. So we have identified approximately 3.3 point $5 million per year over the life plan for those greenhouse gas reduction strategies. So if the priority of the council was to allocate funds to to that category, that total Funded would be in assumption will be increased for that. One of the things that I will also mention is that menorah is going to be talking about two projects. So as far as the capacity projects that we bid our next discussion item, and so if there that kind of this question can also be answered after that discussion, depending on counsels, feelings on it
I think goes in capacity projects, because you're gonna hit a lot of the other category can also do greenhouse gas, you know, it's going to be doing safety, you're going to be doing maintenance, and that will get a lot of the categories put together.
Well, the capacity projects address, I mean,
it's a known fact that if a car sitting on a road, and it's sitting there puffing produces more greenhouse gas,
information on the induced demand, as well as balancing
my babies, you're balancing, it's pretty capacity. There's enough slush funding in this state for greenhouse gas projects with blue in the face, as we sit in our cars and traffic jams. I would be one person, and quite frankly, not a dime will go from at least a vote of mine to a Front Range passenger rail wouldn't doesn't touch one, one square inch, you will have County, so therefore, I'm supportive of John's creation of capacity projects.
Well, I mean, you know, we just heard from the demographers too, about, you know, an aging population. I mean, I understand people's problem with Front Range passenger rail, but I mean, busting and some of the other projects, I think are really important when we think about our demographic changes.
Yes, and so for, you know, the purpose staying and those other regional quarters, we are assuming that those are constrained. So that unconstrained portion of the, the regional is just specifically for that for
each customer, or just for the candidates split up between
lots
of capacity. And then you can have your 16 year olds drive your elderly because there's more room
for capacity. When I look at the demographers graphs, I saw an aging population moving in Fort Collins or moving into Burma. Its capacity for basically all homes we're building and the growth is going to be crazy. I think the whole we're declining population that that's great for the state. But while was growing, and learners growing
capacities where it's needed.
Well, we were the safety focus projects fault. No, it dropped probably operations and maintenance. I mean, does that I guess that's the other area that I hear about all the time in terms of emails and phone calls, I guess about roadway maintenance and potholes. And we're not keeping up with the system that we have. So I'm curious about
their 01 $100. If you're on roadway operations and maintenance,
a lot of time between now and 2015, we're going to catch up with I think the last I heard it was we need an extra 100 or $300 million a year statewide to catch up with our roadway maintenance. So based on this, you're saying forecasting wise, we're all caught up with basic road maintenance.
Based on the identified operations and maintenance costs, we were able to, you know, that was the first the first line of where that flexible funding goes. And that dedicated funding goes. Yes, so
I just find it surprising given the state of our roads today. And the state of the phone calls and emails, but it's all caught up and we don't need any more for operations and maintenance. I've surprised by that. But if that's what the data says, then that's fine. But to me, I guess that would be another consideration is if there was an available balance. How do we take better care of the system we have today? And that's
This doesn't include the state highways. This is our local rules do I know local roads or state highway
but everyone's struggling with operations and maintenance.
And I think that
many of the people I talk with bring up issues that are related to basic care and feeding of the existing systems.
And so I think, maybe a correction to what I said or a point of clarification, it wouldn't be, I don't think that the assumption is that it would be at 100%, like maintain, this is 100%. Complete improved, but to at least keep half the Maintain to the existing conditions. And more be the assumption.
I mean, it just came up, again, the 14th meeting last week was the issue about resources for basic core services. So, an asset management, so that's why I'm raising it again. For building more new anything, it seems like we should do a really good job taking care of what we have, whether it's local, regional, state, federal, whatever taking care of the existing system is important.
It's worth I wonder if that's a function of the state, but then the region and such having a lot older roads and bridges, that risk are dangerous. And we're still we kind of exploded in the last, say, 30 years from farm fields to more than half today, that our roads are still newer, in the relative term.
And I, I mean, I can't speak to that. But the calls I get are from people who live up here and have
terrible, but it's quality, what would you accept? What do you want to pay for?
So I'm just raising it as an option in terms of current reading with the existing support versus building? That's a policy question. So I just made me want to try to make sure I'm saying this correctly. So what I'm looking at this slide, that left category is a user just a category of pots that are needing to extend, what you're looking at for the funding is that we're saying like, for example, on on the regional transit corridors, that's transferred dolly transit like that can't go anywhere else will have to go there. Right. So when you serve, take, and I'm having done this in the past, where you start, take all the pots of money and the money that's coming in, and it's pretty much that this is where you're going to put it. Right. So. So that's what I think this is showing, and then to say, and I'm gonna guess most of this, the flexible money is mostly STG, probably or state money, that is more flexible. So if you could pick which category on this list to put it in, where would you put that? Not to say that it has to go there. But I think that's it my reasons correctly, that enrolls is that how this works, is that you're saying these are the categories and that the money has already sort of predetermined in which categories are most of it is going and now we just have this little bit left at a $13 billion, we have 254 million that we can pick and choose or we want to put it?
Yes, based on the unmet need
to be constrained. This is all about being constrained.
So I mean, I don't know that we've heard some conversations about putting it on capacity, maybe splitting it up putting it on maintenance, putting some on transit. I mean, I don't know, if Council feels like there's any Wilkerson question. And I'm sorry, if I miss this, because I feel like I've moved on I keep going to come down later gets, but with GHG reduction strategies, I mean, are we achieving what we need to do with the dollars that we have, then we are. So this would be just additional strategies that would help us get things even lower.
So this, the, the assumption different greenhouse gas reduction strategies sort of built into the greenhouse gas transportation report. So this would be to meet those types of requirements. For you know, the certain proportion of our funding would go towards projects that that help us meet those standards.
So things like we identified like more roundabouts, or things like that, as we're talking about, or I think it was, like more expanded to you work. I don't remember more transit. Those are the two that stick in my mind.
Yeah, so the GHG strategies that would not be including the roundabouts. That was one of the separate mitigation strategies. Oh, mitigation. So this is looking more at kind of the programmatic side. So TDM some of it could be, you know, for the local bike and ped network and operational improvements. That's the idea for those some of the like intersection improvements because as I think so sort of portion of like our intersection improvement projects would assume for greenhouse gas reducing so We had identified about 9% of that funding. So some of that has been reflected in those projects.
What I thought you'd ask was, given the level of investment you're showing in here for greenhouse gas reduction strategies, are you achieving the target?
Ah, yes. And so also Medora will be presenting on the greenhouse gas transportation report at the end of this meeting as well. So some of the more specific greenhouse gas positioning this is my last slide.
Majority I,
I'm not gonna answer all my,
a general direction is good for when we, you know, bring back a more finalized, fiscally constrained plan, you know, where where that priority is of additional funding, whether it's 254 million, or if it's less or more, depending on how adjustments to the plan, where our priority should go when allocating those. Is this a decision meeting to make tonight? That's, that's general direction. So
let's remember, this is more funny money than Monopoly money. All right. Like it's so far out there that yeah, it's it's reasonably anticipated, it's Monopoly money might have more value than this one.
Because this is part this is 2015 2015.
And I'll be dead. I've been thinking for seven years when you know.
Thank you, Anna rose, perhaps it's best to move on in your Midori as well.
2050 60.
See now we'll still be in this meeting. For the next several hours, we'll be talking. Oh, now you get funny you get funny in your last
of the major Broadway submitted by local entities that we wanted you to review that we know have been incorporated into the RTP. Now it was laid the foundation that her federal requirements, you do need to specify what products are fiscally constrained, which tries to be big, little received by the products that get included in our TV are eligible to apply for federal and state grants all the time grant allocations asked for this product consistent with your regional planning. Yes. So this is critical to make sure that those key projects are reflected in this plan as fiscally constrained. And especially for those types that are anticipated to go forward in the next four or five years really important to make sure that there is no plan and in an earlier seed period. So we have four staging areas. These are set based on the federal requirements for air quality. It's we have a period of four to six since 2007, between 30 140 Try to sign these categories based on the job from the little communities. We asked for these projects in early early this year, and we had a tariff review this list and the meeting last month. They had some time comments and those comments are reflected in these tables here. What else do we need to note the unconstrained products so the unconstrained projects are projects that we do not have to speak and have funding for another way think about them as these are not priority projects for our regionally significant corridors. The benefit of putting the narrative is that it helps us tell the story of what the unmet need is for the region, and it also identifies what projects will be funded additional money. Alright, so there are a few maps figure one shows the fiscally constrained projects that were submitted on the regionally significant corridors. See, there, this is a definition we're using only practices. This is things like I have to go through lane miles for a new intersection. There are many other products that are important that need to happen that are not shown here because they don't rise to that level of significance, which is derived from the federal requirements carefully. So you're just seeing major changes and adding three lanes. This map highlights in yellow, the locations of the products are labeled with an ID number that corresponds to a table leader in this memo. And this app also shows a projected number of lanes on these facilities and sales. They're
shown on a 20.
Oh, I have 25. Yes. So in our model be expressly coded separately from Pericles. And so the math just is not very good at communicating with actually vision for equity five, the fiscal constraint plan is to add an Express Lanes route 100 constraint list is the part that already funded? Yes, yes, when we bring it off the table. So what we have in our TDP is 24 is the first year that we're showing products COVID. Okay, so because wrestling's moving forward, showing them in that staging period, we are showing a cost of $0. Because the funds for those projects came from 2023, or earlier, which text of this memo explained that there are several there's at least one other part of it isn't the same boat had been here before and the funds already available. The ministry has the general purpose.
So vigor to highlights the unconstrained projects on the different corridors. And figure three shows the presence of general locations, streaming products, for the regional transit corridors and household groups last year, physically inserting those new service or enhance service.
With when the universe said is about $250 million that could be assigned, when we look at or tapping is, are the products of this unconstrained list set of products that we might want to look into the constrained set of products with that extra? So now, I'm going to ask you for any questions or comments from our last session.
So this, this list of projects is typically around meeting our wishes significant criteria for performance, right? So it's one lane mile or two lane miles, two lanes, two lane miles of capacity permit, or the originally significant transit service. And there are some definitions around that. So that's what this list is. So it's not it's that bigger thing that's really sort of this is what's helping us run conformity to this list. It's not some there may be other projects like pedestrians, but that's Korres. But that does not help us go running conformity.
The key thing we're going to already the requirements are that any of these major changes to the system get modeled so that you can impact then gets assessed for our emissions? So setting the bar beehive, is this substantially impacting vehicle trips, trips, if so you need to specifically identify the project model it is an off that or analyze the initiatives and see if you're under the budgets. So the projects that are there's so many other products that are important as well. And those get captured in the RTP in some of the programmatic discussions. And that threshold is set based on federal requirements.
That's why you see a lot of Wi Fi This is why this list is a widening, widening widening, it's because of that definition. Yes.
Questions? No, no. He's thinking about you. Greenhouse gas please.
So let's talk about greenhouse gas. As a refresher, this transmission Commission adopted with a standard greenhouse gas test, standard one, our MPOs and CDOT, to demonstrate greenhouse gas emission reductions relative to baseline plans for our region that applies to RTP. And now it also applies to our tip. Last year was the first time we had to do this type of assessment. And at that time, they just made it applicable to RTP. So for this wave of RTP effort, we'll be doing a greenhouse gas transformation report for both RTP. The report gets reviewed by the Air Pollution Control division ABCD and then goes to TC for their approval. This schedule you see along the top is on the greenhouse gas transportation report. So we are open to discussion tonight the council will be asking for action at the July council meeting and the mid July gets submitted to the City Commission, with TC action scheduled for the August TC meeting along the bottom of the schedule is scheduled for adopting the RTP. So it's kind of the discussion of those two minutes. So just like if we're looking for actual counsel on this report, prior to sending it off for approval there are a few things that are new compared to the report we developed last year. So we have an additional new clients here that we need to report on because of it, there's a requirement to report emissions. Last year, the Transportation Improvement Program was 2027 New complaints here in the report, we have updated our latest travel demand models earlier, we have an updated set of roadway products, which we are finalizing. And we are we have added specificity on the greenhouse gas storage is a lot of the same the same however, our baseline is still the 2045 regional transportation plan that was approved in 2019. Based on the greenhouse gas standard, it's not trying to shit and keep shipping, shipping, but it looks at the baseline plan. And you need to have a certain reduction from that plan, if not baseline stays the same. So we're still looking at that previous 23 coverage. Our draft rounds are showing compliance and all yours. So we expect that to stay the same. We are looking at same four sets of greenhouse gas strategies that we used last year. And we do not delete any of the greenhouse gas mitigation measures, which are those measures that get added sort of on top of the plan and then require some additional reporting requirements. So we do not anticipate those. This chart shows the production levels required for our region, grade the target greenhouse gas and the purple representing what we would need to reduce a southern environment standard with 2014 being most seats drop, and we might understand I don't have 20 to 37 on there, but it's simply interpolated between environments. We are forced to the strategies of transportation, transit operations and TDs. So our updated plan? Well, we could just take credit score is what is different compared to our baseline. So what I'm talking about in these categories are the new commitments in a plan that weren't in the 2045. So expanded training service articles increased themselves by saying other regional transporters initiative five mobility has that because our trading investments under TDM we have increasing work from home development and regional TDM programming that grows effectiveness over time. Under operations commitments to arterioles signal timing improvements and under active transportation, significant expansion of our local bicycle and pedestrian network with increased travel to the bicycle scooters and makes it easier to get around sacred underground So with these strategies, we modelled them and our travel demand model. And we see the impact of these strategies. This is one way to look at it, which is the most shared and how that changes. So the blue columns are the baseline plan results for 2018. And the green bars are the puppies. So you have fewer single occupant vehicle trips, for walkers, Horizon trips, transit trips, and then goes on vehicle miles traveled per capita is a decrease from a forecast three to 27 safe miles per day, according to baseline plan.
So this table is showing those greenhouse gas emissions in layman's terms and the reductions that we're seeing between the two sets of estimates and how is each the required reductions. The plan is going to be released. This is the main content of the point of this presentation. The actual document itself will be available in mid June. And then we'll be asking council to adopt that in July this year,
questions for minorities? Thank you
Okay. Dora, any last thoughts? This is your opportunity. Anything about Sousa, you want to worry about? Anybody else? Working here and we're doing all of you and I know. That's cool.
You will be very best.
I can work directly with municipalities or everyone. Yeah, I'll be working with it. And I'm one program the program. So
thank you for your work here. Appreciate still anything about society?
All right, let's move on to council reports. Transportation Commission commission.
Be very quick in the interest of time, but um, hopefully people have seen the information that's gone out about the additional funding that TC approved last month additional 25 million for road repair across the state dealing with all of the winter related impacts. Also, additionally, about 8 million for improvements on North i 25. So north of Fort Collins to Wellington. So again, road repair maintenance there. I want to give a shout out to Heather and her team for hosting the four P meetings around the region. I know they were out on the circuit a lot and had the meetings with Morgan County and Weld County once coming up with Larimer. So those are great meetings encourage you to attend or others very informational. And let's see, I think those are the main ones. I'll definitely take back the comment about the transit townhall, see what we can do there share with me information we're getting. Okay. So I think and then, again, just from a safety moment standpoint, May was Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month, Colorado had an unfortunate record high of motorcycle crashes this past year. So get a lot of campaigns going out around, look twice and save a life. But all of us know people who ride motorcycles and so please, please be safe and be on extra lookout for them. Thank you.
I have to say something I heard today that potentially this could be your last meeting with us.
But we don't know that for sure. That for sure.
So my term is up in July. So
I heard you had an interview with the governor possibly today and
with their office, their office
will know soon in the region rejoining us again.
So if they thought I just you know, again, thank you. It's been an amazing four years. It's amazing to me that four years went by best it's like a blink. Anyway, but you guys are doing great work. And always talk about the North heart rage and all the work that's going on here and as a role model for other parts of the state. So it's truly been a gifted and opportunity to work very well. We've accomplished a lot. When I first got here it was all about second five when I come by and that is It's fake, and it has a delivery method and has funding identified. So glad and that again, that's a testament to all the work that's done up here collaboratively. So we'll see how we hope to see you next time. Thank you for everything you've done. Well, thank you. I appreciate that.
A seat at region four update. Heather, if you are still here, you deserve a medal.
I am here real quick, just gonna ping. Commissioner brekkie already mentioned it our four P meetings. We hit most of the counties we do have Larimer County coming up June 29, and another Weld County one June 22. So we really encourage participation in those meetings. Also wanted to note those those funds coming from TC, we do have a concrete panel replacement project. Going to advertisement here in the very near future that will go from 14 up past l Canyon. We also as part of those commission funds are getting to 57 a portion of that reconstructed north of Windsor. And then our current resurfacing project is should be they should be setting cones anytime if they haven't already. And that is from basically 34 up to a Walnut Street on the south side of Windsor. So a lot of construction going on. And I'm going to just keep it short and sweet. Thank you, actually madora really excited to have you on the team. big loss. huge win for CDOT. So thank you and I really look forward to working with you.
Can I add to her report to say not only is C dot billing and overlaying from basically the railroad tracks by our cemetery, all the way down the State Farm at 34. All of that, which is going to take a long time. We've also got the six to eight month intersection of 257 and Eastman park that involves the railroad CDOT, you know, well, you know, it's, it's crazy, and it's all happening at the same time. So I don't want to tell you to avoid the east side of Windsor, but don't come back. It's gonna be gonna be a mess. So thank you. Hey, thanks to CDOT for helping us out with that.
Stack report is written Colorado transportation Investment Office report is navnet. Commissioner Stevens
Yeah, we met on May 25. We met in person for the very first time, we have, we will have around $6.62 million for this fiscal year. So we're looking at ways to we're looking at how we want to spend the dollars, probably coming up with some criteria, we are talking about bus rapid transit, but some of that is several years away. So looking at sidewalk and bike. Infrastructure but open other.
Good, thank you. Brent range passenger rail district, will Endor John.
Bass, basically, we went through a lot of still going through a lot of the planning, we got a good presentation on the public meetings, everybody in here should be getting some data from the consultants asking you to attend the Front Range, passenger, well, stakeholder meeting, those are going to be going on you guys. All the communities, local communities should have got those are amazing artists in June. So this should be coming out. So just be prepared. They're looking for voices of what they want, where they you know, it's just going to be that process. They're going to have probably a couple rounds of those went through some of the criteria that we want to evaluate through the service development plan. And it's just, it's a long to slow our meeting. As opposed to three hours of information.
What do they do to be so efficient? All right. Skipping right over TPR boundary study, we've already done that host council member report job.
I have 14 projects I was going to go through but since it's late and I'll just stick to a couple of things. One is interesting the presentation of a because one of the things that really is really seen in the last couple of years is our average age is like 36.1 plus or minus. In Greeley 9690 plus percent of the people that moved in or migrated in over the last two years have been people of color. Our community has grown a lot from the migration out of Denver to Greeley. I think A lot of the data points were right. We really have grown substantially in the last two years. Some of the things that we're experiencing, I can go to the projects, but I'm not going to do that. But the two that I will talk about is 35th and 47. Big projects for us the merge grant calls giving presentations on that. We saw a presentation on yesterday for coalition 17 County Road 17 When you start looking at the mobility of people getting from Greeley to Loveland Greeley to Fort Collins, getting that transit system set up so we can move people more efficiently through there and breaking down the bottlenecks with all the signals I think it's going to be important for the region and it's going to be important for really so that's where I'll stay on there's a lot of good things going on. I don't know if you guys know our slow goats story best lived in is what really is logo motto is It's a it's a cool it's a cool thing. It's my greally but it's extended to a story best lived in So every month every week we tell a great story about where we are and really as part of us to say it really is on a roll us pub all the time. So that's all I have
I just forwarded to the stakeholder meetings which actually came fits up
when that two to four it will be online right Am I right that the whole council here right because we're all representing the North. Yeah, I think I think it's for anybody Okay, so yeah, Suzanne has pointed that out to the council members. It's really elected officials and staff okay it's online
and then
everybody should get an email
Johnny BBQ
was warm but I said a few words to microwave he got here in time what was the problem getting here late was the whole barbecues and I thank you for all coming over to Greeley is great.
Council Chambers
I think it's like two or three years old. It's not it's not like in the last year. It's
been here longer than John longer. Oh, yeah. It was here. All right, next month. suggestions please both myself. Sandra, thank you
that's our city. That's our city hall. Was it made up for a city