[0:00] - We are the community diversity Group.
[0:02] Our mission is to foster an inclusive
[0:04] and interactive community, which attracts
[0:07] and retains a pool of potential employees
[0:09] and residents from underrepresented groups.
[0:12] We accomplish this in many ways,
[0:14] including sponsoring events like the Community Resource Fair
[0:17] publishing, a monthly resource flyer,
[0:20] and providing public training and educational
[0:22] and networking events.
[0:24] You can find us online@communitydiversitygroup.com.
[0:30] - For 30 years the State College Community Land Trust has
[0:34] been creating a community where the people
[0:35] who work here can afford to live, grow, and belong.
[0:40] We've created and preserved 56 permanently affordable homes,
[0:44] opening the door to home ownership for more than 80 families
[0:49] with energy efficient upgrades, green building
[0:52] and clean energy investments.
[0:54] Our homeowners enjoy lower utility costs
[0:57] and affordable homes that last for generations.
[1:01] Our programs serve low to moderate
[1:04] and middle income individuals
[1:05] and families who want to live in State College.
[1:09] None of this would be possible without our extended
[1:12] community of dedicated staff volunteers, local businesses
[1:17] and banks and our nonprofit partners.
[1:20] Join the movement, donate, volunteer, leave a legacy
[1:24] through planned giving, share our story.
[1:28] Visit SCC land trust.org.
[1:37] - You are watching CNET Centre County's Government
[1:40] and Educational Access Network.
[1:48] - I'll call the order the Tuesday, September.
[1:51] Oh, by the way, you guys are ready, right? Alright, sorry.
[1:55] Call the order of the Tuesday, September 22nd,
[1:58] Centre County Metropolitan Planning Organization's
[2:00] Coordinating Committee meeting.
[2:01] First item on the agenda is just, I just wanna call
[2:05] to your attention the safety moment that is in your agenda.
[2:09] Anybody have any questions, comments,
[2:11] staff, anything to add to that?
[2:13] - So this is something - That's been circulating
[2:16] around in terms of the safety conferences
[2:19] and I thought if you kind of go through them, it kind
[2:22] of illustrates what your, how your vision changes
[2:26] as you drive faster.
[2:27] Now, you as an individual may feel like you can see more,
[2:32] but regardless of what you believe,
[2:34] you can see there are always limitations as you drive faster
[2:38] and as as daylight savings time comes.
[2:42] Please be cognizant of pedestrians,
[2:52] - I think Joe, Eric, hang - On.
[2:55] Hang on. Are you done? Yep, I'm done.
[2:57] Okay, then we can move to questions. Joanne?
[2:59] - No, it's not a question.
[3:01] It's one way to really make this pop.
[3:04] I played with this on my computer.
[3:05] This says is turn it into a mini video and it goes in
[3:09] and out and you can actually see the difference instead
[3:11] of just one at another.
[3:13] Just FYI. Yep.
[3:14] - Thank you.
[3:20] - Anyone else? I failed to do?
[3:23] We do Roll Call at MPL.
[3:26] - We don't, but we can if
[3:27] - You like don't know, just
[3:28] we're fine then we'll keep rolling.
[3:30] Just make sure I didn't miss, actually you should.
[3:33] Alright, if, if for public record.
[3:35] Alright, then we will pause
[3:37] before moving into Public Comment
[3:39] and allow staff to do Roll Call.
[3:41] Thanks. Frank Frank's here to keep us in line. Frank
[3:45] - Always keeps me in line.
[3:46] Yes. Okay. Mark Higgins. Here.
[3:50] Amber Ion. Eric Bernier.
[3:53] - Here. - Jeremy Thompson Here.
[3:57] - No, Amber's here too. Oh, she just didn't announce
[3:59] - The time.
[4:00] Perfect. Sorry. Jeremy Thompson. You said here. I'm here.
[4:04] Yeah. Bruce Helms. Here. Frank Harden. Here. Heidi Ey.
[4:08] Here go. Paul Valcon on. Yes. Paula Here.
[4:14] Alexandra? David Ano. Keith Reese.
[4:19] Eric Rena. Here.
[4:21] GN Bacon Online I believe.
[4:27] Joanne Toy. I'm here. Dick Decker? No. Margie Bowl.
[4:32] I'm here. Phil Burnett. Nate Walker.
[4:38] Here. Eric Murc. I'm here.
[4:43] Alright.
[4:44] - Okay. That's it for voting members? Yep. Alright.
[4:49] Now that takes us to Public Comment.
[4:51] This is opportunity to address the committee on anything
[4:54] that's not on tonight's agenda.
[4:57] I'm looking online for any digital hands to be raised.
[5:01] And in the meantime I'm looking in the room marketing.
[5:09] - Just a quick question for PennDOT, when you have a chance,
[5:13] if you could send me an update on
[5:15] what you've been working on with Benner Pike had a citizen
[5:19] who commutes on that road
[5:21] and he is noticing his commute times are increasing.
[5:24] So
[5:27] - Is that in relationship to the study?
[5:30] - Yeah, in the study. - Okay. Okay.
[5:32] The, the supplemental planning funds study.
[5:36] Is that, or is there another study that
[5:40] - Well PennDOT had done in a very initial study
[5:43] of potential solutions to producing
[5:47] the congestion on the Better Pike.
[5:49] Just wondering if there's an update
[5:51] or anything they might wanna be trying first.
[5:58] - So if you go back to the June meeting Yeah.
[6:05] Many of the solutions put out there Oh are long term. Yeah.
[6:10] Our long term and they require
[6:15] collaboration from the municipalities.
[6:18] There are some things that we can do to, to kick
[6:23] that along.
[6:26] But in terms of programming, I think more
[6:28] what they leveled at us was the idea that we would,
[6:33] the comment from Banner Township
[6:38] was that there were also some other problems on the
[6:41] corridor, notably at the intersection of one 50
[6:43] and five 50 that we would have to investigate
[6:47] to gain the full benefit from the study.
[6:49] So from our point of view, we are continuing
[6:53] to encourage the municipalities to, to move forward
[6:57] with some of the, with some of the planning methods,
[7:01] with the idea that you want to continue
[7:03] to maintain your signal timings, update them
[7:07] as new developments come and or as traffic patterns change,
[7:12] but also look towards programming additional
[7:17] projects in future tip updates.
[7:20] That is a long slow moving process.
[7:23] And there's, you know, as mentioned we'd have
[7:26] to look at the 1 55 50 intersection
[7:28] somewhere in that process.
[7:30] I don't think there's anything that really comes out of
[7:32] that study that we can put into implementation this fall
[7:36] and expect to see answers come spring.
[7:38] Alright, I'm just passing it on from the citizen. Mark
[7:43] - Raises hand on line mark.
[7:46] Go ahead.
[7:47] - Yes, thank you Marshall.
[7:49] Depend on, wanted to bring to, to light
[7:52] that there was a recent signal upgrade.
[7:55] It was a, a previous award grant to Better Township.
[8:00] I believe our signal
[8:02] or traffic unit made us aware that
[8:04] that had completed recently.
[8:07] So what I'll do is, I'll make note of this,
[8:09] I'll take it back to our traffic unit
[8:11] and talk with them about communicating
[8:12] with the local municipality about some potential up changes,
[8:17] maybe some adjustments that are needed to those signals.
[8:20] - There - We go. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks Mark.
[8:23] Yeah, that was actually some really helpful info.
[8:27] So in essence we got a handbook or a playbook Yeah.
[8:29] With the study and like Jim mentioned,
[8:33] there was a little bit of low hanging fruit that
[8:36] that can be addressed.
[8:37] I mean one of the things was Zoning, you know, booking at,
[8:42] you know, existing Zoning
[8:43] and could possibly be done there too.
[8:45] Yeah. Okay. Any other public comments?
[8:50] I'm not seeing any hands raised online.
[8:53] Nobody else in the room. So we'll move to new agenda items.
[8:56] Same deal opportunity here for anybody,
[8:59] anybody on the committee to request new agenda item
[9:02] for tonight or future meeting.
[9:06] In fact, I'll open that up
[9:07] to anybody who's not on the committee
[9:10] going once, twice.
[9:14] Alright, we'll move to Consent Agenda for the record.
[9:18] There are four items in tonight's Consent Agenda, approval
[9:21] of the minutes from the June 23rd, 2026
[9:23] coordinating committee meeting.
[9:25] The second item is the federal functional class
[9:27] system review update.
[9:29] The third is the NVI Community charging funding opportunity
[9:33] for the Centre Region Centre Region.
[9:37] And the last item is the project committee's update
[9:39] and grant application update.
[9:43] These items will either be accepted
[9:45] or approved through the acceptance of our Consent Agenda.
[9:50] Would anyone like to have any of those items pulled
[9:52] before we entertain a motion
[9:54] to accept the Consent Agenda as presented?
[10:01] Anybody? Alright, Charles, accept the motion
[10:03] to accept the Consent Agenda as presented.
[10:07] - I moved. - Okay. Got a motion from Gopal? Second.
[10:12] - Second. - Alright, I got Joanna as a second.
[10:16] Any discussion questions?
[10:18] If not all in favor, please signify by saying aye
[10:21] - A. Aye. Aye.
[10:23] - Anyone opposed? Alright.
[10:27] Motion carries.
[10:28] Consent Agenda adopted And that takes us to item number six,
[10:33] our State College area Connector project update.
[10:38] Who's going to, who's gonna take that?
[10:42] - I can take that one, Eric. - Alright, thanks.
[10:44] Kevin. Four is yours. Yep.
[10:46] - Alright, thank you.
[10:49] As most of the committee knows
[10:50] during the draft EIS review process,
[10:53] the PennDOT team received several comments from the public
[10:57] and to ensure that we address each comment
[10:59] and give it the thorough consideration it deserves.
[11:03] We then conducted additional environmental
[11:06] and engineering investigations to further
[11:09] evaluate project impacts, opportunities
[11:11] and design considerations.
[11:14] These efforts were undertaken to confirm
[11:16] that the project being advanced best meets the,
[11:19] the region's transportation needs while balancing
[11:22] the interest for environmental community
[11:26] and stakeholder stakeholders alike.
[11:29] The results of those investigations continue
[11:31] to support the central alternative
[11:33] as the preferred alternative as was presented
[11:35] during the draft EIS and the Public Hearing and PennDOT
[11:40] and FHWA are working collaboratively
[11:42] to complete the final EIS to ensure
[11:45] that all comments have been
[11:46] thoroughly considered and addressed.
[11:48] And to verify that legal sufficiency
[11:50] and compliance with appropriate laws
[11:52] and regulations has been completed.
[11:55] The final EIS
[11:56] and record of decision are anticipated to be completed
[11:59] and published within the next few months.
[12:01] So I know that we were initially going with the schedule
[12:06] to try to have that completed this summer.
[12:08] Like I said, with, with all of the, the comments
[12:11] that we received and the additional studies that we wanted
[12:14] to make sure that we thoroughly addressed everything
[12:16] and that we have everything, you know, I saw in the document
[12:18] and as a good alternative to meet all the purpose
[12:23] and needs and the, the identified objectives of the project.
[12:28] That's taken, taken a little bit longer,
[12:30] but we will have a, a complete document in the end,
[12:36] talk about other updates that the team is working on.
[12:38] We're currently working on a drilling contract
[12:41] to get started with borings
[12:43] for the geotechnical investigations along the selected
[12:46] alternative corridor.
[12:48] We did have a pre-bid meeting earlier today
[12:51] with some prospective bidders for the,
[12:54] the drilling contract.
[12:55] The first drilling contract is anticipated to start,
[12:58] it'll be mostly towards the western end of the project area
[13:02] and we anticipate awarding that early next month.
[13:04] So it'll start to see some trucks
[13:07] and movement of equipment out there shortly thereafter in,
[13:11] in the, in this fall in winter season to get that,
[13:15] that contract started
[13:18] and we'll be, you know, sharing that information
[13:20] with the public as well to let them know we've been in
[13:22] contact with property owners
[13:23] and we'll continue to do so so that they know when
[13:26] that drilling act, those drill drilling
[13:28] activities will begin.
[13:31] The team is still coordinating with all the agencies,
[13:33] but especially with the US Army Corps of Engineers
[13:36] and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.
[13:39] That is for the, the Federal Waterway permit,
[13:42] which is the 4 0 4 water waterway permit, as well
[13:45] as the state 4 0 1 water quality certification.
[13:49] Good news is we did get the 4 0 1 water quality
[13:51] certification from DEP
[13:53] and we're continuing to work
[13:54] with the US Army Corps on the 4 0 4 waterway permit.
[13:58] The federal decision on that permit is required
[14:01] within 90 days of the record of decision.
[14:04] So they will follow suit as we get closer to the,
[14:09] the final EIS and record of decision.
[14:14] Also last month on August 25th, depend on team met
[14:18] with Harris Township officials to review preliminary design
[14:21] of the PA 45 corridor.
[14:23] That's between the section of PA 45, between Bull Avenue
[14:27] and the 3 22 interchange with PA 45.
[14:31] And this was just a continuation of previous coordination
[14:34] regarding the roadway design, looking at the typical section
[14:36] of that, that particular roadway as well as
[14:39] the accommodations for pedestrians
[14:41] and bicyclists so that you're non, non-motorized traffic.
[14:45] So we had a very good meeting there.
[14:47] We'll continue to coordinate with both Harris
[14:49] and Potter Township and,
[14:50] and the local municipality as, as we move forward
[14:53] with the preliminary design team is also continuing
[14:57] to coordinate with the consulting parties to develop
[15:02] an advisory committee,
[15:03] which will provide input on the contact sensitive design
[15:06] approaches that may be appropriate for the project.
[15:10] So we we're anticipating to have a kickoff meeting
[15:12] as we get closer to the FBIS
[15:14] and the rod with the record of decision I should say.
[15:17] And we'll be meeting with that committee.
[15:20] The committee members have already been updated and,
[15:22] and agreed upon with the,
[15:24] the different consulting party members
[15:26] and we'll be, we'll be looking to schedule
[15:28] that meeting later this year.
[15:32] And as usual, the team continues to coordinate with any,
[15:36] you know, all those, the municipalities, the county,
[15:40] all the agencies, but as well as the,
[15:42] the residents within the area as we get questions, you know,
[15:44] we've been still going out
[15:46] and visiting with residents when they have questions,
[15:48] answering emails, phone calls,
[15:51] and we'll continue to do so as the project progresses.
[15:54] So we're happy to, to entertain any questions
[15:57] that anybody may have at this time.
[15:59] - Okay, again, this is not an action item,
[16:01] this is simply an update.
[16:03] So I'll look first to committee members.
[16:06] Questions, comments for Kevin? Looking around the table?
[16:11] Anybody online just, just raise your digital hand?
[16:17] No, let me give you another minute By Kevin
[16:22] or or staff, did anything come out of your presentation
[16:25] that your updated tech committee worth noting here tonight?
[16:29] On, on the update?
[16:33] - The only, the only questions that we got from the,
[16:35] the tech committee update was
[16:38] to talk a little bit about the,
[16:40] there's some questions about the PA 45 quarter
[16:42] that we talked about with Harris Township
[16:45] and one of which was we in the draft EIS we showed a five
[16:49] lane typical section, so two lanes in each direction
[16:52] with the center turn lane.
[16:54] We've since looked at that
[16:55] and done some additional traffic analysis.
[16:57] So for the, and the traffic engineers
[17:00] that may be in the road, we did a SIB analysis, which is a,
[17:04] a, a certain type of traffic operation software
[17:07] that allows us to do a little bit more detailed analysis
[17:10] of traffic throughout a corridor.
[17:12] And when we did that, we were able
[17:14] to refine the design a little bit to get us down to a,
[17:17] through back to a three lane section.
[17:19] So one lane, generally one lane in each direction
[17:21] with the center turn lane and,
[17:23] and obviously we have some,
[17:24] some changes in the typical sections as you get to the,
[17:27] the inter proposed interchange.
[17:29] But that was a question that came up
[17:31] with the technical staff, the technical committee.
[17:33] So we were able to share with them that those are some
[17:35] of the things that we shared with Harris Township.
[17:37] So you were looking to make some of those changes
[17:40] And we also looking at, at working, continuing to work
[17:45] with the emergency services personnel on access for them to
[17:49] access, have access to the center portion
[17:52] of the preferred alternative.
[17:54] So we've been working with them on that
[17:56] and we'll continue to do so.
[17:57] So those were some of the areas I think that were
[18:00] slightly changed and altered a little bit since we had
[18:03] presented the draft EIS to everybody.
[18:08] - Right. Thank you. I don't see anybody online.
[18:11] Last chance in the room. Okay.
[18:15] Kevin, is it fair to say then we're, we're a few months
[18:19] behind schedule, at least the initial schedule,
[18:22] but it sounds like it's due in large part to the
[18:27] extensive and unprecedented level of outreach
[18:31] and engagement with both municipalities and residents
[18:34] and then the time it took PennDOT to respond
[18:39] and adjust the plan where appropriate or necessary.
[18:43] Is that a fair statement?
[18:45] - Yes, very fair statement, yes.
[18:47] We had, we had great participation from, from the public
[18:52] and, and that helps to, to give us, you know,
[18:55] the opportunity to make those adjustments, you know,
[18:57] before we finalize the document.
[18:59] So it's, it's very worthwhile.
[19:02] - Alright then on behalf of the MPO, I will again thank you
[19:07] and the PennDOT staff for those efforts
[19:10] because that was exactly what the MPO,
[19:12] this committee went on record asking both you
[19:16] and Pendot to do as part of this project.
[19:18] So thank you.
[19:21] If there's no further comments
[19:22] or questions, we'll move to the next agenda item,
[19:27] which is really, I believe the only one that's
[19:31] the staff is asking for action on tonight
[19:34] and that is the Centre County passenger rail access study
[19:39] status report, final presentation, and potentially a motion
[19:43] or action here tonight to,
[19:46] to accept the draft final report pending comment.
[19:51] And for the first time in, I don't know
[19:52] how many years, Brian's not here.
[19:55] So let me kick it to Greg
[19:56] and you can tell me who's gonna take Brian's place tonight.
[20:00] - Well thank you Mr. Chair.
[20:02] As you mentioned, we are looking to wrap up
[20:06] or wind down the passenger rail access study this evening.
[20:09] It's been going on for just a wee bit over a year
[20:12] at this point this evening.
[20:15] We have two individuals from Michael Baker International,
[20:21] Peyton Trus, Trussell and Ben Warner.
[20:23] And then we also have Toby F from Rockland Planning
[20:27] who is a sub consultant on this effort.
[20:30] As Eric mentioned, we will be looking for action
[20:34] of some sort at the end of this presentation.
[20:38] I also will put out there,
[20:39] I don't wanna steal too much thunder from the presentation,
[20:43] but I will say
[20:44] that we did get one comment at the technical committee
[20:47] meeting and that is that we take at least some steps
[20:51] to integrate this with College Township Dell Summit area
[20:54] plan because of the rail infrastructure in the area,
[20:57] the access to infrastructure leading into
[21:01] downtown State College, as well
[21:02] as easy access out of the area.
[21:05] So we did take that step
[21:07] and you'll see the rest
[21:08] of the draft results here in a moment.
[21:10] But looks like I'll be introducing Ben Warner from
[21:14] Michael Baker International.
[21:16] - Okay, thank you Greg. Ben, the floor is yours.
[21:20] - Thank you all and thanks Greg for that brief introduction.
[21:24] Yes, Brian is out on vacation this week, so
[21:27] I'll provide the briefing tonight.
[21:29] As Greg mentioned, also joined by Peyton
[21:32] and Toby to assist with answering any questions
[21:37] as we well throughout the presentation.
[21:39] I will mention it's a pretty lengthy presentation tonight,
[21:43] so if there's a question on one of the slides
[21:47] or the alternatives that we're gonna look at, feel free
[21:50] to raise your hand, interrupt me, I will take offense
[21:53] and we can try to answer the questions on the fly
[21:56] if that's beneficial as well.
[21:58] - Go - Next slide please, Greg. Thank you.
[22:02] So tonight's briefing, just a brief overview.
[22:04] We're gonna discuss the study purpose and objectives.
[22:08] We're gonna look at the four alternatives
[22:10] that were developed as part of the study
[22:13] and then really the bulk of it's gonna be
[22:16] how did we get here based off involvement with the public.
[22:19] So I'll provide a brief overview on the public engagement
[22:22] overview and dive the specifics of the public survey,
[22:26] our stakeholder interviews,
[22:28] our 30 day Public Comment period.
[22:31] And then in the middle of that 30 day Public Comment period
[22:33] that ran from July August, we also hosted a very successful
[22:39] public open house.
[22:41] - Hey Ben, let me, let me interrupt you for a second.
[22:43] How about we take a break
[22:44] after each one of those seven segments for questions?
[22:49] I assume there's a couple of slides for each one.
[22:53] - Yeah, so basically a couple
[22:55] besides this first section, I'll say there's only,
[22:57] there's only one slide and then we roll into the next.
[23:00] So, but yeah, we can definitely pause after each session.
[23:03] - Alright, thank you. - Absolutely.
[23:07] So some of the study objectives
[23:10] and the purpose was really designed
[23:12] to update rather than simply repeat
[23:15] and revisit the Keystone West report.
[23:18] So like I mentioned, our process was stakeholder engagement.
[23:22] So we met with stakeholders, update
[23:24] and validate the assumptions from the Keystone West report.
[23:28] We explored routing options
[23:30] and endpoints for services considered, so shuttle busters
[23:35] or rail options.
[23:38] We identify the most sustain, supportable
[23:41] and sustainable options
[23:43] for both passenger rail and shuttle bus.
[23:47] And then we also evaluated the willingness
[23:49] and ability of the required partners
[23:51] to provide the improved access.
[23:53] Obviously this is not just one group
[23:57] or agency that would be involved with this.
[23:59] There's a lot of players that would be involved.
[24:02] So we were insured throughout the whole process
[24:05] that we involved all of those particular parties
[24:14] Continuing.
[24:14] So here into the next section,
[24:16] looking at our four alternatives.
[24:18] This is the first of four,
[24:19] which is a dedicated shuttle bus service connecting Centre
[24:23] County with the existing Amtrak stations such as
[24:27] Altoona or Harrisburg.
[24:29] As you'll see here, each
[24:30] of the alternatives are set up in a similar fashion
[24:33] with brief overview across the top, highlighting
[24:36] what the alternative is and then a list of several benefits
[24:41] and challenges that would come along
[24:43] with each of the alternatives.
[24:45] So for the shuttle bus service connecting
[24:47] to existing Amtrak stations, some of the key advantages
[24:52] include it would probably be the lowest cost
[24:55] 'cause it could use existing roads and rail service
[24:59] and we wouldn't really need any new rail infrastructure.
[25:02] It has the potential to offer flexible
[25:04] and scaled services based on Penn State events,
[25:08] the academic calendar.
[25:09] So really looking at those football Saturdays, concerts,
[25:14] holidays for the students at the,
[25:18] at the university in addition to also beginning
[25:22] and end of the semester.
[25:24] Some of the key issues are the sustainable operating
[25:28] funding, seasonal demand, as I mentioned,
[25:31] it would be very spiky based on particular events
[25:34] with the university schedule coordination with Amtrak
[25:38] to align is where so busing individuals to
[25:42] and from the Amtrak stations, you would want
[25:45] to ensure alignment with Amtrak stations
[25:48] to make sure the individuals can connect to
[25:51] and from State College integrated ticketing vehicle
[25:56] and facility needs
[25:57] and the potential for LI limited fair revenue
[26:00] or some of the negatives
[26:03] I'll mention throughout the process.
[26:05] This was viewed as a lower cost access strategy,
[26:08] but would still require a large operating partnership
[26:12] across multiple agencies.
[26:17] Our second alternative is expanding
[26:21] existing inner city bus service
[26:22] between Centre County and Harrisburg.
[26:25] So this would be Greyhound fullington services
[26:29] provide both connection to Amtrak
[26:32] and a useful regional mobility for other chips
[26:34] for individuals who, not just students
[26:37] but also residents who may live in Centre County
[26:41] but want to travel that need to travel to Harrisburg
[26:43] for work or vice versa.
[26:45] Individuals lived out in the Harrisburg area need to travel
[26:48] to Centre County.
[26:51] Some of the key challenges
[26:52] for this alternative are operating funding requirements,
[26:56] again, highly peaked demand based on campus events,
[27:01] broad reliability, congestion, potential for
[27:06] accidents, causing delays along with the inner city bus,
[27:10] and then coordination among the carriers, PennDOT,
[27:13] local partners and Amtrak.
[27:19] So those were the two shuttle bus service alternatives.
[27:22] Now looking at our rail alternatives,
[27:28] The first rail alternative was our short line rail shuttle
[27:31] service to Centre County.
[27:33] Under this concept, basically a rail shuttle would connect
[27:36] Centre County with the existing Amtrak network using
[27:40] existing freight rail corridor corridors
[27:42] and serving communities throughout Centre County
[27:44] and beyond, such as Beon or Downtown State College.
[27:48] Some of the advantages include a one seat rail connection
[27:51] within Centre County serving multiple communities,
[27:55] more reliable that highway travel
[27:58] and the potential to support transit oriented development.
[28:02] So the trade offs, significant capital investment.
[28:05] So we're starting to talk about more expensive alternatives
[28:09] with our rail coordination with freight railroads
[28:11] and Amtrak, potential track
[28:14] and station upgrades, OP operating subsidies, equipment
[28:18] and maintenance requirements,
[28:20] and then again, dependence on those reliable connections
[28:23] after you get off the rail shuttle service
[28:25] and trying to find connections beyond.
[28:32] Our fourth and final alternative is our,
[28:35] that direct passenger rail service
[28:38] to State College from the Altoona Amtrak station
[28:43] and really direct this would provide direct access
[28:46] through the NI and Bald Eagle Road railroad corridor,
[28:51] while it provides the strongest direct access,
[28:53] it's a one seat trip
[28:55] and really responds
[28:56] to those major travel generators in the region providing
[29:00] direct access for visitors, tourists, or the general public.
[29:05] It's also the most complex alternative.
[29:07] Obviously you have high capital costs,
[29:10] you would require new station upgrades and
[29:13] or just brand new stations in general.
[29:16] Railroad ownership and operating agreements
[29:18] would've to be implemented.
[29:20] There would be significant infrastructure upgrade
[29:23] you'd be operating.
[29:24] There would be freight impacts, which could cause freight
[29:27] to be moved to the nine operational constraints,
[29:31] recurring subsidy needs
[29:33] and the demand that may be highly seasonal or event driven.
[29:37] So again, the common theme here, as you've probably heard,
[29:40] is a lot of the alternatives appear to be driven by
[29:45] those spiky trends from Penn State
[29:48] and beginning end of semester
[29:51] football games events on campus.
[29:54] So that is the end of the one section.
[29:57] So I know that was a lot of information,
[30:00] but I will at least pause Toby
[30:02] and I would be happy to kind
[30:04] of answer any questions on the four
[30:06] alternatives if there are any.
[30:09] - Okay. One quick request before we open it up.
[30:13] On the first two alternatives, you identified
[30:18] Harrisburg and Altoona.
[30:21] I believe that the report notes why,
[30:24] but for the folks who might be watching tonight,
[30:27] could you explain a little bit why those two sites were
[30:30] chosen in alternatives one and two?
[30:35] - Absolutely. So originally we were looking at Lewistown
[30:40] and Tyrone has potential connections, but
[30:44] after we conducted our stakeholder interviews
[30:49] specifically with Amtrak, we learned
[30:52] that travelers are extremely vulnerable.
[30:56] So basically you envision it
[30:59] as an individual who's unfamiliar with the area, who trapped
[31:03] by Amtrak now got off at a station that is unstaffed
[31:08] and is trying to find their connecting route, trying
[31:11] to find their inner city shuttle bus
[31:13] to connect to State College.
[31:15] So Lewistown is not a staff station.
[31:20] So based on advice
[31:22] provided by AM Amtrak, they recommended we expand study area
[31:27] to Altoona and Harrisburg, mainly due to the fact
[31:30] that they are staff stations
[31:32] and if a vulnerable traveler would get off the,
[31:37] at an Amtrak station and need assistance with luggage
[31:41] or just in general questions about connecting to their final
[31:46] or next destination, having
[31:48] that staffed individual at the station is a lot more
[31:51] beneficial than ultimately dropping them
[31:54] and no one there to assist them.
[31:56] - Yeah, Greg, clarification on that or Yeah,
[32:01] - I do want to say that the other point
[32:02] that we considered particularly
[32:04] with Harrisburg is just the volume of Amtrak service,
[32:07] particularly to the east that you're able to hook into.
[32:10] So we thought that would probably be a, a better
[32:14] examination than for example, Lewistown.
[32:18] - Okay. Ben
[32:19] and Greg, thank, thank you for that clarification.
[32:21] I'm looking to the room questions on what we've seen so far.
[32:25] Comments also looking online.
[32:29] Frank did you have something? Yeah,
[32:31] - I, I just kind of disagree.
[32:32] I I think that first off, it seems to me
[32:37] that this study's done based on Penn State football.
[32:41] I mean that's what you're saying, you know, I will be,
[32:45] next Tuesday, I'll be down at the Lewistown station
[32:49] dropping somebody that's going to Dallas,
[32:51] picking the train up there
[32:53] and there will be a lot of people getting on
[32:55] and a lot of people getting off.
[32:57] People were already going to Lewistown to,
[33:00] to pick the train up to go east and west.
[33:04] Has anybody talked to the Lewistown Travel Bureau?
[33:07] You're basically giving an, there's an opportunity here for,
[33:11] for revenue.
[33:12] There's an opportunity for,
[33:14] for business escalation in an area.
[33:17] You know, has anybody talked to Lewistown,
[33:20] the travel agent down there
[33:21] and say, Hey, would you guys be
[33:23] interested in looking at this?
[33:25] You know, I Amtrak sure that they wanted to go
[33:28] to their stations, absolutely,
[33:30] but that Lewistown station could be, could be upgraded
[33:33] and it could have people there, but,
[33:35] but you know, Amtrak doesn't wanna put people there,
[33:38] there are people there right now.
[33:39] They're all volunteers.
[33:41] So I, I just think you, you're, you're,
[33:44] you're setting this up for football weekends
[33:46] and you know, you're not looking at at the whole picture
[33:50] and, and I think Tyrone
[33:51] and Lewistown for this area, who wants to get on a bus
[33:54] and ride an hour and a half, you know, to go
[33:57] to catch a train when you can do it in like 25 minutes.
[34:01] Why, why would you go an hour and a half on a, on a bus?
[34:04] So I, I just think that,
[34:06] I think ignoring those two locations is a mistake.
[34:09] - Okay. We gotta comment.
[34:11] Hang on Jeremy, which, which we will note
[34:14] and then I don't know if Ben or Toby
[34:18] or Peyton can answer the question on any level
[34:22] of engagement from the Lewistown business community.
[34:26] Was that any of that part of the study?
[34:31] - No, the, we did not involve the Lewistown business
[34:35] community as part of this feasibility study.
[34:40] - Okay. Jeremy? - Yeah. Well
[34:43] - Why it have been rather supportive
[34:44] of like Lewistown or Tyrone?
[34:46] I, my preference would be to get
[34:48] to the nearest train station instead
[34:50] of staying on the road a little bit longer.
[34:52] But I have found benefits of traveling out of Harrisburg
[34:56] and Middletown because there are more trains.
[34:59] But also if you did have an unforeseen incident
[35:04] where service may be canceled
[35:05] or sus suspended either in Altoona
[35:10] or Harrisburg, there's at least possibly, especially more
[35:13] so Harrisburg for additional options to work out the travel
[35:17] or at least enough accommodations that somebody could even,
[35:21] you know, find, find a place relatively easy
[35:24] to stay the night and resume their travel the next day
[35:27] versus in like Tyrone
[35:30] or Lewistown where lodging options
[35:33] and sometimes other transit options are a lot more limited.
[35:38] So. Okay.
[35:39] Just my take on the perspective
[35:41] and under understanding where, you know,
[35:44] the experts were coming from.
[35:46] - Yeah, Joanne,
[35:48] - I am pretty much agreeing with what Jeremy said,
[35:52] but going to Al to Tyrone
[35:56] or to Lewistown is good if you're just doing day trips.
[36:00] If you're going further, like the example
[36:02] that you gave going to Dallas, neither of those stations
[36:07] has, you can't put your extra baggage in a baggage cart.
[36:12] You can in Harrisburg and you cannan Altoona. Yep.
[36:16] So when I use Amtrak,
[36:20] if I just doing a day day trip, I go to Lewistown,
[36:24] but if I've got a longer distance,
[36:26] like I will be doing in November for a two week trip
[36:29] to Texas, I need that baggage handling service,
[36:34] which means a staff station
[36:36] and that would be Altoona or Harrisburg.
[36:40] And in that case I wouldn't mind taking the bus,
[36:43] although I hate buses, but I would prefer doing
[36:48] that over having to try to schlep three suitcases
[36:53] into a coach car.
[36:56] - Okay. Again, this is the draft of the final report.
[37:00] We're not writing the report, we've hired the consultants
[37:03] to do it, but obviously comments are welcome
[37:06] and I think the discussion about the comments is healthy.
[37:11] So other questions or comments
[37:14] before we move to the next section?
[37:18] No. Okay, Ben, go ahead.
[37:20] - Great, thank you and I appreciate the discussion.
[37:23] So moving on here. Our public
[37:26] and stakeholder engagement was really a
[37:29] core part of the study.
[37:31] Public engagement efforts included the public survey
[37:35] stakeholder interviews a public open house
[37:38] and then also involved was we developed a project steering
[37:41] committee that meant four times throughout the process.
[37:46] I also mentioned the 30 day Public Comment
[37:48] and review period that was open during, in the middle
[37:52] of when the public open house was held.
[37:55] So really these activities helped us understand the travel
[37:58] references reality of how individuals travel
[38:02] and the level of support for each alternative.
[38:08] So very early on in the study process,
[38:12] Centre County MPO learned
[38:14] that a graduate student at Penn State University was
[38:17] actually conducting a very similar study
[38:20] to passenger rail in Centre County.
[38:24] So to reduce duplication efforts,
[38:27] the Centre County NPO partnered
[38:29] with Penn State on a public survey,
[38:32] which was a very unique opportunity which allowed kinda
[38:37] a great collaboration between the university
[38:39] and the community and then also the NPO.
[38:43] So the public survey was open from February 4th
[38:47] through March 16th
[38:49] and we received a little over 1300 total survey responses.
[38:55] So like I mentioned, while survey was run through Penn State
[38:59] Credit to the Centre County MTO staff
[39:02] who completed their own extensive promotion of the survey
[39:06] to ensure awareness was made across the entire county
[39:10] and all residents
[39:11] and individuals within the county were made aware of
[39:15] the public survey and this ongoing study effort
[39:18] that was related to the Study.
[39:22] So next slide. Sorry about that Greg.
[39:26] So these next couple slides here are just an overview on
[39:31] some of the responses we received through the public survey.
[39:35] So this just provides an overview
[39:37] of the respondent location.
[39:39] As you can see, responses really came from across Centre
[39:42] County as a whole.
[39:44] What the largest number is being focused in State College
[39:47] Borough Ferguson Township, Township and College Township.
[39:52] It's important, the geographic pattern,
[39:54] it's really important to hear
[39:57] that the interest was not just limited to one municipality
[40:00] or the university at the same time, concentration
[40:04] with this in the Centre County region should be considered
[40:08] with the overall results.
[40:09] So there was a widespread
[40:12] of survey results from across the county,
[40:15] which was extremely beneficial and credit to the MPO staff.
[40:22] So within the study or within the survey,
[40:24] respondents had the opportunity to select kind
[40:27] of four preferred destinations.
[40:30] So those included New York City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh,
[40:33] and New York, New Jersey.
[40:35] In addition, respondents could select their other option,
[40:40] which was kind of out of those four options,
[40:43] maybe there were other areas that they wanted to travel.
[40:46] As you can see, New York City
[40:48] and Philadelphia more the most frequently
[40:51] identified preferred destinations followed
[40:53] by Washington DC Pittsburgh and Harrisburg.
[40:57] This show shows it's a very strong connection along the
[41:00] northeast corridor and other major regional destination.
[41:05] It also reinforces the importance of reliable transfers
[41:10] and schedules because several of the leading destinations
[41:15] that are towards the top of the list,
[41:16] you cannot reach directly from Centre County.
[41:19] You would have to connect in to one of the
[41:23] ed stations in order to reach a destination.
[41:31] So again, it's part of the survey.
[41:35] Individuals were able to kind of build their own selection
[41:39] by making trade-offs, whether it's from the fair, fair,
[41:42] so the cost, the service type that they would prefer,
[41:45] the frequency, how they would get to a station along
[41:50] with the departure times.
[41:52] The purpose was to really move from that simple statement
[41:55] of support and identify which surface characteristics were
[41:59] most meaningful for individuals.
[42:02] So looking at it, the average price chosen
[42:05] by survey respondents was $114.
[42:10] The top service types, so they could choose here
[42:12] between high speed rail or regular rail.
[42:15] 63% selected regular
[42:18] and depart departure frequencies
[42:21] that was most common was three times per day.
[42:27] One of the other questions was allowing individuals
[42:29] to really say, well how are you gonna get to it from
[42:33] the station?
[42:34] It was either drive
[42:36] or be dropped off by friend family member,
[42:39] which may also include Uber or Lyft
[42:43] or if there was a shuttle option, would you take the show
[42:48] again, very close but 54% mentioned.
[42:51] But they would prefer to be to drive themselves
[42:53] or be dropped off at the station.
[42:56] And then 65% preferred three daily departures.
[43:04] So I will pause there.
[43:06] That covers kind of the high level overview
[43:09] of the public survey.
[43:11] A full in-depth look at the survey results is included
[43:15] as an appendix within the report.
[43:18] But again, just really wanted
[43:19] to provide a high level overview of the, some
[43:22] of the key questions that were included within the survey.
[43:30] - Is this our pause? - Yeah, we can,
[43:33] we can take any questions on the
[43:35] survey, that would be a good spot.
[43:36] Now.
[43:37] - Questions, comments? Go Paul.
[43:45] - Ready? So - Hang, hang on Ben,
[43:47] hang on Ben, we go. Paul, I
[43:49] - Just had a question online.
[43:51] Yeah, thanks a lot for this Ben.
[43:54] Of course I didn't get a chance to look
[43:55] through the appendix, but what was the option that most
[43:59] of the respondents wanted?
[44:01] Did they want like option three
[44:02] or four, the ones that were involving the rail service
[44:06] or what was the
[44:09] - So the public survey was actually,
[44:13] the public survey was completely different from the four
[44:16] alternatives that were developed.
[44:19] So the four alternatives were developed based on
[44:23] the feedback from the public survey
[44:27] in the stakeholder interviews.
[44:29] So further down here in the presentation
[44:32] for the 30 day public review period, it actually, we
[44:36] provided individuals the opportunity to comment
[44:38] and share their preference on the four alternatives.
[44:42] And not to spoil it,
[44:44] but the preferred alternatives from the individuals were the
[44:48] two rail options during the public
[44:50] or the 30 day public review period.
[44:52] Okay. Yeah, I guess that's
[44:53] what I was wondering about is both of that, that during
[44:55] that review period, because I remember the survey
[44:57] was passed around.
[44:58] Thanks a lot. Absolutely.
[45:02] - Okay, Ben I think you're good to go. Jeremy, did you?
[45:06] Okay, hang on. Hang on Ben, one more, sorry. So,
[45:10] - So I'm kind of curious with the
[45:13] O over 1300 survey respondents, just kind of how does
[45:16] that compare to other feedback engagement opportunities
[45:20] we've had through the COG
[45:21] or even the consultant may have experienced before
[45:25] because that, that is a pretty significant number.
[45:28] No worries if nobody has the answer.
[45:30] Just yeah, a point of curiosity. I think if
[45:33] - You look at other supplemental planning studies
[45:36] that we've done, I would absolutely say
[45:38] that's a significant number. Okay.
[45:41] - To, to follow up on that, this is as good a time
[45:43] as any to bring this up.
[45:45] This is the most comprehensive
[45:48] and broad based study that's been done
[45:52] as long as I've been around.
[45:54] I mean, just look at the five
[45:56] entities that were at the table.
[45:57] I'm not sure that previous studies have had all five
[46:00] of those at the table.
[46:02] I can't say for certain,
[46:04] but I would say I'm 99% sure that
[46:07] that has not happened before.
[46:09] - Frank. Yeah, I I it may be comprehensive,
[46:13] but I, I'm sitting here
[46:16] and you just said 54%
[46:19] of the people you surveyed want to drive there
[46:22] or get dropped off
[46:24] and 48% would like some kind of shuttle service.
[46:27] So we're, we're putting all this together
[46:29] to based on half the people
[46:31] that are gonna use the service, less than half.
[46:34] I mean I, I I disagree with the results and,
[46:37] and how you, you came about all this.
[46:39] You, you basically said here's what we want to give you
[46:41] and which one do you like?
[46:42] I mean, I still think that,
[46:45] I still think you should look at other alternatives.
[46:47] I I think those two stations are still viable.
[46:51] - Well keep in mind Frank, that it'll be up to us
[46:54] to determine how to use this
[46:55] information and how to move forward. Well
[46:58] - I understand that.
[46:59] Okay.
[47:00] - And just one last thing from this section, going back to
[47:04] that slide that Mr. Hardin was mentioning about,
[47:07] I think it was like six 60 some percent we're preferring
[47:11] like three trips a day.
[47:13] I think that's a pretty good number just considering
[47:15] that we are within a month
[47:18] or two of a second daily round trip through the state just
[47:21] to show there is pent up demand for having more options.
[47:27] So that's a pretty good number to go off of.
[47:31] - Okay. We've given Amber enough time to come up
[47:33] with a question or comment.
[47:37] - So this is partly in response, this is partly in response
[47:40] to Frank's concern about like why would we not
[47:43] use Lewistown?
[47:45] And as someone who responded to the survey
[47:48] and going through it, I would've expressed my preference
[47:52] for Harrisburg because there's a train from Harrisburg
[47:56] to Philly and then onto New York like every hour,
[47:59] just about all day long from early in the morning
[48:01] until well into the evening.
[48:03] So if I'm planning a trip
[48:05] and I can't meet the timetable of the Lewistown train,
[48:09] which is once a day versus like once an hour,
[48:13] that's why we are always going to Harrisburg for the train.
[48:17] So, and which we do on a very regular basis.
[48:19] So I think that's kind of the issue with, with Lewistown is
[48:23] one train a day versus one train an hour.
[48:26] So hopefully maybe that helps.
[48:29] - Okay, thanks Amber.
[48:31] And before I turn it back over to Ben, I just want
[48:35] to correct myself what we do
[48:39] with this information's really not up to us.
[48:41] The MPOI just wanna make sure that everybody understands
[48:45] that when I say us, I mean the community in,
[48:49] in in particular those five entities
[48:52] and whatever comes from the community that wants
[48:55] to keep moving forward with one of those options.
[48:57] So, or multiple options. Okay.
[49:01] Ben, we, what's that? Frank?
[49:06] - The royal we I think is what he
[49:08] - Said.
[49:09] Yes. Yes. Thank you again. Alright Ben.
[49:13] - Alrighty. Thank you. So moving on here
[49:15] to our stakeholder interviews.
[49:17] This was a very essential part of the planning process.
[49:22] We really picked these five organizations as we thought
[49:26] that they were important to advancing one
[49:28] or more of the alternatives.
[49:30] As you can see this involved trans providers PennDOT the
[49:34] seat of call joint rail authority and Amtrak.
[49:39] So some of the common themes that we heard during
[49:44] our stakeholder interview views were stakeholders
[49:49] recognized the demand for inner city bus access.
[49:52] Amtrak, as I mentioned, advised for
[49:56] taking people to the, from those bus connections
[49:59] to staff stations, Altoona
[50:02] and Harrisburg ridership for those longer trips would peak
[50:06] around the breaks at Penn State in the end of the semester.
[50:09] And then the service competitiveness is
[50:12] very critical for this process.
[50:19] Moving on to our public comments.
[50:22] So in addition,
[50:24] we had a 30 day Public Comment review period,
[50:27] which was available to the public from July 17th
[50:30] through August 17th.
[50:33] We received 245 responses from the
[50:36] online Microsoft form.
[50:39] In addition, we received 24 written comments
[50:43] through email from residents.
[50:45] So these next couple slides just summarize the ratings
[50:48] and the recurring themes for each alternative.
[50:51] And it shows the relative support along
[50:55] with the written feedback that was
[50:56] provided by individuals as they took the Microsoft form
[51:01] during the Public Comment.
[51:04] So the dedicated shuttle bus alternative received an average
[51:07] rating of 3.51 out of five
[51:12] feedback showed there was conditional support.
[51:14] Many respondents saw value in near term connection
[51:17] to existing Amtrak service,
[51:19] but really preferred a shuttle be framed
[51:23] as a one step within a broader passenger rail strategy.
[51:27] The recurring message was
[51:28] that a bus connection could improve mobility in the near
[51:30] term, but it should not replace continued consideration
[51:34] of passenger rail for Centre County.
[51:42] The expansion of inner city bus service received the 3.55
[51:47] out of five respondents cited improved connectivity
[51:50] between Centre County and Harrisburg
[51:52] and better access to Amtrak stations, airports, employment,
[51:57] medical services, and other key destinations.
[52:00] It was generally viewed as more affordable
[52:02] and achievable in the near term
[52:04] and the two rail alternatives.
[52:05] However, again, many respondents still considered it
[52:09] as a secondary option rather than the community's preferred
[52:12] long term outcome of rail.
[52:18] So short line rail service, as you can see,
[52:20] the average rating has spiked now
[52:22] to 4.44 indicating very strong support.
[52:27] Respondents viewed it as a potential balance
[52:29] among practicality costs.
[52:31] Long-term transportation benefit emphasized the value
[52:35] of connecting Beon State College, Tyrone
[52:38] and the surrounding communities along
[52:40] with potential economic development benefits
[52:43] at certain communities.
[52:44] And the main concern was whether the capital
[52:47] and operating costs could be justified
[52:49] by expected RI ridership and broad benefits.
[52:52] So while it received significant support, there was also
[52:57] a number of comments raised about if the cost
[53:02] construction operating costs could be justified.
[53:08] So our direct passenger a again received a rating of 4.44
[53:13] and had the greatest number of level five ratings.
[53:16] Among the four alternative response describe
[53:20] as potentially transformative for regional mobility
[53:23] and frequently identified Penn State move in weekends
[53:26] graduation and game days as major use cases.
[53:30] Principal concern again was, was the cost
[53:32] of constructing necessary infrastructure
[53:35] and weather rhino ship would be sufficient
[53:37] to justify that investment.
[53:39] Again, the results showed strong public preference
[53:42] for the two rail options, specifically
[53:45] direct passenger rail,
[53:47] but it does not by itself resolve feasibility funding
[53:51] or implementation questions.
[53:55] As I mentioned, we also received written comments
[53:59] and they again reinforce the phase strategy.
[54:03] Many participants supported improving bus access in the near
[54:07] term while continuing to look at that long term
[54:12] rail connection providing service to Centre County.
[54:16] Some of the other comments here, again that phased approach,
[54:21] looking at the value of the State College or Beon station
[54:25] and the potential benefits
[54:26] of Penn State residents and visitors.
[54:34] So I will pause there that kind
[54:36] of highlights our public review period.
[54:41] Happy to take any questions that we received
[54:44] and again, this is just a very high level summary
[54:48] of the responses that we we received.
[54:51] We have a full in depth analysis from the Microsoft form
[54:56] that includes each individual
[54:58] response from respondents throughout
[55:00] the 30 day Public Comment.
[55:03] - Okay. It's pause time, questions, comments,
[55:09] and that particular section is what it is.
[55:12] So, okay Ben? Sure. Oh Greg,
[55:16] - Just one point of clarification.
[55:18] You know, for as much of a range of stakeholder interviews
[55:22] as we conducted, it's probably worth noting that we,
[55:25] we wanted to do even more.
[55:27] Unfortunately we were unsuccessful in bringing
[55:30] like a federal rail administration
[55:33] or a representative from Greyhound to the table.
[55:37] Fullington because they're a more local company,
[55:40] probably a lot easier to get an audience with them.
[55:42] But discussions that unfortunately we weren't able to have,
[55:46] but there's still value in having probably going forward.
[55:52] - Okay, Ben, back to you.
[55:55] - Alrighty, we're coming down here
[55:56] to the end of the presentation.
[55:58] So the, as I mentioned, we held a public open house
[56:02] on August 4th that was broken out into two sessions,
[56:05] an afternoon session and then an evening session.
[56:08] In total we had about 25 attendees
[56:12] and again, there was significant support
[56:15] and preference for both Rail alternatives support
[56:19] for looking beyond the Tyrone Lewistown
[56:21] to Harrisburg and beyond.
[56:24] The NI Mall was brought up as a potential desire
[56:27] of station location
[56:30] and one of the big things in the open house was
[56:34] residents were curious to know a clear sense of
[56:37] what party's decisions
[56:38] and actions would be necessary to advance one
[56:41] or more of these options.
[56:44] An interesting thing we walked out of the, the meeting room
[56:47] that night and there was a group of individuals who actually
[56:51] were setting up a group text to
[56:54] that were extremely interested
[56:56] and wanted to be involved with potential passenger rail
[56:59] and they were setting up a group text
[57:01] and were interested to see
[57:02] how they could advance this forward.
[57:04] So that was definitely something different from my end
[57:07] that you don't see too often
[57:09] after a public, public open house.
[57:10] But at the same time it's very unique and cool to see.
[57:18] So during the September 9th meeting,
[57:20] the technical committee did recommend acceptance
[57:23] of the study and I guess
[57:26] that concludes the presentation.
[57:29] Again, I know we kind of paused for questions,
[57:31] comments throughout, but if there are any outlying
[57:34] questions, comments, Toby
[57:35] and I are available here to kind of answer any questions
[57:38] or provide clarification on anything.
[57:40] I just wanna thank you for, for your time tonight.
[57:44] - Alright Ben, thanks.
[57:45] Before I open it up for comments
[57:47] or questions, I will note that based on your comment
[57:51] that the action you saw at the end of your public open house
[57:56] makes me feel pretty good about the, the subject choice
[58:00] for the supplemental planning fund study.
[58:04] Obviously we chose something that has, yeah,
[58:08] that, that people are interested in and passionate about.
[58:12] So with that, I'm looking in the room first
[58:15] and I'll look for digital hands once we go through the room,
[58:21] follow up comments, questions, let's go
[58:23] with Heidi and then Jeremy.
[58:26] - I get the sense that the rail options,
[58:27] what everybody really wants, but I also get the sense
[58:29] that people think that's just a pipe dream.
[58:31] Is, is that fair
[58:34] - That that, that it's what
[58:36] - That that, that everyone would love
[58:38] to have the rail come directly to State College
[58:40] or the Centre Region, you know, more closer,
[58:43] but that, that is never gonna happen.
[58:46] - Let me add to that 'cause I think we could merge two
[58:49] questions here together.
[58:52] Maybe this would be for staff or,
[58:54] or Ben, maybe one of you
[58:58] can offer just a little bit about what it would take
[59:03] to get, what would we say, a six car
[59:05] and track train beyond miles per,
[59:10] not cost wise, but just to give some context to
[59:13] what it would require.
[59:15] Did that come out in the tech committee meeting?
[59:18] - It not specifically.
[59:20] It was discussed a bit during the public open house.
[59:23] - Okay. 'cause we're, we're constantly referring
[59:25] to infrastructure cost and that,
[59:27] and it might be helpful just to know about, you know,
[59:30] just in general what we're talking about.
[59:34] Absolutely. Why you can't bring an Amtrak train into the
[59:36] Nittany Mall on the existing track
[59:39] and what would be required.
[59:41] So now Greg or Jim or Ben?
[59:47] - I, Toby I don't, I don't mean to put you on the spot,
[59:50] Toby, but are you, did you wanna take this one?
[59:53] Yeah, can you guys hear me okay?
[59:55] - Yep, yep. - Yeah, so
[59:58] it would require significant,
[1:00:00] pretty significant track upgrades.
[1:00:04] The, you'd have to get a railroad agreement to be able
[1:00:08] to operate a passenger rail there, require signal upgrades,
[1:00:13] you'd have to construct stations that meet the Americans
[1:00:17] with Disabilities Act with high level platforms
[1:00:20] for the full length of the train.
[1:00:22] So if you have a six car training, I've got a platform
[1:00:24] that runs the full length of that training that,
[1:00:28] that is level boarding.
[1:00:29] They're, they're, the cars are high
[1:00:33] if you're gonna operate Amtrak in there
[1:00:36] and then there would be,
[1:00:37] there would definitely be significant
[1:00:42] operating costs associated with,
[1:00:47] you know, paying Amtrak for,
[1:00:49] for operating those trains as well.
[1:00:51] So it, it definitely isn't something that's a quick,
[1:00:55] a quick process
[1:00:58] and it would take, it would take a bit of a time
[1:01:01] and a significant amount of money to be able to,
[1:01:05] to be able to achieve that.
[1:01:06] But you know, there's, there are rail projects
[1:01:09] that people have as, as ideas
[1:01:12] or things they want to do around the country
[1:01:15] and there are, you know, various funding streams
[1:01:19] that can be applied for to advance the phases
[1:01:23] and move projects forward.
[1:01:24] So the one, the one real advantage,
[1:01:29] that gap here is a, a major
[1:01:34] concentrated population in State College that
[1:01:39] has, that there's demand for travel outside
[1:01:43] of the State College area.
[1:01:45] So I think there, there are definitely is opportunity
[1:01:50] for inner city to explore inner city
[1:01:52] passenger service there.
[1:01:55] - Okay. Toby, just one quick follow up.
[1:01:57] You're talking about what
[1:01:59] beyond milberg, is that accurate?
[1:02:08] - Do we, do we have a map,
[1:02:10] - But I mean in in general or,
[1:02:11] or is it further upstream than Milberg?
[1:02:14] We're we're talking about those kind
[1:02:15] of improvements made to track.
[1:02:17] - Oh yeah, yeah. I mean there, there's, there's
[1:02:20] there there's you, you have to,
[1:02:23] so if you were gonna take this a step further, right now,
[1:02:26] this was a conceptual study,
[1:02:28] but if they're gonna take this a step further, you need
[1:02:30] to really explore all,
[1:02:32] what's gonna be the most viable rail alternative.
[1:02:35] Whether even using existing, the existing
[1:02:40] right of way is feasible or not,
[1:02:43] and you know how much cost you have in doing that.
[1:02:47] And then where you'd want to have station locations so
[1:02:52] that you could achieve the best ridership
[1:02:54] and the best terminal in the investment.
[1:02:58] - Okay. Did you have a follow up to that? Well,
[1:03:00] - I'd love to hear a ballpark number,
[1:03:02] but I don't think we're gonna get one.
[1:03:04] So, but, but it it expensive
[1:03:06] and that's, it's just everybody wants it,
[1:03:08] but it doesn't seem like it'll ever happen.
[1:03:10] Is that, is that still we always hope for something
[1:03:14] and we could pursue it.
[1:03:16] - You're, you're so expensive,
[1:03:18] you're probably talking hundreds of millions of dollars.
[1:03:21] It's not in the tens of millions of dollars.
[1:03:23] So this is this, this would not be an inexpensive venture
[1:03:28] to, to, you know, move forward with.
[1:03:32] I can't say whether it's feasible or not feasible
[1:03:35] because it really depends on political will
[1:03:38] and willing to invest.
[1:03:40] - Yeah. And and that's a bit outside the scope
[1:03:42] of this study, so not, it's no matter,
[1:03:47] even if there was money and enthusiasm, it takes some time.
[1:03:51] Absolutely. Alright, go Paul and then we'll go with Joanne.
[1:03:56] - Thanks. I was wondering like the, that short rail study
[1:04:02] that looked like that was something
[1:04:03] that was more feasible, right?
[1:04:04] I mean, do you have a sense for how,
[1:04:08] how much the cost overlay would be for that?
[1:04:11] It sounds like that's significantly cheaper than
[1:04:14] the passenger rail one.
[1:04:15] It seemed more feasible, at least
[1:04:16] that was the impression I got from looking at
[1:04:19] the, the report.
[1:04:21] Is that correct?
[1:04:23] - You're talking about the alternative
[1:04:24] where you run the rail shuttle.
[1:04:26] - The rail shuttle, but
[1:04:27] that still runs on rail tracks, right?
[1:04:29] - Yeah, it's the same. So the, so a lot
[1:04:32] of the same track upgrades would be necessary,
[1:04:35] but you would probably end up with a different operator.
[1:04:40] You wouldn't have to, you wouldn't have
[1:04:42] to make it work for Amtrak.
[1:04:44] The other big issue
[1:04:46] or the big thought behind
[1:04:48] that was if you use a diesel model, diesel model unit type
[1:04:53] of vehicle, you can operate one unit, you can operate two,
[1:04:57] there's self-propelled cars.
[1:04:59] You don't have to have an engine in cars, you're,
[1:05:01] you're operating a self-propelled car
[1:05:03] and there are versions of the cars that have,
[1:05:09] that could service low level platforms so you wouldn't have
[1:05:12] to build higher level platforms.
[1:05:13] So there's, there's definitely cost advantages to it.
[1:05:17] It would still, it would still require, you know,
[1:05:20] a pretty significant amount of money, a big investment.
[1:05:24] Plus you, you would, you would have equipment
[1:05:27] and a different operator probably that would then need
[1:05:30] to have a place to store
[1:05:32] that equipment, maintain that equipment.
[1:05:34] So it would add some other features that you wouldn't have
[1:05:37] with the, with the Amtrak alternative.
[1:05:39] Okay. But I mean it's not like,
[1:05:41] say like if you said the passenger rail was hundreds
[1:05:44] of million dollars, millions of dollars Yeah.
[1:05:46] Something because tens of millions.
[1:05:48] No, its, it's, it is, it's probably it, you know,
[1:05:54] maybe in the low hundreds of millions.
[1:05:57] I mean I I would think, I mean, it, it, it is,
[1:06:00] it's gonna be, it's it's gonna be significant,
[1:06:05] but you, you have to, you have to work it out.
[1:06:07] And honestly, I, I've seen lots
[1:06:11] of rail studies done over the years, some
[1:06:13] of 'em while I was Deputy Secretary of Penn on some of 'em
[1:06:16] that, you know, I've participated in as a consultant
[1:06:19] and often people will try to work toward,
[1:06:24] you think about try and work toward low capital costs
[1:06:27] and capital costs aren't your biggest challenge.
[1:06:31] You're often your biggest challenge is how you're gonna pay
[1:06:34] for ongoing operations
[1:06:36] because that doesn't usually come with federal dollars.
[1:06:40] It usually, you know, requires state local dollars to pay
[1:06:44] for ongoing operations, which can be pretty challenging.
[1:06:48] - Hey, Toby, since you mentioned it, if you would share
[1:06:52] with the group your previous day job in the public sector,
[1:06:57] I think that would be helpful context for,
[1:07:00] for those of us in the room.
[1:07:02] - Sure. So prior to going back to consolidating,
[1:07:06] I was deputy secretary
[1:07:07] for multimodal transportation at PennDOT.
[1:07:10] Prior to that I was deputy secretary for local
[1:07:12] and area transportation, but I was at PennDOT for 14 years
[1:07:18] and over, you know, three governors
[1:07:20] and that, in that deputy secretary role was responsible
[1:07:24] for funding public transportation and passenger rail.
[1:07:27] And then when I was multimodal, I covered all
[1:07:31] freight rail and ports and waterways
[1:07:33] and, you know, airports and everything else.
[1:07:36] So for the last five years.
[1:07:37] But I pretty much every passenger rail study
[1:07:42] that went on in Pennsylvania
[1:07:45] or was engaged in Pennsylvania during that period
[1:07:48] of time I was involved in or commented on
[1:07:51] or, you know, we, we ended up reviewing
[1:07:54] and like I said, the, the biggest challenge is,
[1:07:59] is achieving, getting,
[1:08:02] operating on mostly ongoing operating costs.
[1:08:06] Being able to pay for operating, operating expenses.
[1:08:11] - Alright, thanks Toby.
[1:08:13] I hated to put you on the spot,
[1:08:14] but I thought that No, that's fine.
[1:08:15] Context was, was relevant, you know, to the,
[1:08:20] to the study, Joanne and then Frank. Okay.
[1:08:25] - To sort of answer your question about cost,
[1:08:28] about six years ago, Bellefonte looked
[1:08:32] into adding the upper
[1:08:34] and lowering arms, which would be required if we have
[1:08:37] passenger railroad, we have five places in Befor
[1:08:41] that we would have to have them.
[1:08:42] At that time it was about two to two
[1:08:44] and a half million dollars for just those five.
[1:08:47] And raising, I'm suspecting now it's gonna be over 5 million
[1:08:53] to just give you an idea of what kind
[1:08:55] of cost we're talking about.
[1:08:56] And that doesn't they do anything
[1:08:58] to the train station at this point
[1:09:00] or upgrading the rails, it's just making sure
[1:09:03] that there's a barrier
[1:09:05] for people crossing the railroad tracks
[1:09:07] - Or your grade crossings.
[1:09:08] Yeah, yeah. Frank, yes.
[1:09:12] - Just put everything in kind of in perspective here.
[1:09:15] Number one, we already have bus service to Harrisburg.
[1:09:18] You can get, you can get a Greyhound
[1:09:19] or a Fullington, you can get to Harrisburg on a bus.
[1:09:22] So I'm not really enthused about spending a whole bunch
[1:09:24] of money to, to re redo that or repurpose that.
[1:09:27] The other thing to keep in mind is we're gonna spend a
[1:09:30] billion dollars here in the next 10 years
[1:09:32] to build a four lane road between Potters,
[1:09:35] Mills and, and burg.
[1:09:36] So the a hundred million doesn't scare me as much
[1:09:39] as it may be scares other people.
[1:09:42] Second thing is we, we built a,
[1:09:43] we built a Transcontinental railroad across this country
[1:09:46] in the 18 hundreds.
[1:09:47] I think we could build a rail service between here
[1:09:50] and Altoona, you know that that's not nearly as, as daunting
[1:09:54] as building a railroad across the country.
[1:09:57] In our long run transportation plan, we have, I believe,
[1:10:02] a four lane road trying to connect 99 to the airport.
[1:10:05] So why wouldn't we add this to the long range plan
[1:10:09] to say we're also gonna connect rail service to the airport
[1:10:13] and make that our transportation hub for getting to out
[1:10:16] of the area on either rail train
[1:10:18] or whatever, so that we could have, you could go there
[1:10:21] and get on a plane, you could get on a train and connect.
[1:10:24] So I think this, what we're talking about in this study,
[1:10:27] why not just put it into our long range transportation plan
[1:10:30] and put it all into one big package?
[1:10:33] That's my comment,
[1:10:35] - Like that enthusiasm.
[1:10:37] But that is a role this body could play. Others.
[1:10:44] Oh, Jeremy. Yeah.
[1:10:47] - I was gonna, I was gonna say Heidi, I su supervisor, Rob
[1:10:51] and I actually had privilege
[1:10:53] of meeting Mike Carroll a couple years ago
[1:10:55] and the reality is, you know, rail is
[1:11:00] rather expensive
[1:11:02] and does take a lot of time to put together
[1:11:09] I'm, I'm optimistic, but again, it, it takes time.
[1:11:13] And I know Amtrak is very eager
[1:11:17] to expand passenger rail service.
[1:11:19] They've even formed a committee with their board
[1:11:24] of directors that's actually chaired by Robert Gleason,
[1:11:26] a longtime Pennsylvanian
[1:11:28] and resident of Johnstown, who is
[1:11:32] really excited to see expansion of passenger rail service.
[1:11:38] So again, yeah, it just takes time and, and a lot of money,
[1:11:42] but you know, it's not completely undoable.
[1:11:46] It just, you know, it's gonna depend on when, where,
[1:11:49] and who has resources With
[1:11:53] just kind of a general comment of the overall study.
[1:11:57] I know there was a lot of references of spiking demand,
[1:12:03] but it would be kind of interesting to see how
[1:12:06] with even increased service
[1:12:08] or more consistent service, just kind of how those spikes
[1:12:12] continue to evolve and even
[1:12:16] be nice if there was even just a review within a year
[1:12:19] after Amtrak gets the second train launch.
[1:12:22] Just kind of how the numbers
[1:12:28] evolve because there have been areas
[1:12:30] where Amtrak has expanded service or reintroduced service
[1:12:33] and in some of those areas it has exceeded expectations
[1:12:39] months, if not even a year into those changes.
[1:12:44] So be interesting to have those numbers to continue on with
[1:12:49] what we've put together tonight.
[1:12:53] - Yeah, well for points west of Harrisburg,
[1:12:57] yeah, we'll see the increase.
[1:13:00] Any other comments again before we consider action tonight?
[1:13:07] Obviously based on the comments tonight,
[1:13:09] there's also passionate enthusiasm for this within the,
[1:13:12] the MPO and, and Frank's, right?
[1:13:14] We do actually have a role, it's not necessarily paying
[1:13:17] for it, but certainly, you know, prioritizing it and,
[1:13:22] and and taking, take, taking our shots where we have them.
[1:13:28] I will say this though, and as we wrap up,
[1:13:31] if I'm reading a little in
[1:13:32] between the lines from those comments,
[1:13:35] while everyone prefers the rail, it seems
[1:13:38] as though they all understand that the
[1:13:42] options one and two are necessary to get
[1:13:47] to three and four.
[1:13:49] You know, you've gotta build your base,
[1:13:50] you've gotta show demand
[1:13:52] before you can even begin
[1:13:53] to think about spending hundreds of millions of dollars.
[1:13:57] So I think it, while it didn't come out clear in there,
[1:14:00] if you read between the lines and the comments
[1:14:03] and read some of them, I think everybody understands
[1:14:06] that one and two is necessary if you're either ever going
[1:14:10] to consider three and four.
[1:14:13] So
[1:14:15] - I was gonna say even one, one
[1:14:17] and two is kind of a no brainer in like
[1:14:20] my own fiscal reality right now
[1:14:22] because I'm going to a conference in October
[1:14:24] where parking's like $75 a day
[1:14:28] and just doing the math.
[1:14:30] I, I'm better ditching the car, taking the bus,
[1:14:33] getting on the train and going to the conference.
[1:14:37] - Alright, I don't see any more hands raised,
[1:14:39] so we're gonna cut Ben and Toby
[1:14:43] and Peyton loose here as soon as we take take action.
[1:14:47] I want to thank you again and,
[1:14:48] and also pass our thanks on to Brian
[1:14:53] absolutely on our behalf.
[1:14:57] Again, the only comment I would make though is I would stick
[1:15:00] those recommendations at the end.
[1:15:01] Going back to go Paul's question, you know, we led
[1:15:06] with the alternatives, it might flow a little better if,
[1:15:09] if this is ever used again.
[1:15:11] And maybe we could get a copy of this absolutely PowerPoint
[1:15:16] to, to set the, the options at the end
[1:15:19] after you looked at, you know,
[1:15:20] how you gathered all the input.
[1:15:23] Alright, if no further comments
[1:15:25] or questions, again this is an action item asking the
[1:15:29] committee to accept the final draft,
[1:15:32] which would turn it into a final
[1:15:37] and release it at this point.
[1:15:40] Anyone wanna make that motion? Joanne? I'll make the motion
[1:15:45] - To accept the final report
[1:15:47] with any comments we heard this evening.
[1:15:50] - Okay. And we'll have those in the record.
[1:15:53] - I'll second those. Mr. Chairman.
[1:15:55] - Second. Any discussion or comments on the motion?
[1:16:00] Alright then. All in favor please signify by saying aye.
[1:16:04] Aye. Aye. Aye. Anyone opposed?
[1:16:11] Okay. Motion carries.
[1:16:13] Study goes from final draft to final
[1:16:17] with the comments from tonight.
[1:16:19] And again thanks to the staff at Michael Baker, Toby
[1:16:25] and Brian again of course at Michael Baker
[1:16:27] for all the work in in bringing this home.
[1:16:31] That concludes the passenger rail study takes us
[1:16:35] to item number eight, our
[1:16:39] centered on safety action plan status report.
[1:16:44] And this is not an action item, this is more
[1:16:47] or less an update with potential comments.
[1:16:49] Is that correct? Yes. Okay.
[1:16:53] - So tonight this is moving
[1:16:58] along toward a final draft for November
[1:17:02] and we wanna share what we've been doing.
[1:17:05] If you've been following along,
[1:17:07] the last several agendas have had updates as part
[1:17:10] of the Consent Agenda.
[1:17:13] So this is basically presenting an update prior
[1:17:17] to the final draft.
[1:17:20] What we have here is centered on safety is an act safety
[1:17:25] action plan that was originated as part
[1:17:29] of the active transportation plan that was adopted a couple
[1:17:33] of years ago and that assisted us in
[1:17:38] going after grants for Safe Streets and Roads for all.
[1:17:41] So this is a planning grant
[1:17:43] that we were successful in obtaining.
[1:17:47] The idea is that we update what's currently online is the
[1:17:50] safety action plan with some additional information, which
[1:17:54] as part of the grant included a safety analysis
[1:17:57] and prioritization that also included an inventory.
[1:18:02] So there were the boroughs
[1:18:05] and Borough Lake areas selected
[1:18:07] that you'll see later were inventoried for sidewalks.
[1:18:12] Many do not have any type of inventory, not even on paper.
[1:18:17] So this seemed like a definite need for those areas.
[1:18:21] The second part came from discussions
[1:18:24] with Pendot Lane Departures being one
[1:18:26] of the highest crash types in Centre County.
[1:18:29] And this being a priority for PENDOT to try
[1:18:33] to address more segments.
[1:18:35] And basically a lane departure crash is when you leave the
[1:18:38] lane, whether it's cross the center line
[1:18:39] or go off the other direction.
[1:18:44] Included in this are other safety projects that we have
[1:18:49] in our active transportation plan as well
[1:18:51] as our long range transportation plan.
[1:18:54] The idea is that we are summarizing all these projects
[1:18:57] for future implementation.
[1:18:59] Some of it could be part of a future safe streets
[1:19:03] and roads for all grant
[1:19:04] and others could be part of other, whether it's municipal
[1:19:08] or county wide LED grants.
[1:19:14] We also included public engagement, noting
[1:19:16] that we included the previous public engagement efforts
[1:19:19] that we had done with the active transportation plan,
[1:19:22] the long range plan and this plan update.
[1:19:27] Next slide. So in case you didn't know,
[1:19:33] the Safety Action Plan has very specific steps that we have
[1:19:36] to follow to meet the the Federal Highway criteria.
[1:19:40] It's changed slightly in the last couple years,
[1:19:43] so this is the most up to date that we are to follow.
[1:19:46] So we need leadership commitment.
[1:19:48] The MPO as an organization can be that leader
[1:19:52] and that was initiated in the plan,
[1:19:55] the active transportation plan in 2024
[1:19:58] and then confirmed in the LRTP that we adopted last year.
[1:20:03] So that the goal is to reduce serious injuries
[1:20:06] and fatalities by 22% by 2034.
[1:20:12] The planning structure there needs
[1:20:13] to be an advisory body for this process.
[1:20:17] And the safety subcommittee that has been
[1:20:19] around roughly since 2021 has been providing advice.
[1:20:24] As we have developed sections of the plan, it has
[1:20:28] to include safety analysis,
[1:20:29] which not only includes things like crash data review,
[1:20:33] what types of crashes are occurring,
[1:20:36] but also specific to the lane departures, what
[1:20:41] what are occurring at at those particular segments.
[1:20:45] When we look at sidewalks, it's a little bit more proactive
[1:20:48] because if you don't have a sidewalk,
[1:20:51] you're actually more at risk as a pedestrian to get around.
[1:20:54] So it's a little, it's a little different.
[1:20:57] So that's really looking ahead, trying to develop these
[1:21:01] potential sidewalk connections.
[1:21:04] Stakeholder engagement we carried
[1:21:06] through from the previous plans as well
[1:21:09] as doing some engagement this summer into this fall.
[1:21:14] Getting feedback from what we have accomplished so far.
[1:21:19] As part of that we have to review policy and process.
[1:21:22] What plans are helping us, what should we be looking ahead
[1:21:26] for in terms of updating, such as do municipalities
[1:21:31] actually have a sidewalk Ordinance?
[1:21:34] Many boroughs don't necessarily have one
[1:21:37] or if they have one, they may not want to look back at it
[1:21:41] and see if there needs to be some updates.
[1:21:43] And then are there other things that we could do in terms of
[1:21:49] coaxing along our roads to be safer
[1:21:55] strategies and projects?
[1:21:57] We have actual lists in the the
[1:22:01] draft action plan.
[1:22:03] They have been drawn from the active transportation plan,
[1:22:07] the LRTP
[1:22:09] and then the lane departures
[1:22:11] that we are highlighting in this.
[1:22:13] The sidewalks are a little different
[1:22:15] and we'll go over that later.
[1:22:18] In terms of progress, we have to have a webpage
[1:22:20] that is dedicated to this, that is a requirement
[1:22:23] of the grant and the materials.
[1:22:26] Our progress have been posted on there.
[1:22:30] What we'd like to do is to have an an adoption in November.
[1:22:35] This sets us up as long as the stars align
[1:22:39] to look at potential projects.
[1:22:42] Two for implementation in 2027.
[1:22:45] Those could be part of another safe routes, safe streets
[1:22:50] and roads for all I grant.
[1:22:55] Or it could be something that's locally driven.
[1:22:59] All right, next slide please. So the sidewalk analysis.
[1:23:02] So this is a list of locations that were part
[1:23:05] of our inventory discussion in the parentheses, this is the
[1:23:10] actual miles that were inventoried for each area.
[1:23:14] So some have more than others, which is kind of interesting.
[1:23:20] I never really had any expectations.
[1:23:21] This came from the consultant in terms of an idea to track.
[1:23:25] So it's really good summary of of
[1:23:27] what these areas look like.
[1:23:30] State College is a little different.
[1:23:32] They have a very robust inventory already.
[1:23:35] They do regular inspections
[1:23:38] for their sidewalks.
[1:23:41] So the inventory did not include a redo of that work.
[1:23:45] Rather, they were interested in having an updated inventory
[1:23:49] for aada, a ramps.
[1:23:51] Next slide. So in terms of what we did with
[1:23:56] that information, you'll see in the map
[1:23:57] that their green lines are where the sidewalks are located.
[1:24:01] We used beon as an example.
[1:24:04] Typically county seats are the areas of activity
[1:24:07] that happen within a county
[1:24:08] and that seemed to make sense to do that here.
[1:24:10] So the inventory was completed with a quarter
[1:24:13] and half mile buffer to see if there was anything
[1:24:16] beyond the municipal limits.
[1:24:19] And as you can see, and this is pretty true of some
[1:24:21] of the other boroughs, it drops off like pretty fast.
[1:24:27] And what we did was look at these
[1:24:29] and looked at their condition,
[1:24:34] their, their cross slope,
[1:24:36] their slope, those were spot checks.
[1:24:38] And then the lengths of these sections are measured as well
[1:24:42] as having a d, a and CRO
[1:24:44] and crosswalk information,
[1:24:47] since we know sidewalks are a proven safety counter measure.
[1:24:51] But this helps advance, trying to make the system safer
[1:24:55] for our vulnerable road users,
[1:24:57] but also access to activity centers.
[1:25:00] We know that people sometimes they just have
[1:25:02] to walk somewhere because they don't have a car.
[1:25:04] So for example, from Bellon, someone may actually walk
[1:25:08] to the Weiss market that's on five 50
[1:25:11] because they don't have car access.
[1:25:13] And we wanted to create some sort of scoring
[1:25:18] and prioritization to try to get the conversation going,
[1:25:22] to try to develop priorities
[1:25:24] that the boroughs could think about.
[1:25:26] This is not us telling you what to do,
[1:25:29] but we have to start somewhere
[1:25:30] and what we look at in terms of prioritization.
[1:25:34] Next slide. So we had this scoring matrix
[1:25:39] where we looked at functional functional classification.
[1:25:42] Typically the higher functional class, the higher the speed,
[1:25:45] so the higher risk where those activity centers were.
[1:25:48] So if there were gaps to activity centers,
[1:25:51] that was something that we thought was a priority, whether
[1:25:55] or not there was a sidewalk, what was the condition?
[1:25:58] So for example, if it's poor condition,
[1:26:01] probably people aren't going to use it
[1:26:03] because there's lots of tripping hazards.
[1:26:05] And then other things like barriers, these were the ones
[1:26:08] that we selected and is there a right of way available?
[1:26:11] This is a limiting factor A lot
[1:26:13] of times in sidewalk development,
[1:26:16] this was a very high level planning review.
[1:26:18] It was not technical,
[1:26:20] but we thought we should highlight that as part
[1:26:22] of this prioritization.
[1:26:24] And then finally, as part of the 12 year program,
[1:26:27] that's the TYP, the first four years,
[1:26:31] typically those projects have already been started under
[1:26:34] design and trying
[1:26:35] to sneak something in would be extremely difficult.
[1:26:37] So that's why we're looking ahead.
[1:26:41] So this is what the scoring results look like for bail fund.
[1:26:45] Okay. And you see it's interesting in that
[1:26:50] it is really some of the more utilized roads
[1:26:55] into and out of the Borough
[1:26:57] and that speaks to the functional classification
[1:27:01] and then also where sidewalks are missing.
[1:27:05] I think in this case we didn't know what to expect.
[1:27:10] So we have left it as is in terms
[1:27:14] of a prior prioritization map with the idea that,
[1:27:19] and it was presented to the Beon Borough earlier
[1:27:22] that they can use that.
[1:27:24] We will have a suggestion in our plan for beon that
[1:27:30] the Willow Willowbank Street will,
[1:27:34] that red line that's kind of connects to
[1:27:39] Benner will be probably the prioritized route just
[1:27:42] based on the information.
[1:27:44] But Bellon did note that Potter Street was a priority.
[1:27:48] So we can also add that as part
[1:27:52] of the document.
[1:27:55] Each grow has their own priorities in terms of
[1:27:57] what they're trying to accomplish.
[1:27:58] So we wanna be supportive of that as well. Next slide.
[1:28:04] Lane departure crashes.
[1:28:06] So this is where the locations within Centre County
[1:28:11] PennDOT suggested for us to go and study.
[1:28:14] And you'll see they're extremely rural.
[1:28:17] They are not in our urbanized areas.
[1:28:20] So there's some themes that occur
[1:28:22] with this when looking at them.
[1:28:24] And we had the assistance of a subcontractor, Bowman
[1:28:28] to review these segments
[1:28:31] and make suggestions essentially
[1:28:33] how we can improve upon these locations.
[1:28:36] Next slide and flip through all of it.
[1:28:40] So part of this calculation is what the excess cost is.
[1:28:44] So it's generally understood that
[1:28:49] crashes have a cost
[1:28:51] and fatal have a higher cost
[1:28:55] than property damage.
[1:28:57] So what the Bowman did
[1:28:59] for us is do an excess cost analysis using the crash
[1:29:03] history of those segments.
[1:29:04] The the, the traffic that they were able to locate in terms
[1:29:08] of the data available and then the road curvatures there.
[1:29:12] Many of these segments do have some
[1:29:14] road curvatures associated with them.
[1:29:17] So then the expected versus the predicted.
[1:29:20] So when there is a higher ex
[1:29:24] excess cost than is predicted,
[1:29:29] that becomes a problem
[1:29:30] because that means there's a higher risk
[1:29:33] for crashes in those locations.
[1:29:38] Next slide please. So these are the segments
[1:29:43] that had positive excess costs
[1:29:45] and it seemed to be better to try to list them
[1:29:48] by municipality than trying
[1:29:51] to set up some other arrangement.
[1:29:53] But in the document there is more detail on these locations
[1:29:58] and we did not treat them any differently.
[1:30:01] Say for example, section 5 0 4
[1:30:04] that has the 11,000 excess cost, we didn't say
[1:30:07] that one was less important than the one at the
[1:30:10] top Ridge Ridge Road.
[1:30:11] We wanted all of them analyzed. Next slide please.
[1:30:16] So as part of this effort, Bowman did
[1:30:20] analysis within their office,
[1:30:21] but then they went out in the field
[1:30:23] and they actually took a map and marked it up
[1:30:27] and made field observations
[1:30:28] that they couldn't necessarily get from video log.
[1:30:31] And so I'm just sharing this, that there's a lot of work
[1:30:33] behind the scenes that goes on with this
[1:30:35] and I thought it might just be interest
[1:30:37] of interest to the group.
[1:30:39] Next slide please. And then of course,
[1:30:42] video log doesn't always give us good photos in terms
[1:30:46] of what's going on in the conditions.
[1:30:48] So they went out and took some photos of the,
[1:30:51] of each segment, this is in Marion Township, to see kind of
[1:30:55] what was going on and also document some concerns.
[1:31:00] Next slide. And then as part of that analysis,
[1:31:06] this is a simplified version of it,
[1:31:08] the longer version is in the draft plan.
[1:31:11] What they did was put together these project profiles
[1:31:15] so you kind of have a summary of what's going on,
[1:31:17] what are the conditions, what are the potential crash types
[1:31:22] and and was there anything unusual about the information
[1:31:26] that they were able to get from the data?
[1:31:29] The field observations were intended, oops, sorry
[1:31:32] to supplement that because data can only go so far.
[1:31:37] And they went out
[1:31:39] and looked at, see if there was anything in addition to
[1:31:42] what the data was showing.
[1:31:44] And this basically has put together for each
[1:31:47] of those segments with
[1:31:50] potential improvements for those segments.
[1:31:54] - Alright, - So then in addition to those areas
[1:31:59] of emphasis that the grant is covering, we wanted
[1:32:02] to recognize some projects that are going on
[1:32:06] as potential items for improvement in the
[1:32:11] active transportation plan
[1:32:13] and the safety projects from the LRTP.
[1:32:16] So the active transportation plan solicited for areas
[1:32:21] of concern and project for future project development.
[1:32:26] And those projects were compared to planning documents
[1:32:29] that had similar scopes
[1:32:32] or locations for potential improvements.
[1:32:35] So these are some of the projects that from that survey
[1:32:40] and comparing to existing plans were highlighted
[1:32:44] as potential safety projects.
[1:32:46] The ones on the right should look familiar.
[1:32:49] They are from the long range transportation plan
[1:32:52] and those have been adopted as part of that plan.
[1:32:57] The next item is the pen. Whoops, sorry, I meant to go back.
[1:33:03] Is the PennDOT network screening results,
[1:33:05] which are done periodically
[1:33:07] and they highlight sections of roadway
[1:33:10] and intersections that are of concern.
[1:33:12] PennDOT has been looking at the project list
[1:33:15] and has suggested that the, even though they're dated,
[1:33:18] they're a couple years old, that the the dozen
[1:33:21] or so locations from
[1:33:23] that screening exercise be incorporated into this plan.
[1:33:28] Next slide. In terms of countermeasures
[1:33:32] for lane departures, these are the most common items
[1:33:36] that are being suggested for the majority of those segments.
[1:33:40] These are not high cost items
[1:33:43] and so we're not sure that this would be a potential
[1:33:46] for a futures safe streets and roads for all grant.
[1:33:50] But we think potentially locally they could be incorporated
[1:33:55] as folks from the safety office at PennDOT
[1:33:59] as well as maintenance office.
[1:34:02] There could be an opportunity to make these improvements as
[1:34:06] funds become available.
[1:34:09] In terms of the prioritized sidewalk replacement,
[1:34:12] really the emphasis is replacing or installing sidewalks
[1:34:16] and then of course including a DA ramps and crosswalks.
[1:34:20] And what we'd like to continue
[1:34:21] to do is keep the conversation going for these projects
[1:34:25] because more than likely they are going to be locally driven
[1:34:28] by boroughs since many of these
[1:34:33] locations are along state routes
[1:34:35] and it is practice for PennDOT to not maintain those.
[1:34:40] So the municipality would be responsible
[1:34:42] for maintaining those.
[1:34:47] Next slide. So in terms of public engagement,
[1:34:51] we have had some very specific targeted meetings.
[1:34:56] We had a July 8th virtual
[1:35:00] engagement session countywide.
[1:35:01] We had a pretty decent turnout for that.
[1:35:06] And then we tried to spread our time out in
[1:35:08] a couple of locations.
[1:35:10] So in July we also went to Rush Township
[1:35:14] and held an open house.
[1:35:16] We met with the Ney Valley planning region.
[1:35:19] And then September, actually tomorrow I am going out
[1:35:24] to Penns Valley to meet with them
[1:35:28] right now we have the Public Comment,
[1:35:32] open house Public Comment period from September 11th
[1:35:35] to October 12th when you walked into the foyer,
[1:35:40] the, there's a notice on the board
[1:35:43] and there's a QR code you can use that.
[1:35:46] But we do have an open house next week
[1:35:50] doing the same times that we've done
[1:35:52] for other project plans like the Rail Access City
[1:35:55] and the LRTP to the extent that we are able, we are going
[1:36:00] to continue with our buy and annual municipal visits
[1:36:04] and also be highlighting this
[1:36:06] effort as part of those visits.
[1:36:10] Next steps are to refine the draft that is ongoing.
[1:36:15] We are interested in comments from the plan.
[1:36:17] So if you want to use the, the survey
[1:36:22] that is online or you wanna reach out to me
[1:36:24] and make a comment, that's fine.
[1:36:26] We have notified all planning regions
[1:36:29] that the draft is available
[1:36:30] through their municipal managers and secretaries.
[1:36:34] The safety subcommittee will be reviewing the draft plan in
[1:36:38] October with the idea that we are finishing it up
[1:36:43] and that the tech
[1:36:45] and coordinating committee meetings can adopt this
[1:36:48] in November at the joint meeting.
[1:36:53] And I talked a lot. Are there any questions
[1:36:57] - Before we open it up And thanks.
[1:36:59] We do have at least one safety subcommittee member
[1:37:03] here tonight, don't we?
[1:37:06] Yes. At least part, just wanted to recognize that person.
[1:37:10] Yeah, sorry. Offer him the opportunity if he so desires
[1:37:14] to provide any additional comments.
[1:37:16] He does. He does. I thought so.
[1:37:19] - It is an extremely lengthy document
[1:37:21] and I apologize that for that.
[1:37:23] We are currently trying to work with the sub-consultant
[1:37:28] of Michael Baker to make it more legible.
[1:37:30] So
[1:37:33] - Frank, any comments?
[1:37:35] No. Okay. Again, this is full document is in your,
[1:37:39] is in our packet full draft, right?
[1:37:41] - So it is a link to the draft. Okay.
[1:37:44] - Yes. Alright Joanne
[1:37:48] and then anybody online,
[1:37:50] this is not necessarily an action item, it's an opportunity
[1:37:54] to provide comment before we wrap it up into a final, right.
[1:37:59] - So does this draft or currently
[1:38:03] or can it include
[1:38:06] information on municipalities
[1:38:09] that have adopted a Complete Streets program?
[1:38:14] Beon did that seven months ago where in going
[1:38:19] through our streets committee they ha we have
[1:38:25] an all board contract that is correct,
[1:38:27] but we're working with the sustainability program
[1:38:30] and they've got a student group that is actually,
[1:38:34] and we've identified certain sections of town that need
[1:38:38] be improved for safety purposes
[1:38:41] and they are starting on that two weeks ago.
[1:38:44] - Okay. Yeah, we could certainly add that.
[1:38:47] I'm not sure there are many.
[1:38:50] The active transportation plan actually has a,
[1:38:53] a model guidance that your students could use and rely upon.
[1:38:59] But other than that, and I'm not going to pretend
[1:39:02] to remember all, but I think it's only one
[1:39:03] or two municipalities that have some type
[1:39:07] of complete streets policy or Ordinance in place.
[1:39:11] But I can definitely get that in there.
[1:39:13] - Okay, thank you.
[1:39:15] - Other comments? Looking online, not seeing any.
[1:39:21] Thank you Ann. We'll just,
[1:39:22] we'll see this again in November then, right?
[1:39:24] Yes. Alright,
[1:39:28] that concludes item number eight.
[1:39:30] That takes us to item number nine,
[1:39:32] fiscal year 20 27, 20 29
[1:39:38] UPWP Unified Planning Work program.
[1:39:42] We have talked about this in the past,
[1:39:44] but I believe this is the first actual official
[1:39:47] draft we're gonna see.
[1:39:48] Is that correct? And just to note, this is one
[1:39:52] of the core functions of the MPO.
[1:39:55] So this is kind of what summarizes what we're going to do.
[1:39:59] Both what we're required to do along with some
[1:40:02] of the other stuff we're gonna do
[1:40:03] and what we're gonna commit resources to.
[1:40:05] So Ann,
[1:40:08] - So we update these every two years.
[1:40:12] As Eric had mentioned, it is part of our core function.
[1:40:17] It's almost a task list for us in terms of MPO staff,
[1:40:22] what we do day to day.
[1:40:24] And we are our,
[1:40:27] even our time sheets are following the UPWP.
[1:40:31] So we make sure that we're doing what we're supposed to do.
[1:40:34] So the next, we are currently in A-U-P-W-P
[1:40:38] that ends in next June.
[1:40:41] So we are looking ahead to update so that we are ready to go
[1:40:46] for a new UPWP in July of next year.
[1:40:50] And there are many things
[1:40:52] that are gonna look familiar in this document.
[1:40:56] Based on the guidance that we received this summer
[1:41:01] staff determined that what we are doing is in alignment
[1:41:06] with the guidance document.
[1:41:08] And at this point there really isn't a need
[1:41:10] to necessarily make significant changes to
[1:41:13] how we are operating.
[1:41:15] So many of those items you can see here in terms
[1:41:18] of plan development, making sure we have comment periods,
[1:41:21] making sure we have meetings
[1:41:23] to let people know what's going on,
[1:41:25] but also continue our locally driven priorities.
[1:41:29] And we have a history of wanting to provide programming
[1:41:34] for bicycling transit and maintaining local outreach.
[1:41:39] And then of course the one
[1:41:41] that many are interested in are our supplemental planning
[1:41:43] studies such as what we did with this past year,
[1:41:49] the Benner Pike study, as well
[1:41:52] as the passenger access rail study.
[1:41:55] So, so many
[1:41:57] of the items on the left hand column here are required.
[1:42:00] We can't get out of them. We have regular updates
[1:42:03] and they are, there is a cycle to them.
[1:42:07] So the tip is, is it always seems like we're looking
[1:42:11] to update the next tip.
[1:42:12] It's somewhat frequently the LRTP is
[1:42:15] roughly every five years.
[1:42:17] So while this actual UPWP will not look at
[1:42:21] updating any aspect of it, the next one probably will
[1:42:26] in order to stay on schedule.
[1:42:29] And then of course we will be looking again at our another
[1:42:33] UPWP after this one is adopted.
[1:42:37] In terms of maintaining the planning process,
[1:42:39] we have to maintain the tip.
[1:42:40] There will be amendments, alter adjustments,
[1:42:43] but we also have to maintain our meeting schedule
[1:42:47] to make sure we're keeping you the tech committee informed
[1:42:51] and following what we have in terms of
[1:42:54] getting Public Comment and and public input.
[1:42:58] We have last several years, maybe even longer than that,
[1:43:03] we have agreed to follow the performance measures that
[1:43:08] we have from pendot.
[1:43:11] For example, safety. We don't generate our own performance
[1:43:14] measures, we don't have the staff
[1:43:17] expertise or time to do that.
[1:43:19] As well as some
[1:43:20] of the other items which are air quality conformity.
[1:43:24] We need assistance with that.
[1:43:27] The county assists us, which with the HPMS inventory,
[1:43:31] I think that's kicking off in October.
[1:43:33] And then of course any related complete streets activities,
[1:43:38] things that you don't normally see are items
[1:43:41] that happen in the background.
[1:43:43] We often are part of the project delivery process
[1:43:48] and what we call DVF
[1:43:49] or design field views where we go out at certain stages
[1:43:54] of project development.
[1:43:55] For example, a bridge is going to be replaced
[1:43:58] and we meet with PennDOT
[1:44:01] and the municipality to see what the concerns are.
[1:44:04] So we are often out in the field doing that.
[1:44:07] But we're also a participant in the SCAC process as well
[1:44:11] as other projects that may be emerging.
[1:44:14] So we might have a municipality that wants
[1:44:17] to develop a project but they need help with the scope
[1:44:22] or they need data, for example, crash data.
[1:44:25] So we try to make ourselves as available as much as we are.
[1:44:31] Next slide,
[1:44:33] - Hey, be before end gets off.
[1:44:35] That for those of you who are new, those things we have
[1:44:38] to do are not things that we think we have to do.
[1:44:40] Those are things that the federal government requires us
[1:44:44] to do when they established NPOs in order to be eligible
[1:44:47] for our formula funding.
[1:44:49] So we have to do them if we want to get any
[1:44:52] of the funds we need to spend money on our projects.
[1:44:57] So just a clarification. Yeah, sure.
[1:45:00] That's, that's, that's a have and capitals for a reason.
[1:45:04] - Yes. So a couple
[1:45:08] of things we want to do.
[1:45:11] You can see here we have bicycle and transit planning.
[1:45:14] So as you know, my primary role is active transportation
[1:45:18] plan related work and Greg's role is transit.
[1:45:22] So we spend, we're kind of like specialists
[1:45:25] where we spend a lot of time with stakeholders,
[1:45:28] project development, responding to requests
[1:45:31] or in Greg's case, reviewing land development plans
[1:45:36] as they are submitted.
[1:45:38] We also have made a commitment to buy annual
[1:45:43] outreach to the municipalities.
[1:45:45] This is part of our strategic plan.
[1:45:47] This is not required,
[1:45:48] but this is something that we feel is important
[1:45:51] because we, those are the conversations
[1:45:53] where we get project development started.
[1:45:56] We know it's very difficult to get to our meetings
[1:45:59] and if we make ourselves available, we want to be able
[1:46:02] to help our municipalities in in any way we can.
[1:46:07] The projects committee is another example
[1:46:09] of project development that is something
[1:46:12] that has been locally supported the last couple of years
[1:46:15] to fund Marcella's position
[1:46:18] and work with municipalities
[1:46:21] and develop project prioritization methods.
[1:46:26] And of course, as previously mentioned, working
[1:46:29] to do other projects as municipalities may need assistance.
[1:46:34] Supplemental planning are those kind of projects that are
[1:46:37] outside staff's ability to do,
[1:46:40] don't necessarily have the technical expertise,
[1:46:43] but we can ask for financial assistance through the UPWP
[1:46:47] to retain a consultant
[1:46:49] to get those planning documents completed.
[1:46:53] And then of course, we're always looking at data at tools
[1:46:56] and how can we better support our members.
[1:47:00] And we have some abilities in terms of in-house abilities.
[1:47:03] For example, REACH is working on fun
[1:47:06] functional classification.
[1:47:08] We have Steve who has updated our crash dashboard
[1:47:13] and we want to look at other items that we can do in terms
[1:47:17] of we can get trained to help with future projects.
[1:47:23] Next slide. So the general schedule here is
[1:47:27] you had a presentation in June for the
[1:47:33] priorities and we received the guidance from
[1:47:36] PennDOT in July.
[1:47:38] So we reviewed that and determined, like I had said
[1:47:42] before, not a lot had to be changed in terms
[1:47:45] of how we operate.
[1:47:48] What we have here today is a draft.
[1:47:52] Feel free to comment on it if you, if there's something
[1:47:55] that you have a question on or whatever, that's fine.
[1:47:58] We have to submit this to Federal Highway and FFTA.
[1:48:03] They have a 45 day required review period
[1:48:08] and that is basically fri this Friday in order to meet
[1:48:13] a November adoption date.
[1:48:17] January is kind of like we're something fails
[1:48:21] and we need to have a meeting.
[1:48:23] We really wanna avoid trying to do it in January since
[1:48:27] that's not a typical meeting month for us.
[1:48:30] So our goal here is, is November next slide.
[1:48:37] So just to recap with supplemental planning studies,
[1:48:41] I've already mentioned what we've been working on.
[1:48:43] So we're looking ahead now.
[1:48:45] And year one would be the, the Philipsburg
[1:48:50] 3 3 22 safety study.
[1:48:53] This really had been a emerging concern from Philipsburg
[1:48:58] shared by Rush Township
[1:49:00] and was brought to light as part
[1:49:02] of the active transportation plan process.
[1:49:05] It was carried over into the long range transportation plan.
[1:49:09] Historically, we don't do a year one and year two.
[1:49:13] So Phillipsburg and Rush Township have been waiting
[1:49:16] patiently for their turn that we put together a scope
[1:49:20] and submit that for supplemental planning.
[1:49:22] And that would be in the
[1:49:24] 20 27, 20 28 timeframe.
[1:49:29] Year two is looking ahead,
[1:49:31] but as I mentioned, we don't typically put a year two
[1:49:34] in the document, but there has been interest expressed
[1:49:38] to have a North Atherton Street corridor
[1:49:43] basically study that would also look not only at
[1:49:47] the transportation network
[1:49:49] but the land uses that are along that corridor.
[1:49:53] And then the other candidate projects are listed below just
[1:49:56] for reference that we weren't doing this in isolation.
[1:50:01] I should note one last thing with the fills
[1:50:04] for Rush Township study, both Rush Township
[1:50:07] and Phillipsburg have each committed $2,000
[1:50:12] to advance this process, this project.
[1:50:15] Okay, next, next slide. So threw a lot at you.
[1:50:21] Do you have any questions?
[1:50:23] - Yeah, before we open it up, just to that last slide,
[1:50:27] it should also be noted
[1:50:28] that there is no year two supplemental planning study
[1:50:33] candidate listed in.
[1:50:36] - Yes. - The, the draft
[1:50:37] that was currently under consideration,
[1:50:40] that one was put in there right along
[1:50:44] with all the other potential candidates.
[1:50:46] We, we have come a long way in that regard
[1:50:50] 'cause it wasn't that long ago we had maybe one
[1:50:52] or two candidate projects.
[1:50:54] But our success in getting those projects,
[1:50:58] planning grants funded has probably led to a little bit more
[1:51:03] interest in, in, in, in topics that, that we could,
[1:51:09] we could secure funding for almost a victim
[1:51:12] of our own success there.
[1:51:14] Alright, again, this is a draft, we
[1:51:18] talked about this over the summer.
[1:51:21] That was an opportunity to provide big picture input,
[1:51:26] anything missing, anything we shouldn't be working on.
[1:51:29] In the interim, we've got the guidance we needed correct
[1:51:32] to put the draft together.
[1:51:34] So any comments from this group, suggestions
[1:51:38] before we move to submitting it
[1:51:42] and then seeing it again in November
[1:51:44] hopefully and not January.
[1:51:47] Looking in the room first, giving the folks online a chance.
[1:51:52] Alright Joanne.
[1:51:54] And if anybody online has a comment, just unmute
[1:51:58] or raise your digital hand or something.
[1:52:01] - Go ahead. So I attended the projects meeting on
[1:52:04] August 5th, Theran,
[1:52:08] the Ney Valley Transit came in number three
[1:52:12] and we talked to the CCMPO staff afterwards
[1:52:17] to find out why we didn't get more points
[1:52:19] and we thought we were should have gotten, but,
[1:52:22] and what I wanna do is just basically thank the CCMPO staff
[1:52:26] for telling us where our deficiencies were so
[1:52:29] that we can look ahead with whatever grants we go forward
[1:52:32] that we should be able to have a better sense
[1:52:36] of getting in a competitive grant process.
[1:52:40] We've, this afternoon we added the needs, needs, benefits
[1:52:44] as thing to our scope of work, which is one
[1:52:47] of the big things that you said we were missing.
[1:52:49] And next week we're going to be talking to
[1:52:53] the grants administrator to look at
[1:52:55] what our alternatives are.
[1:52:57] So that is very, very helpful. I wanted to thank you.
[1:53:01] - Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up.
[1:53:02] And I wish Marcello was here. She's online. Oh is she?
[1:53:05] Okay, good. Then she can hear this.
[1:53:09] This is one of the benefits
[1:53:10] of establishing not only the projects committee,
[1:53:13] but sound metrics for which to evaluate, you know,
[1:53:17] competing projects.
[1:53:20] Not only for that reason,
[1:53:22] but for what the reason Joanne just mentioned, you know, how
[1:53:25] how does our project become more competitive?
[1:53:28] Because if it's not competitive within our own projects
[1:53:31] committee, it's gonna be less competitive when we go
[1:53:34] after those discretionary grants.
[1:53:35] So I think it's a win-win.
[1:53:37] I just want to tip my hat to this group for standing it up
[1:53:41] to the municipalities for funding those staffing needed
[1:53:45] for the projects committee
[1:53:47] and then of course the projects committee itself
[1:53:49] for the work they've done so far.
[1:53:52] So go Paul, did you have a question?
[1:53:54] I saw you appear momentarily.
[1:54:01] Okay. Anybody else in the room?
[1:54:05] Alright then. Thank you Ann. Thank you.
[1:54:08] We'll see this again in November. Yes.
[1:54:11] Hopefully none of us wanna come back in January.
[1:54:16] So a actually this is a good segue into the budget
[1:54:20] because a lot of
[1:54:22] what you just saw is included in our next agenda item.
[1:54:26] You know, we have to cost out what it, what it takes
[1:54:29] to, to accomplish that.
[1:54:31] So again, this is just a draft
[1:54:36] taking comments, but I think we're gonna give Jim a chance
[1:54:41] to present something tonight.
[1:54:42] Is that correct? Yes.
[1:54:45] - Alright. So again, if, if you haven't been here that long,
[1:54:50] the way this process works,
[1:54:51] the MPO doesn't actually approve the budget.
[1:54:56] The portion that's funded through the COG goes
[1:54:59] through the COG budgeting process.
[1:55:01] The portion that's funded through Centre County goes
[1:55:03] through their budgeting process
[1:55:05] and that the staff level, we're trying
[1:55:07] to tie this all together along with the UPWP, which is used
[1:55:10] to administer the pen op funds.
[1:55:12] So you've got three big chunks of this working together
[1:55:17] with this overview, we're trying to give you just an idea of
[1:55:21] how that all fits together.
[1:55:25] If you've got particular direction, it may have to come
[1:55:30] through one of those other processes,
[1:55:32] but we do put it in front of you so that you're informed
[1:55:35] and that you can offer comments on it to staff.
[1:55:38] And so that when you get, if you're involved in
[1:55:41] that process at one of those bodies to the point
[1:55:44] where you're a acting in approval
[1:55:46] or you're asked by somebody, that is,
[1:55:48] you have the background to be able to answer some
[1:55:51] of the questions part in terms aren't you,
[1:55:55] of the, you're
[1:55:56] - Part of that group that us, sorry Jim,
[1:55:59] there's some members here
[1:56:00] who actually will be in those roles. Yes,
[1:56:02] - I was just, yeah, so you around the table
[1:56:05] for both those bodies. So
[1:56:07] - Find anybody who's on the finance committee per COG.
[1:56:11] Also she, she used to answer all the questions.
[1:56:15] I didn't hear what you said. I said
[1:56:16] you get to answer all the questions.
[1:56:17] Yeah.
[1:56:22] - So some quick highlights from the current year budget,
[1:56:25] but we have wrapped up the, the 20,
[1:56:29] the Benner Pike quarter study and the passenger rail access.
[1:56:34] We've got the safe streets for all
[1:56:39] a study underway and just presented on that.
[1:56:43] It doesn't really show up in our budget
[1:56:45] because it's being administered through PennDOT,
[1:56:47] but we'll talk about in a couple slides.
[1:56:49] We've also been successful in getting funding
[1:56:52] for a protect study.
[1:56:55] Staff will act in that as more a stakeholder role it,
[1:57:00] but because of the number of things we had on our plate,
[1:57:05] we pushed that over to Pendot
[1:57:06] and we're very grateful for their help
[1:57:08] in administering the study.
[1:57:12] We do have some things
[1:57:13] that carry forward from previous years.
[1:57:15] We set funding aside to help
[1:57:18] to help us work on discretionary funding requests.
[1:57:21] We have enough to push forward from 2026 into 2027.
[1:57:25] We don't need to ask for more funding to refill those pots.
[1:57:29] Likewise for that UPWP study that we're talking about
[1:57:34] for 3 22, the local match that has
[1:57:37] to come from Centre County
[1:57:38] and from the COG, we've already funded that out
[1:57:41] of the 2026 budget.
[1:57:43] We'll just carry that forward into 2027.
[1:57:46] So there's no new request.
[1:57:50] We talked last year about funding
[1:57:54] to have our consultant help us learn to use some
[1:57:58] of the tools that are available to us
[1:57:59] through the Rita platform
[1:58:01] and potentially do a couple of updates
[1:58:03] to the travel demand model.
[1:58:06] We wanted to get into that in 2026.
[1:58:08] It's looking more and more like, we'll have to push
[1:58:10] that into 2027.
[1:58:13] We're working on that as quickly as we can.
[1:58:17] There's one new request as part of the budget process.
[1:58:21] That's for six bite counters
[1:58:24] and the software necessary to support them.
[1:58:26] There are, there are
[1:58:32] some funding increases included in this, even though
[1:58:36] as you'll see, our total expenditures go down
[1:58:40] and we do anticipate being able
[1:58:42] to continue discretionary funding applications.
[1:58:46] That's going. The opportunities for that are going
[1:58:48] to be tied up with reauthorization.
[1:58:51] We're currently in an extension that runs through,
[1:58:54] I think December 11th.
[1:58:56] We'll see what happens after that.
[1:58:58] Is there a new highway bill passed
[1:59:00] or do we work with another extension of the current bill
[1:59:04] that will help set the priorities moving forward
[1:59:08] for discretionary funding applications?
[1:59:10] Next slide please. This is just a,
[1:59:16] a deeper look at, at what we've been doing
[1:59:18] with those supplemental planning funds.
[1:59:20] You can see the amount that we spent there on Benner Pike
[1:59:23] and the rail access study.
[1:59:25] What we plan to spend on the 3 22 safety study
[1:59:28] that includes the local match that Ann called out pledged
[1:59:31] by the Shannon Valley municipalities.
[1:59:34] And the amount set aside for the, the training
[1:59:38] and travel demand model updates out of local funding.
[1:59:42] Excellent. For the discretionary funding
[1:59:47] efforts so far we've netted about
[1:59:51] a million and a half dollars.
[1:59:52] That's mostly in protect funds and safe streets for all.
[1:59:57] There is an award out there for additional safety funding
[2:00:01] to look at applying safety devices to EMS vehicles
[2:00:07] and police vehicles and can correct me if I'm wrong,
[2:00:11] but my understanding of that is that the,
[2:00:14] the award has been made,
[2:00:15] but there's been no steps forward from the federal side
[2:00:18] for the agreement necessary to actually put that in place.
[2:00:22] So we know we're gonna get it. It hasn't moved forward yet.
[2:00:29] We did submit a grant for the bill program
[2:00:33] for South Atherton Street for phase four, which is on the
[2:00:37] newly adopted tip.
[2:00:38] We were not successful in that.
[2:00:40] We got some good feedback recently from the evaluation team.
[2:00:44] So we'll continue to work on that.
[2:00:47] That will inform future application efforts if that's
[2:00:50] what we put in for.
[2:00:51] Again. Next slide please.
[2:00:57] As far as discretionary funding opportunities,
[2:00:59] what we think might become available,
[2:01:02] Ann's talked a little bit about what might come out
[2:01:04] of the safe streets for all.
[2:01:08] We hope to get far enough with the 3 22 study that
[2:01:11] that leads to some implement implementable projects.
[2:01:15] We know that the 45 study for the
[2:01:19] safety needs identified independently
[2:01:21] of the SCAC on the 45 corridor is moving forward.
[2:01:27] We think there will be some implementable
[2:01:29] projects that come out of that.
[2:01:30] So we want to keep it on the radar.
[2:01:33] We talked about resilient routes.
[2:01:35] Atherton Street, I guess I'd also note
[2:01:39] that we have the, a
[2:01:43] Carbon reduction Program
[2:01:45] project over on the branch road
[2:01:47] intersections at Whitehall Road.
[2:01:50] Well, Atherton Street with Branch Road and Whitehall Road
[2:01:54] and University Drive.
[2:01:58] It's looking like there's an opportunity to put a little bit
[2:02:01] of additional funding into that for signal improvements,
[2:02:05] especially if we want to get some of the work done
[2:02:08] that we're seeing at the Whitehall road intersection.
[2:02:10] So those are some of the things that are kind
[2:02:12] of hovering on the horizon that we might see
[2:02:15] putting applications in for depending on
[2:02:20] what comes out of this reauthorization or extension effort.
[2:02:24] Next slide.
[2:02:28] - The Resilient Road Route study
[2:02:31] is, I don't know what that is.
[2:02:33] - Okay, so that is a countywide study.
[2:02:38] We started going
[2:02:39] after a discretionary
[2:02:44] portion of protect funds and weren't successful in that,
[2:02:49] but we were successful in going
[2:02:50] after a statewide allocation of it.
[2:02:53] So it's the same funds,
[2:02:54] but it was allocated at the state level.
[2:02:58] They've allowed us funding
[2:03:01] to look at Centre County on a county-wide basis, identify
[2:03:07] areas where we've had repetitive closures.
[2:03:11] So some of the things that come up frequently are
[2:03:16] the Hannan Valley corridor around Hannan Creek,
[2:03:22] Penns Creek, down on the, the southeastern portion
[2:03:25] of the county storm water based flooding on College Avenue.
[2:03:30] And then some of the flooding instances
[2:03:32] that we've had along the Bald Eagle Creek corridor.
[2:03:36] Look at those closures in more detail.
[2:03:40] Identify what we think the, the, the causes of those were.
[2:03:44] So for instance, with the,
[2:03:47] with the Bald Eagle flooding a few years ago,
[2:03:49] they did an analysis
[2:03:51] and identified that there was a, a low capacity pipe
[2:03:55] underneath the railroad
[2:03:56] and that may have contributed to some of the flooding.
[2:03:59] They were able to develop plants to replace that
[2:04:01] with a larger culvert.
[2:04:03] We want to repeat that process for other
[2:04:07] areas in the county.
[2:04:09] Identify potential projects
[2:04:11] that will address the root causes of this repeated flooding
[2:04:16] so that the, the projects.
[2:04:21] So that should the Protect discretionary funding program
[2:04:26] continue, we've got some strong competitive projects queued
[2:04:30] up to put in for it.
[2:04:31] So the idea was to spend a little bit of money
[2:04:35] to get from the stage where we know there's flooding,
[2:04:39] but get through the, the questions of what do we do about it
[2:04:42] and how do we permit, what do we move forward, what's the,
[2:04:45] the funding actually needed?
[2:04:47] Kind of get to the nuts and bolts of the project
[2:04:49] so we can build a fundable application.
[2:04:53] So hopefully this project will result in a list
[2:04:58] of prioritized projects that we can put forward
[2:05:01] for implementation using state
[2:05:03] and federal sources in the future.
[2:05:07] We're just getting started in that process.
[2:05:09] It's been an awful long runway to get it off the ground,
[2:05:12] but we are excited about where it's gonna take us.
[2:05:16] Thank you. Sure.
[2:05:19] Again, our, our sig e request for this year was
[2:05:23] for six bike counters.
[2:05:27] We wanted movable counters so
[2:05:28] that we could set them up at different locations.
[2:05:35] Right now, you know, we know that our,
[2:05:38] our trails in the the Centre Region are well used,
[2:05:42] but it's just anecdotal evidence.
[2:05:45] We wanted to provide a, a backstop capability in the region
[2:05:50] so that if a municipality wants to provide annual
[2:05:54] or even seasonal counts to put some numbers on
[2:05:58] that the capability exists in the local area.
[2:06:02] Likewise for the outlying areas, if they've got a facility,
[2:06:06] you know, a roadway or even a partial trail that
[2:06:10] they think there's demand for it,
[2:06:13] they think there's some use in the area,
[2:06:15] but they need to get a counter on it to help build support
[2:06:17] for the application that we'd provide
[2:06:19] that capability without them necessarily having
[2:06:22] to go to a consultant.
[2:06:23] So the, again, it goes back to the idea, the UPWP,
[2:06:27] that we want to bring actual data into the planning process.
[2:06:32] This is where the capability comes from.
[2:06:36] We did look at a couple of different ways
[2:06:38] to provide this capability.
[2:06:39] Whether we could Borough, whether we could partner
[2:06:42] with someone else for it,
[2:06:43] or whether we could just work through a consultant far
[2:06:46] and away that the most effective way to do this is
[2:06:49] to purchase the six counters
[2:06:51] and the, the license for the software wired.
[2:06:55] So that is our request working through my understanding is
[2:06:59] that the finance committee approved that as part of the,
[2:07:02] of their recommendation for the general forum so that
[2:07:06] that request is moving forward as part of the budget.
[2:07:09] - Oh, Jen? - Yes sir. Oh,
[2:07:11] - The committee rejected it,
[2:07:13] but I do believe one of the townships is rescinding their,
[2:07:17] - One of the townships - Voted, but,
[2:07:18] but it was, it was by the committee shot it down.
[2:07:21] - But, but when they, - I know that I heard,
[2:07:25] - I just wanna make - Clear.
[2:07:26] So, you know, some people have no ballot.
[2:07:29] - Our, our representative voted incorrectly, so we asked you
[2:07:33] - To leave vote. Anyway, that's, that's
[2:07:35] - A whole nother story.
[2:07:38] Hey, I have an update on that.
[2:07:40] So I was in executive committee today
[2:07:42] and I actually amended the motion, the recommended motion
[2:07:47] to include those counters.
[2:07:49] It was, it was something
[2:07:50] that the committee did discuss today.
[2:07:52] So that is moving forward now to the municipalities
[2:07:56] with the counters in itself,
[2:07:58] - But it was not a unanimous vote.
[2:08:01] So there may be spirited discussion when the budget hits the
[2:08:04] municipalities over that particular item.
[2:08:07] Fair to say, very
[2:08:08] - Fair.
[2:08:09] Might, might, might need to come to general for it, but
[2:08:13] - Fair enough.
[2:08:14] We appreciate it. And it kinda underlies
[2:08:16] what we were saying earlier, that this is a complex process
[2:08:18] with a lot of moving pieces.
[2:08:20] Again, what we're trying to do is make sure that,
[2:08:23] that you have as much information
[2:08:25] as we can provide as we're working through that. That's
[2:08:28] - Fair.
[2:08:29] Automatically said.
[2:08:32] - And of course sure that would come from the county.
[2:08:35] So there's lots of discussion yet to be had
[2:08:38] Since I'm the chair, I'm gonna exercise my
[2:08:40] prerogative here, the floor.
[2:08:41] I want to reiterate what, what Jim said.
[2:08:44] A few different words we felt in supporting this.
[2:08:48] It was absolutely critical to have that data
[2:08:51] to be competitive,
[2:08:54] to be competitive in the discretionary grant applications,
[2:08:57] to do any kind of expanding
[2:08:59] or installation of bike amenities in today's world.
[2:09:05] And as Jim noted, we could get
[2:09:07] that data from hiring a consultant,
[2:09:10] but Jim said it would be more efficient,
[2:09:12] it would be far more cost effective to buy this.
[2:09:16] No offense to our friends at Michael Baker.
[2:09:18] They've done some good work for us.
[2:09:21] But this appeared to be a more cost effective way
[2:09:23] to gather the data we thought we needed to be competitive.
[2:09:29] Alright, Jim,
[2:09:32] - They count, they count scooters.
[2:09:34] - Oh, counterpoint. - They count scooters.
[2:09:36] - What's that? - Do they count scooters?
[2:09:41] - Just checking.
[2:09:46] - All right, so this is a,
[2:09:47] a quick look at the top line numbers.
[2:09:54] Our total spending is in line
[2:09:56] or a little bit lower than last year.
[2:09:59] As always, insurance costs drive some of the increase.
[2:10:05] Some of what you're seeing here as well is that there's a a,
[2:10:08] a decrease in special projects.
[2:10:10] We're not going after two studies this year.
[2:10:13] So more of the, even though the number's a little bit lower,
[2:10:16] more of that's made up of our own costs.
[2:10:20] I also want to call out the increase in contracted services.
[2:10:23] That's a number that we put on the in-kind labor
[2:10:28] provided by the Centre County Planning
[2:10:29] and Community Development Office.
[2:10:31] That's reaches time on staff, that's Ray Salinas
[2:10:36] and Liz LO's Time as they work on related materials
[2:10:41] and the the time of the GIS staff
[2:10:43] as they're working on the HPMS data collection compared
[2:10:47] to previous years, we're seeing a lot more hours.
[2:10:50] We can then go and reimburse or go
[2:10:53] and request reimbursement from that time for PennDOT.
[2:10:57] But really what it's doing is leveraging the efforts
[2:11:01] of the staff that we have here.
[2:11:03] We're really happy to see that team effort.
[2:11:05] If you haven't looked at, looked at some of the projects
[2:11:08] that REACH has put together,
[2:11:10] either summarizing the Liquid fuels efforts
[2:11:13] or some of the tools she's put together
[2:11:16] to support the federal functional classification revisions,
[2:11:20] please do so and you'll see the value of this contribution
[2:11:25] placed right in front of you.
[2:11:26] So I I I just wanted to call out that
[2:11:29] we've really been seeing the benefits of
[2:11:31] that in this budget process
[2:11:32] and to, to say thank you for the counting, for taking
[2:11:35] that approach and continuing to be
[2:11:38] just taking such a team approach in that
[2:11:41] for the revenue sides, the changes are in line
[2:11:46] with the expenditures
[2:11:49] and is working diligently to finish safe Streets for all.
[2:11:53] When that's done, it may drop off
[2:11:55] both sides of the equation.
[2:11:57] So revenues and expenditures
[2:12:01] and again, is, there's less special project funding than
[2:12:05] that translates to an increase for the county
[2:12:08] and Centre Region contributions even if your total number
[2:12:11] stays the same or goes down a little bit.
[2:12:14] So that is just a thumbnail sketch.
[2:12:20] If you, one step back again sure.
[2:12:23] If, if you look at that top line number, that's
[2:12:26] what we expect to get from PennDOT
[2:12:28] and what we're required
[2:12:29] to put in is a 10% local match to that.
[2:12:33] And if you're doing back of the envelope math,
[2:12:36] we're actually matching
[2:12:37] that something like two to one or three to one.
[2:12:40] So that, that represents the value
[2:12:43] of the local contribution to this.
[2:12:45] And we really appreciate that
[2:12:47] because that is what makes it possible for us to go
[2:12:52] after discretionary funding applications for us
[2:12:55] to do things like this municipal outreach
[2:12:57] where we literally go out
[2:12:59] and meet with all 35 municipalities.
[2:13:03] M MPOs don't have the ability to go out
[2:13:05] and have that kinda local level contribution.
[2:13:08] So it's the support of the, the budgeting partners
[2:13:11] that makes that possible.
[2:13:13] And I wanna make sure that I say thank you for
[2:13:15] that in this process.
[2:13:17] Any questions about this?
[2:13:19] - I've go to the next slide before we open up for questions.
[2:13:23] It's a good segue into our next agenda item.
[2:13:26] 'cause Ann mentioned that previous, he mentioned outreach
[2:13:30] to municipalities and what Jim just mentioned
[2:13:33] and I just wanna make sure everybody heard him that
[2:13:37] not too many, if any MPOs do that can do that,
[2:13:42] that level of outreach.
[2:13:43] How many municipalities? 35 municipalities. Alright.
[2:13:46] Even if you just sent one staff person to each one of them
[2:13:49] for a couple of hours, I mean, do the math
[2:13:52] and it's generally oftentimes more than
[2:13:54] one and then there's travel.
[2:13:58] But that's pretty significant. So questions on the budget?
[2:14:02] Again, it is what it is.
[2:14:04] We aren't the determining factors, but it's not a
[2:14:07] - Question on the budget, but I think you've already said
[2:14:09] this, these presentations will be provided Yes.
[2:14:12] This committee. Okay. Just wanted to confirm
[2:14:16] - Yeah, each one, even if we didn't ask for it,
[2:14:18] if we could get the PowerPoints out to everybody.
[2:14:21] - Hey Eric, I, I just a comment from,
[2:14:23] from our budget sessions, I, this one was
[2:14:26] fairly simple.
[2:14:30] The committee really appreciated over the years of,
[2:14:33] of adding personnel
[2:14:34] that have brought more money in than it costs us
[2:14:38] to pay for those individuals.
[2:14:40] And I believe the only thing that is left on yours
[2:14:45] that I I don't think we're worried about is,
[2:14:47] is the fund balance.
[2:14:50] And I, and I think we're gonna let that set for a year
[2:14:53] as a committee to let it equalize out.
[2:14:55] But I don't think the MPO fund balance
[2:14:57] is in that bad of shape.
[2:14:59] So I think we're good there, but,
[2:15:01] but I, I think overall we were pretty
[2:15:03] pleased with his budget.
[2:15:05] - Well that's good news coming from representatives
[2:15:09] who are responsible for funding about a third of our budget.
[2:15:12] So Thank you Frank.
[2:15:15] Jeremy, are you the fi finance comm you're exec.
[2:15:17] - Exactly. We don't,
[2:15:18] we don't let we Good stuff.
[2:15:24] - Hi, you are Patton's finance committee rep. I'm,
[2:15:26] - Yeah, I'm Pat.
[2:15:27] - Yeah. Are you the finance committee rep?
[2:15:29] - Yes. Okay. Yes. I'm
[2:15:31] - Alright.
[2:15:32] And we have the county's finance committee rep here, so,
[2:15:36] well we have to both of them.
[2:15:38] Right? And she's still Amber's still on.
[2:15:42] Alright, any other questions? Thank you Jim.
[2:15:46] Good segue into what you did.
[2:15:47] The last thing you mentioned, which I think Greg,
[2:15:50] are you gonna talk a little bit about
[2:15:52] this outreach effort? I will, I
[2:15:53] - Will
[2:15:59] - Prepared just a few brief slides on That's good.
[2:16:03] Our biennial municipal outreach process.
[2:16:09] Kinda hard to believe.
[2:16:11] We're jumping into this again and starting a new cycle.
[2:16:14] Actually most of the information's already in
[2:16:17] your agenda packet.
[2:16:18] The relevant information.
[2:16:20] I just drew up two
[2:16:21] or three slides here just to keep myself straight
[2:16:23] as I kind of walked through everything.
[2:16:26] So as Anne alluded to during the UPWP presentation,
[2:16:31] these efforts come directly from the MPO strategic
[2:16:35] plan process.
[2:16:37] I think all sides agreed, including staff that we wanted
[2:16:40] to kind of reaffirm our commitment
[2:16:42] to regular consistent local outreach.
[2:16:45] And so what that does mean is at least one
[2:16:48] of our staff visits each
[2:16:49] of the 35 municipalities at least once every two years.
[2:16:54] And, and sometimes we do a wee bit more than that.
[2:16:56] Even our last outreach cycle was in late 2024
[2:17:01] and the very early part of 2025, we were able to collect
[2:17:06] some really good information, start some good conversations
[2:17:09] with each of these municipalities on their local
[2:17:12] transportation needs as they saw them
[2:17:15] and any concerns that they had.
[2:17:17] Good byproduct of that is we were able
[2:17:19] to get some new project concepts
[2:17:22] for our LRTP 2025.
[2:17:25] So we had kind
[2:17:26] of some churn in our long range plan projects, some
[2:17:29] of the old stuff kind of aging off, brought in some,
[2:17:32] some new fresh ideas.
[2:17:33] And we did adopt that document in September of last year.
[2:17:38] So what we're doing now, the goal is to complete all
[2:17:41] of our visits by the end of calendar year 2026.
[2:17:46] A number of these sessions have already been completed.
[2:17:49] What remains are currently being scheduled by staff
[2:17:53] in conjunction again with those individual municipalities.
[2:17:57] One of the neat things this time around is it allows us
[2:18:00] to kind of double up on some other efforts that we have,
[2:18:04] either as the MPO
[2:18:06] or as the Center Regional Planning Agency staff.
[2:18:09] So some of Pam's visit, she's not here tonight,
[2:18:13] but she's been in attendance to talk
[2:18:15] not only about transportation issues,
[2:18:18] but also the Centre Region Comprehensive Plan update
[2:18:22] to those municipalities to whom that applies.
[2:18:27] Ann's also got the opportunity to go out to some
[2:18:29] of these Borough and Borough like areas
[2:18:31] to discuss the centered on safety project,
[2:18:35] which you saw presentation on earlier in this meeting.
[2:18:40] So we kind of have, we've developed a, a list
[2:18:42] of talking points for this round.
[2:18:44] Last round was a little bit more open-ended.
[2:18:48] This one we definitely have some items
[2:18:51] for which we would want municipal feedback
[2:18:54] and some discussion.
[2:18:56] Again as part of the centered on safety project,
[2:18:58] that sidewalk priority and inventory for boroughs
[2:19:01] and Borough like areas for the
[2:19:03] municipalities to which that applies.
[2:19:05] Obviously not all, not all of them do.
[2:19:09] We'll be discussing that lane departure information again,
[2:19:11] that Ann talked about in her earlier presentation.
[2:19:16] You've heard a little bit from Richa about the updates
[2:19:19] to the federal functional classification.
[2:19:22] That is something that we'll be rolling out on a little bit
[2:19:25] more wide basis to each of the,
[2:19:27] the individual municipalities we're including the planning
[2:19:30] region profiles that were completed
[2:19:33] during our last LRTP update.
[2:19:36] Marcella has a grant assistance survey that we're trying
[2:19:40] to publicize and get some local thought on.
[2:19:43] So we'll be discussing that during our visits.
[2:19:47] And then again, we want to kind
[2:19:48] of refresh those project request forms, get a sense of what
[2:19:53] the current and emerging municipal needs are.
[2:19:57] So we'll be circulating our new 2027 project request forms.
[2:20:02] I believe they're
[2:20:03] to be in once we've deployed everything I believe there
[2:20:06] to be in by the beginning of March.
[2:20:09] And then we also wanna leave some open-ended time
[2:20:11] to discuss other topics as well.
[2:20:14] So that's just kind of a rundown of our current process.
[2:20:18] If you have any questions, comments, we'll be glad
[2:20:20] to take those as staff.
[2:20:22] And if not, if we haven't seen you already, just be ready
[2:20:27] to see us at a municipal meeting near you
[2:20:29] between now and the end of the year.
[2:20:32] - Okay. Questions, comments?
[2:20:37] Okay, thank you Greg. I know this is a heavy lift.
[2:20:41] I appreciate the effort
[2:20:43] and I know having sat in some of these with some
[2:20:46] of the more rural municipalities,
[2:20:47] that is appreciated on their end.
[2:20:52] That would then take us to member reports.
[2:20:56] Let's look in the room first.
[2:20:57] We'll start with the county Mark or Amber
[2:21:01] - Quickly and maybe Richie can help me out with this.
[2:21:05] It's the fee for local use,
[2:21:09] liquid Fuels and Act 13 grant period
[2:21:14] for all 35 municipalities in Centre County.
[2:21:17] So make sure you get those applications in
[2:21:20] because we're what, one side or the other?
[2:21:23] Maybe a million dollars potentially this year.
[2:21:28] - Alright. Amber, anything else?
[2:21:35] - I think Mark covered it. That's it for now.
[2:21:38] - Alright, thanks. Let's go around the room.
[2:21:40] Bruce, half Moon, anything to report?
[2:21:43] - Yeah, just real quick, our expanding our Smith Road,
[2:21:48] the berms, getting that all fixed so that we'll be ready
[2:21:50] for the overlay in 2027.
[2:21:52] That continues it's way behind schedule
[2:21:55] because of the rotten weather we've been
[2:21:57] experiencing all summer.
[2:21:58] The road crew has been focused on storm damage versus
[2:22:02] working on this road.
[2:22:04] Also, we did meet with Isha
[2:22:05] and Pam in latter part of August
[2:22:08] to talk about the federal classification system.
[2:22:11] Get some input to the Penn. Not one tool.
[2:22:15] I I pick the ball's in Reese's Court right now,
[2:22:18] so we'll wait for the next round when,
[2:22:21] when we're called upon again. That's it.
[2:22:23] - Alright, thanks Frank Harris,
[2:22:27] - Couple small items and, and they were sidewalks.
[2:22:32] We have approved monies and, and put out a bid.
[2:22:36] We're gonna have all our sidewalks up to snuff by spring
[2:22:39] of 2027 and then we can look at gaps once we have that done.
[2:22:44] And the other thing is, we had some deed issues
[2:22:48] at our meeting the other night,
[2:22:49] but we're meeting tomorrow night to officially
[2:22:51] accept the roads in Rocky Ridge, so that'll help our fuel.
[2:22:56] Oh,
[2:23:01] - How about the Penns Valley deck?
[2:23:04] - Well we're, I'm ready to pave Decker Valley Road,
[2:23:07] which has been a dirt road for many years,
[2:23:10] so getting close.
[2:23:12] - Alright. Significant. Jeremy Ferguson.
[2:23:15] - I was gonna say, I think we've pretty much wrapped up a
[2:23:18] lot of our summer projects.
[2:23:19] Did a little bit of microsurfacing
[2:23:21] and did some paving in spots
[2:23:23] and went
[2:23:25] through our CIPI think we identified some things
[2:23:28] for next year and now we're into budget season
[2:23:31] and probably also either the favorite
[2:23:36] or least favorite part of
[2:23:38] Public Works collecting leaves followed by snow.
[2:23:44] Those, those times of the year are upon us.
[2:23:49] Yeah, they hopefully we can enjoy a few more weeks
[2:23:52] of pleasant weather.
[2:23:55] - Joanne Beon, Ney Valley Planning Region
[2:23:58] - One for Ney Valley and one for Bellfort.
[2:24:00] Alright. Ney Valley
[2:24:03] Planning Commission met last week
[2:24:05] and we started a review of updating our
[2:24:11] interim municipal agreements for Zoning
[2:24:14] and aldos.
[2:24:16] There were some things that were a little bit oblique,
[2:24:20] so we've sent it back to the Centre County
[2:24:23] Planning office administrative staff to correct
[2:24:26] or make it clear as to what we're talking about
[2:24:29] and we're going to finalize that at the November meeting.
[2:24:33] In terms of Bellefonte had a council meeting two weeks ago.
[2:24:39] One of our council members point out that his wife
[2:24:42] saw a little hole about this big two Aquar quarter size
[2:24:46] and it looked like she set a little sinkhole.
[2:24:49] It ended up when we got the streets committee up,
[2:24:53] it completely transversed an intersection at
[2:24:58] West Curtin and North Spring Street.
[2:25:00] They closed down the road last week, removed a tree, had
[2:25:05] to put in a new storm drain.
[2:25:08] We fixed the repair
[2:25:09] and right now they've opened up the road this morning
[2:25:14] and they're still working on replacing the sidewalks
[2:25:18] that failed as a result of this.
[2:25:21] So I am glad somebody was looking out for us.
[2:25:26] - So keep your eye open for little holes.
[2:25:30] - Yes. Yeah, it
[2:25:31] - Was a little hole about that big
[2:25:33] and she was walking at night and had her camera flashlight.
[2:25:37] She said, that looks odd.
[2:25:38] One took a closer lick
[2:25:40] and it was a 20 foot wide sinkhole.
[2:25:46] - Hello. - Hello. Hello.
[2:25:52] - Well, Eric topped that Ms. Shannon Valley,
[2:25:55] - Well in our area, a hole opens up.
[2:25:57] It's usually a coal mine in there.
[2:26:03] PennDOT got working on new truck,
[2:26:07] constructing a new truck pull off at the top
[2:26:09] of Port Matilda Mountain in Rush Township.
[2:26:11] That's eastbound where it goes.
[2:26:14] 3 22 goes from two lane to four lane.
[2:26:17] And so all trucks over a certain weight,
[2:26:19] I assume it'll be 21,000 pounds gross.
[2:26:22] We'll have to pull over and stop.
[2:26:24] And the benefit of this is hopefully it will save
[2:26:27] what I call Jim Sailor's guardrail, which gets smashed into
[2:26:31] repeatedly over the winter when trucks go down
[2:26:34] the windy section.
[2:26:35] And we've had some trucks go over the guardrail
[2:26:37] and hopefully this will help to improve that section
[2:26:42] of roadway by requiring trucks to stop
[2:26:44] and then adhere a a to a,
[2:26:46] a lower speed limit going down the mountain.
[2:26:50] This group previously had reallocated some funds to
[2:26:56] conduct some or to place more high surface,
[2:26:59] high friction surface treatment on Route three 50 on Sandy
[2:27:03] Ridge Mountain in Rush Township.
[2:27:06] And that was done about a month ago.
[2:27:09] I happened to live on that road
[2:27:10] and I know the, the treatments that were put down a couple
[2:27:13] of years ago, just anecdotally from my view, seemed to help
[2:27:18] particularly trucks from getting stuck in in bad weather.
[2:27:22] And so they've now basically completed
[2:27:25] that treatment going up all of the s curves
[2:27:28] between the bottom of the mountain of the Rush Township line
[2:27:30] and the top of the mountain at Sandy Ridge.
[2:27:33] So I anticipate that we'll continue to improve the safety
[2:27:37] of, of that road.
[2:27:39] So that that's what we have going on area. Good to hear.
[2:27:43] - How about the airport? Anything going on? George?
[2:27:45] - Oh, thank you again for allowing me to attend.
[2:27:55] Every day is kind of an adventure at the airport.
[2:27:58] We are still working through our due diligence
[2:28:04] with the university to
[2:28:08] make sure that we understand what we're taking over if
[2:28:13] and when the day comes, that we do
[2:28:16] assume control of the airport.
[2:28:21] Primarily we're going through the financial statements,
[2:28:25] trying to learn as much as we can about PennDOT
[2:28:28] or airport operations.
[2:28:35] One thing, and our chairman already announced it back in
[2:28:39] June, in about 10 days,
[2:28:43] American Airlines is starting a new service to Charlotte
[2:28:48] from State College Airport.
[2:28:50] - Got two trips booked already. Hopefully they happen.
[2:28:55] - You - Have an open house too?
[2:28:57] We have an open house coming, yes, that same day.
[2:29:02] And you're all welcome to attend
[2:29:07] and as long as I've got the floor, I thank you for that.
[2:29:12] - Well you've sat here for two and a half hours. This is,
[2:29:15] - I did and I didn't say anything.
[2:29:17] No, this thought came to me while Jim was going
[2:29:22] through the, through the budget presentation.
[2:29:28] Some of you may know I came out of PennDOT after I retired.
[2:29:32] I spent several years
[2:29:34] serving on the State Transportation Commission.
[2:29:40] I will tell you from a statewide perspective,
[2:29:46] and there are a lot of egos in this room,
[2:29:50] but from a statewide perspective,
[2:29:54] Centre County MPO is a very well
[2:29:58] regarded MPO.
[2:30:02] The things that you do, Jim
[2:30:04] and your staff to reach out to your members
[2:30:10] is a model for the rest of the state.
[2:30:14] And it's, it, it's been noticed.
[2:30:18] That's all I can say. Is that Okay? Thank you.
[2:30:23] - Just to follow up quickly on that, I know
[2:30:25] that we've got central office
[2:30:27] and district office reps here too, that our district
[2:30:32] and central office reps deserve a, a share of
[2:30:36] that credit right along with the
[2:30:39] Yeah, Heidi. I
[2:30:43] - Don't report.
[2:30:44] - Alright, let's look online.
[2:30:46] That's a good segue into our central and
[2:30:50] and district reps.
[2:30:52] Mark or Eric, anything from the district office?
[2:30:59] - I, I guess I would mention,
[2:31:00] I know Nate Walker probably has this on his list as well,
[2:31:03] Frank, the PennDOT, MTF
[2:31:06] Multimodal Transportation Fund is open for applications
[2:31:11] and that is available until October 30th.
[2:31:14] So you, I guess be encouraged to submit applications
[2:31:19] for those types of needs.
[2:31:21] - That's announcement number 14.
[2:31:23] - Nice. Alright.
[2:31:26] Eric, if you don't have anything, I'm gonna go to Nate
[2:31:28] and Frank Central.
[2:31:33] - The only thing I have is just form the shout out
[2:31:35] to Centre County here.
[2:31:37] We let about $82 million worth
[2:31:39] of work in Centre County this year so far.
[2:31:42] And we have about, we have three more projects
[2:31:44] to let in Centre County, then we'll be done.
[2:31:47] And if you don't know, just in case you don't know,
[2:31:49] this has been a pretty good year
[2:31:50] for district two in the whole so far.
[2:31:52] We've let $145 million worth of work in district two
[2:31:57] and we're on track for about $196 million this year.
[2:32:00] So pretty good year for district two
[2:32:03] and in Centre County this year.
[2:32:08] - Okay. And then I couldn't let Central go without noting
[2:32:10] that Frank Hampton is one of the reasons
[2:32:13] that George mentioned that
[2:32:18] the, the regard that this MPO has has held in, you know,
[2:32:21] Frank's been sitting with us for, for, for a long time.
[2:32:26] Anything to add, Frank?
[2:32:29] - No, I'll actually defer to the rep Nate.
[2:32:31] I know Mr. Walker probably has something
[2:32:33] - To share he wishes,
[2:32:35] - But I thank, thank George for that comment.
[2:32:37] - Alright, thanks. Yeah,
[2:32:40] - I, I was gonna say many, many thanks to Frank
[2:32:43] for all his time here working with you guys,
[2:32:47] but Mark, mark sold the words outta my mouth with the
[2:32:52] multimodal information.
[2:32:53] So nothing else to add this evening.
[2:32:56] - Alright, then we'll go to go Paul
[2:32:58] for the Borough State College Borough.
[2:33:02] Anything?
[2:33:03] - Yeah, well we've been working on our Zoning, Zoning,
[2:33:06] updated Zoning degree, right.
[2:33:07] That's been, you know, very, very tense
[2:33:11] and very productive
[2:33:13] but you know, at the same time there's been a lot of, a lot
[2:33:16] of input and community engagement.
[2:33:18] So we've been working on that, that as well as, you know,
[2:33:23] we approved our CIPA couple of weeks ago
[2:33:27] and now we're heading into budget season.
[2:33:29] So hopefully we left the Zoning rewrite all wrapped up
[2:33:33] by the early part of the year.
[2:33:36] - Alright, thanks. Go Paul. How about Jean?
[2:33:39] Anything to offer? Any updates?
[2:33:43] - Oh, not nothing from Stone two Township.
[2:33:47] - Okay. I think I covered everybody. Did I miss anybody?
[2:33:53] If not, then we will move to announcements.
[2:33:56] I only have one meeting announcement this month
[2:33:59] 'cause we're actually meeting November 18th
[2:34:04] when we meet November 18th.
[2:34:06] It'll be a joint meeting between,
[2:34:08] between the coordinating committee and
[2:34:12] and the technical committee.
[2:34:13] I think for those of us who were around last year, saw a lot
[2:34:16] of benefit in that and look forward to huddling
[2:34:19] with the tech committee in November.
[2:34:22] Beyond that, I'm gonna first give staff an opportunity
[2:34:26] to point to anything specifically in announcements
[2:34:29] before I open it up to questions from the
[2:34:31] group. Anything Jim?
[2:34:34] - And as David mentioned, we did complete an update to our
[2:34:39] crash database to add data up through 2025.
[2:34:42] There's a link right there
[2:34:43] in the announcements if you're curious on that.
[2:34:46] So thanks to Ann
[2:34:47] and Steve for getting us through that effort.
[2:34:50] Otherwise it's just the funding opportunities have already
[2:34:53] been called out and then there's a listing of
[2:34:55] of some of the recent awards.
[2:34:57] Nothing else to share
[2:34:59] - Questions on?
[2:35:00] Anything in announcements?
[2:35:03] - Anne's got - Something. Anne,
[2:35:06] - We also wanna remind you about the municipal
[2:35:09] transportation grant.
[2:35:10] Assistant needs survey. That's number 15.
[2:35:14] If you could fill that out, it would be greatly appreciated.
[2:35:17] It's probably going to go
[2:35:18] beyond the September 30th deadline.
[2:35:21] We had a request from a municipality to have it open
[2:35:26] until the second week in October.
[2:35:33] - Questions Alright,
[2:35:34] before I accept the motion to Adjourn,
[2:35:36] I just wanna thank you all for your patience.
[2:35:38] It's been two and a half hours.
[2:35:39] We had a lot of ground to cover,
[2:35:42] but I think we did it pretty efficiently.
[2:35:44] So it, with that, I'll accept the motion to Adjourn.
[2:35:49] Thank you Frank. We are adjourned.
[2:36:21] - The Centre Region Active Adult Center is a vibrant,
[2:36:23] inclusive, and happening location designed
[2:36:26] for active adults 55 years and over to be social
[2:36:29] and participate in new experiences while
[2:36:31] also staying close to home.
[2:36:32] We promote healthy aging through our many activities
[2:36:35] and health forums as well as lifelong learning
[2:36:37] through classes and social interaction
[2:36:39] that suit almost any lifestyle.
[2:36:40] Whether you prefer line dancing followed by a walk
[2:36:43] or a game of bridge and a meal,
[2:36:45] the center is sure to have something for you.
[2:36:47] Visit crpr.org for more info.
[2:36:54] - Did you know that CNET has over 30 years
[2:36:56] of program archives available to the public
[2:36:59] for a requested donation of $20?
[2:37:01] You can receive a DVD
[2:37:02] or digital copy of any program in our library going
[2:37:05] back to 1988.
[2:37:06] The senior archives include high school graduations
[2:37:09] and award nights, school district concerts
[2:37:11] and sporting events, school library, write
[2:37:14] and illustrate your own book awards.
[2:37:16] Memorial Day in Bosberg in the Central Pennsylvania Festival
[2:37:19] of the Arts, military history lectures.
[2:37:22] So round tables and many more.
[2:37:24] And don't forget about the meetings.
[2:37:26] We have an expansive archive of local government as well
[2:37:29] as Beon and State College area school board meetings.
[2:37:31] CNET has been covering the Centre County community
[2:37:34] for over three decades, and we have the tape to prove it.
[2:37:37] Visit CNET one.org to browse our archives
[2:37:39] and you can call or email us.
[2:37:40] Order your own DVD or digital copy today.
[2:37:43] Nothing good on tv.
[2:37:45] You're just not watching the right channels.