[0:00] like to welcome you all.
[0:02] Are we on the ready to go? Well, I would
[0:05] like to welcome you all to our active
[0:07] transportation committee uh meeting. I'm
[0:09] Mayor Walker and the chair of our
[0:10] committee. It's got good good to see you
[0:12] all. Feels like it's been a long time
[0:13] since we've met. Has it been a long time
[0:15] you? Feels long. Anyway, thank you for
[0:19] all being here, all of you that are
[0:20] online and all of you that are here in
[0:22] person. Um, we would like to start with
[0:25] the introductions and I think what we
[0:28] want to do is maybe should we go around
[0:30] the room starting on that corner and
[0:33] come around then hit online. Go ahead
[0:34] and give us give us a little
[0:35] introduction on yourself. Thank you.
[0:39] >> Hi, I'm Cameron Carter with Bike Utah.
[0:43] >> Good morning. Jiren Robertson with the
[0:44] Utah Transit Authority.
[0:48] >> Kirby with Avenue Consultants.
[0:50] Kathleen Bunhan with Lake Point City.
[0:53] Ellen Burrell, Cottonwood Heights City
[0:54] Council. Miranda Jones Cox, government
[0:57] affairs here at WFRC.
[1:00] >> Ed Nolton, deputy director at WFRC.
[1:03] >> Hugh Van Wagon, staff lead for this
[1:05] committee here at WFRC.
[1:07] >> Sheldon Burch, uh, with EDA City and
[1:10] ToGog.
[1:12] Dory Jonner, Long Range Planning Group,
[1:14] WFRCD.
[1:16] >> DD Murray with Utah Transit Authority
[1:18] Planning.
[1:20] >> I'm Thomas Mcgory with Avenue
[1:22] Consultants.
[1:23] >> Joel Temple with Long Range Planning at
[1:25] WFRC.
[1:27] >> Jordan Chandler, WFRC admin team.
[1:30] >> Do you want me to read those online?
[1:32] >> Yeah, let's do that if you would.
[1:33] >> Okay, let's go with Wendelyn, um,
[1:36] Council Member Dave Graph, and Mayor
[1:38] Petro.
[1:41] » Yeah. Hi, I'm Benjene Kopl city in the
[1:44] planning department.
[1:47] >> I'm Dave Graph Ogden City Council.
[1:54] » Mayor Petro, do you want to introduce
[1:55] yourself?
[1:56] >> Yeah, sorry I don't have my camera on,
[1:58] but Mayor Petro Leighton City.
[2:01] >> Um, let's do John Nichols, Brett McKiff,
[2:03] and Sue Yonen.
[2:05] >> I'm John Nichols with parametrics.
[2:09] I am Brett Miff with Utah Department of
[2:11] Health and Human Services.
[2:15] » I'm Siani, Utah Department of
[2:17] Transportation.
[2:19] >> Mark Bradley, Camille Alexander and
[2:21] Byron Head.
[2:23] >> Mark Bradley with Brigham City.
[2:28] >> Camille Alexander with HDR.
[2:32] >> Byron Head. I'm a community planner with
[2:34] WFRC's CED Group.
[2:37] Ivan Hooper, Julie Bjornstead, and
[2:40] Travis Moat.
[2:42] >> Ivan Hooper, Sandy City.
[2:45] >> Julie Bernste with the long range
[2:47] planning team at WFRC.
[2:53] » I'm Travis Mo. Um, mayor of Willard
[2:55] City.
[2:57] >> Bert Granberg, Caitlyn Morosis, and
[2:59] Mayor Merrill.
[3:03] Bert, excuse me, Bert Granberg with the
[3:06] analytics group at WFRC.
[3:09] >> Caitlyn Marusus, transportation planner
[3:11] at HDR.
[3:13] >> Carla Merrill, mayor of Alpine City and
[3:15] representing MAG.
[3:17] >> Dave Eltus and Corey Bolock.
[3:20] >> Dave Eltus with Cycling Utah and Cycling
[3:23] West.
[3:26] >> Cory Bolock with Tula County Parks and
[3:28] Recreation.
[3:29] >> Thanks. I think that's everybody online.
[3:31] Mayor,
[3:32] >> that's everyone. Thank you all. Next
[3:35] item on our agenda is an item for action
[3:37] and it's the approval of our uh meeting
[3:38] minutes for February 10th, 2026. Is
[3:41] there a motion to approve our minutes?
[3:49] » I'll make a motion to approve the
[3:50] minutes.
[3:52] >> This is Travis Mo. Yep.
[3:54] >> Thank you, Travis. There second.
[3:55] >> I'll second. Dave Graph Ogden.
[3:58] >> Thank you, Dave. All in favor of
[3:59] approval of the minutes say I.
[4:01] >> I.
[4:03] >> All eyes. Are there any opposed?
[4:06] All right. The meeting minutes are
[4:07] approved. Next item is a as a brief
[4:11] chair's report. I don't know how brief
[4:12] it'll be. It might be unbrief. Um,
[4:15] however, we'll start off with the
[4:17] Boulder Pier Tour. How many of you are
[4:19] signed up to do this Boulder Pier Tour?
[4:21] Excellent. Few of you online. All right.
[4:24] Um, if you aren't aware, it's a it's
[4:26] WFRC, MAG, and Bike Utah have organized
[4:30] these out of state tours for many years.
[4:32] This year, the tours in Boulder,
[4:34] Colorado, a platinum level bicycle
[4:36] friendly community. Um, over 20
[4:38] individuals signed up to join the tour
[4:39] and we'll be experiencing how Boulder
[4:41] land use and transportation networks
[4:44] have grown together over time. We're
[4:45] looking forward to hearing a report on
[4:47] the tour at our next ATC meeting in
[4:49] June. If you're attending, be safe, have
[4:52] fun, and bring back a lesson learned to
[4:54] share with us in our region. Next item
[4:58] up is May, if you all know, is bike
[5:00] month. Uh, and the golden spoke ride
[5:02] that we try to coordinate with in most
[5:04] of our communities. Every May we
[5:06] celebrate bike month along with the rest
[5:08] of the country. One major event that
[5:10] occurs every year is the free golden
[5:12] spoke ride celebrating the 100 plus
[5:15] miles of pave trail connecting Weaver,
[5:17] Davis, Salt Lake, and Utah counties. It
[5:19] is taking place on Saturday, May 16th
[5:21] with with ride lengths available for
[5:24] people of all ages and abilities.
[5:25] Several mayor's bike rides are being uh
[5:28] dovetailed with the Golden Spoke Ride,
[5:30] including Draper West Jordan. Full event
[5:32] details can be found at goldenpoke.net.
[5:36] Special thanks to all the partners
[5:38] putting on this event, including the
[5:40] Jordan River Commission, UTA, MAG, and
[5:43] many others. If you haven't done that
[5:44] one, that's a fun one to do. Um,
[5:48] a lot of we've been growing it seems
[5:50] like every year in Draper it's probably
[5:52] doubled in size each time. Um, for other
[5:55] bike month activities, the locally
[5:57] published cyclingwest.com website has a
[6:00] full list of activities that we can drop
[6:02] a full link in the chat then include the
[6:04] following in the follow-up email. Um,
[6:07] would anyone like to share bike month
[6:08] activity they are looking forward to in
[6:10] their city that they have planned?
[6:17] Mayor, the city I live live in, Provo,
[6:19] always does an awesome bike to anywhere
[6:22] day as opposed to bike to work day. And
[6:23] there are several breakfast stations um
[6:26] set up throughout the city. So, sort of
[6:28] no matter where you're going, you can go
[6:30] and hit some breakfast up. And
[6:32] typically, we take our kids to school
[6:34] late and just hit up all the breakfast
[6:35] stations with them. It's pretty fun.
[6:38] In Draper, we're doing the Saturday
[6:40] ride, the mayor's bike ride, and we we
[6:42] do about 22 miles. We go south down the
[6:46] Jordan River Trail, and we start at the
[6:47] Rotary Park, and we come out through
[6:49] Lehi and come back across the bridge and
[6:52] back into Draper. It's been It's a fun
[6:54] ride. We had I think we had 27 people
[6:56] last year do it, so we're excited for
[6:59] it. Um it it's getting bigger and bigger
[7:01] as it goes along. Anybody else?
[7:06] » All right. Well, thank you. Next item up
[7:07] is comment. Um, is there anyone here
[7:10] from the public that would like to make
[7:13] a public comment to the to our
[7:15] committee?
[7:18] >> Yeah, I would.
[7:21] >> Dave Dave Eltus. All right, Dave.
[7:25] >> Yeah, just a a couple couple things. One
[7:27] is if you do if anyone uh does have bike
[7:31] month activities, if they can please
[7:33] email me, I can add it to our calendar
[7:36] of events. Um, I think we have most of
[7:40] the ones that you mentioned today. Um,
[7:42] and there's a bunch of others that are
[7:45] on there um that were not mentioned um
[7:48] that various entities are are doing.
[7:51] There's a a slugat alleycat race.
[7:54] There's the well the golden spoke. Um
[7:57] Salt Lake City doesn't have their date
[7:59] yet for their mayor's bike to work day.
[8:02] Um, and there's a variety of other
[8:04] things including the right of silence on
[8:08] uh it's the third Wednesday of May which
[8:11] honors people who have been hit and
[8:13] killed by um hit killed or hurt by cars.
[8:18] Um couple other quick things. Um I think
[8:22] later on in the this meeting you have on
[8:25] the agenda the fallout from SB242.
[8:29] Uh just so you know, that's made a mess
[8:32] of many, many things in Salt Lake City.
[8:34] And if I were mayors of other
[8:37] communities uh on the Wasatchet front,
[8:40] I'd be wary that this might at some
[8:42] point come to haunt them as well. Um
[8:46] anything that any of you can do to push
[8:49] back against uh I I think the driving
[8:52] person behind all this is probably
[8:53] Stuart Adams and Mike Schultz. um pushed
[8:56] back against their uh the policy and
[8:59] this has just really made a mess of
[9:01] things and kept bike lanes off of 7 East
[9:04] for example, kept the extension of the
[9:07] protected bike lane on Third West by
[9:11] Pioneer Park uh among many others. Um
[9:14] lastly, um I it's been a while since
[9:18] I've been to this committee, but uh 3200
[9:21] West um would be a great project for
[9:25] WFRC and any of the communities that are
[9:29] along 3200 West to um finish off the
[9:33] bike lane that would uh that has the
[9:36] potential from going from 500 south to
[9:38] 12,000 south. Um, it's probably 90 80%
[9:44] done, but it would make an incredible
[9:47] uh length of the valley bike route uh
[9:50] with just a bit of fine-tuning. So, um
[9:54] anyway, hope WFRC andor uh communities
[9:58] like West Jordan, um West Valley City,
[10:02] um I think Riverton, etc. could take
[10:05] that on. Um thanks so much. And I I'll
[10:08] put my email in the chat if anyone wants
[10:11] to email me uh details of their bike um
[10:15] bike month events. Thanks.
[10:18] >> Thanks, Dave. I also enjoyed your
[10:20] legislative recap email. I just got
[10:22] that. That was a the uh fashion show, if
[10:25] you will. That was great. Um is there
[10:28] anyone else like to make a general
[10:30] public comment to the committee?
[10:36] » You're not the public. You're not the
[10:38] public. Hold on. Anybody else like to
[10:40] make public comment?
[10:43] All right, we'll close public comment
[10:45] and our next item. Did you want to make
[10:47] Ellen? Did you want to make a statement
[10:48] or something? Go ahead.
[10:49] >> No, mine is ever mine is ever so brief.
[10:51] I just wanted to say I rode the train up
[10:53] here and found out why this meeting
[10:55] starts at 9:15. It is so perfect. So,
[10:59] take front runner. It's great.
[11:02] >> Thank you. All right. Next item. If
[11:04] you'll recall at our last meeting, Hugh
[11:07] asked us to come up with as a group what
[11:10] we wanted to accomplish in 2026 as the
[11:13] active transportation committee. And
[11:15] Hugh is going to go over all of your
[11:17] responses and we can have a discussion
[11:19] about about that. Go ahead, Hugh.
[11:25] » Thank you, Mayor. And I also want to
[11:27] recognize
[11:28] uh Commissioner Facel from Morgan who's
[11:30] with us. Thank you for being here. Okay.
[11:35] So, as mentioned, we asked in our last
[11:37] meeting, uh, what does the committee
[11:39] want to achieve during this calendar
[11:40] year? And thought, oh, well, let's go
[11:44] over this with you a little bit and see
[11:45] if we can talk about it and, um, get
[11:48] some get some direction from you all
[11:50] moving forward.
[11:53] So,
[11:56] I don't know what that was. Okay,
[11:58] perfect. Okay. Click, click, click, someone's room.
[12:03] The goal of this discussion, any hockey
[12:05] fans out there? I know we got like
[12:07] everybody's in. Was anybody into hockey
[12:09] when it was just the Grizzlies or is
[12:10] this like a mammoth thing only? Just a
[12:13] mammoth thing. I was curious about that.
[12:16] The goal of the discussion today is to
[12:18] narrow down some of the topics that you
[12:20] all expressed in our last meeting and to
[12:23] find out how we can utilize our
[12:25] remaining three meetings and what the
[12:26] best format is to sort of discuss what
[12:29] we come up with today. So at the end of
[12:31] this discussion, we'll have some polls
[12:32] for you. Again, prepare, you know, have
[12:34] your phone ready to go. You can um sign
[12:36] in to that polling question. But
[12:39] narrowing narrowing down topics and
[12:41] what's the best way to approach those
[12:43] for the rest of the year.
[12:45] Get rid of that discussion.
[12:49] So read all of these. Don't read all of
[12:52] these. But this is all the content that
[12:53] you gave us. Uh the intention is not for
[12:55] you to read this slide at all, but to
[12:57] give you an idea of all the great
[12:59] feedback that we got. What we did do was
[13:02] take all of that feedback and um used
[13:05] our Google Gemini platform here to say,
[13:07] "Okay, we'll break these into
[13:09] categories, right, and put them into
[13:11] different buckets." And so this is what it came up with. So my
[13:14] question to you is we can go through
[13:16] these and we'll look at some of the more
[13:18] specific responses. Some have been
[13:20] edited for clarity and um brevity. But
[13:25] which of these topics right now do you
[13:26] want to jump into and look at the more
[13:28] specific responses? We can click on any
[13:31] of these and just jump to that category
[13:42] or I will choose the event. Oh yes,
[13:45] Commissioner Fel.
[13:47] >> I think they're all important.
[13:49] Um, but as far as which one to start
[13:51] with, infrastructure and connectivity
[13:55] would probably be
[13:57] well maybe that's not number one.
[13:59] Planning and policy. We've got that. We
[14:01] just heard it in public comment about
[14:03] the planning and the policies. And I
[14:07] mean, all of those things are important
[14:09] to me because I can't get anything going
[14:12] in Morgan County yet and I need help.
[14:15] >> Juggle. Okay. Well, let's start with we can we'll get to all of these. Um,
[14:20] we'll start with infrastructure and
[14:21] connect connectivity. So, I think that's
[14:23] what you started with, right? This was
[14:24] your first thing you said.
[14:26] All right.
[14:27] >> This is Joy and I agree with that one.
[14:30] >> Okay. Thank you, Mayor Petro.
[14:33] So, these were the responses under that
[14:35] specific category. Better network
[14:36] connectivity and connections to transit
[14:40] assistance working with UD do support to
[14:43] advance neighborhood byways. help
[14:45] implement safe, user-friendly AT
[14:47] facilities. Make implementation of bike
[14:50] facilities easier.
[14:54] Any thoughts? Just real quick, fire on
[14:59] yes. No
[15:03] on any of these. And we'll have a chance
[15:05] to do some ranking later, but
[15:07] >> I'd say all of them.
[15:08] >> Okay. All of them.
[15:14] I just want first real quick
[15:16] impressions. You don't have to dwell on
[15:17] it too much.
[15:18] >> Assistance with U dot.
[15:20] >> Assistance with UD dot. Okay. Getting
[15:22] that.
[15:24] >> Well, I I think the support for
[15:26] neighborhood byways and helping people
[15:28] to understand what that is and the
[15:30] efficacy and especially for cities on
[15:33] tight budgets. It's really
[15:35] >> smart.
[15:37] >> Okay, that's very good. Mayor Petro,
[15:39] you're drawn on my screen. Is there
[15:40] anything specific you want to Did I
[15:43] misspell something?
[15:46] That's okay.
[15:48] Vendeline, your your hand is up. Would
[15:50] you like to comment?
[15:52] >> Um, yeah, just a quick comment sort of
[15:54] from the municipal perspective. You
[15:56] know, there's of course always money
[15:58] involved in these things and um oftent
[16:02] times for larger facilities
[16:06] um we oftentimes rely on federal money
[16:09] and um I wonder if we as this committee
[16:17] uh need to talk with people to
[16:21] make sure that on the federal end that
[16:24] the federal agencies And maybe the our
[16:28] Utah federal delegation understands how
[16:30] important the federal money is. And it
[16:33] seems there are some headwinds in that
[16:35] regard in Washington DC right now.
[16:39] >> Great comment. Cameron is here and we'll
[16:41] be talking about that in uh I think the
[16:43] next item. So, thank you for bringing
[16:45] that up. Okay, I'm going to jump back to
[16:47] our categories here. Next one. Jory.
[16:50] Well, I was just going to add, I don't
[16:52] know if everybody knows UD do has a um
[16:55] trails division right now that's helping
[16:58] implement the UTN um and then they also
[17:00] have regional planners. So, if you don't
[17:02] know that, at least on the coordination
[17:04] with UD do piece before, reach out to
[17:06] both groups um could be helpful.
[17:09] >> Thank you.
[17:14] Planning the policy. The next one I
[17:15] think Mr. fac said
[17:18] it's like engaging with my teenagers
[17:20] here at dinner.
[17:24] Prioritize ATN communications and plan
[17:26] development.
[17:28] More planning for outlying areas to
[17:30] connect to the Wasatch front and
[17:32] highlight successful planning
[17:33] implementation.
[17:37] Any first impressions on any of these?
[17:45] Miranda, please.
[17:46] >> Sure, I'll just weigh in. No, I think
[17:47] these are great. I um looking at like
[17:50] communicating
[17:52] uh prioritizing active transportation is
[17:54] great. I think over the past few years,
[17:55] we've obviously seen a lot of support
[17:58] for active transportation in some ways,
[18:00] right? The state has uh invested a lot
[18:04] in active transportation, $45 million
[18:07] ongoing every year for the active
[18:09] transportation investment fund or the
[18:11] Utah Trail Network. Um, but we're also
[18:13] seeing a lot of other different types of
[18:15] push back around active transportation
[18:17] in other ways. And so finding ways to
[18:19] continue to communicate the importance
[18:22] of active transportation, its value in
[18:25] our transportation system within our
[18:27] communities, etc., I think is important
[18:29] not only to lawmakers uh who are making
[18:32] policies um but also to residents so
[18:35] that they understand um and feel um feel
[18:39] like they want to use these facilities
[18:40] as well.
[18:42] Thank you.
[18:45] Any else? Others? I'll jump back. Oh,
[18:48] Council Member Burch,
[18:49] >> that second bullet point on there is
[18:50] really really important to the Tilla
[18:52] Valley right now. I don't know if that's
[18:53] where that came from, but uh we're we'd
[18:57] really like to actively pursue that as a means to solve some of our issues
[19:02] out there.
[19:03] >> Great. Thank you.
[19:06] Okay. Anybody want to pick the next one?
[19:13] funding
[19:14] >> funding and programming. All right. So,
[19:17] funding for trail preservation and
[19:18] easements.
[19:23] Um, which I actually think there was a
[19:26] bill that passed that might help with
[19:27] that. Miranda might talk about that.
[19:29] Seed funding, funding for trail design,
[19:32] and funding for commuter routes.
[19:43] un uninspiring. Is that what
[19:47] Wendellin please?
[19:51] Um, one thought that came to my mind um
[19:54] on funding and programming is maybe it
[19:58] would be a good idea to have a a UTN
[20:01] representative
[20:03] sort of permanently at the
[20:06] transportation committee.
[20:11] » Hey, I have a question about the last
[20:13] bullet. Um, because it looks like the
[20:16] third and the fourth. So the first one
[20:18] is more of a recreational component and
[20:20] then the the fourth one is looking at
[20:24] when you say commuter routes is that
[20:26] comprehensive for just like act like
[20:30] connections to activity nodes or because
[20:32] it just seems like it's focused on just
[20:35] workforce. It's kind of like that same
[20:36] mentality for roadway design of like
[20:38] getting people to their jobs instead of
[20:40] like those local trips. So
[20:43] >> yeah, I did not write this myself,
[20:45] right? This is uh somebody else put this
[20:47] in there, but it's a good thought. Does
[20:49] anybody else have a thought on that when
[20:50] you hear the term commuter route? What
[20:52] does that say to you?
[20:55] >> Well, I I really like uh Dee's train of
[20:58] thought there because um you know in
[21:00] Cottonwood Heights obviously and then to
[21:03] the South Sandy and Draper and I know
[21:06] who's chairing this meeting uh you know
[21:08] we have these arterials that uh is how
[21:11] people get well to work. So there's that
[21:14] issue is what leaps into my mind for
[21:16] commuter and I've long thought by
[21:19] working with UTA and UD do a combination
[21:22] that people can think of active
[21:24] transportation to get to frankly some
[21:26] rapid uh routes as opposed to all our
[21:30] bus service in Salt Lake County. Well,
[21:32] not all of it. Most of it is is local
[21:34] routes that people who work for a living
[21:37] don't have time to take to get anywhere
[21:39] from the suburban areas of Sandy,
[21:41] Collwood Heights, and and um Draper, for
[21:44] example. But I I really like the
[21:46] thinking of local,
[21:49] which is why I'm such an advocate for
[21:51] neighborhood byways because you can do
[21:52] something immediately. But this idea of
[21:55] people getting around because a small
[21:56] percentage of AT users go long distances
[22:01] from what I can comprehend. And so we
[22:04] really need to think of those three mile
[22:06] trips within three miles
[22:09] >> regardless of the term.
[22:12] Um the only bullet point up there that
[22:15] sort of implies what should we focus on
[22:18] funding is the fourth bullet. Other than
[22:21] that, it's sort of amorphous about where
[22:24] are the priorities for funding. So, I'm
[22:26] just reflecting on that.
[22:31] » One more.
[22:34] I agree with all that, but that's good
[22:36] for just the Wasatch front. Um, so I
[22:40] mean, sure, if we could get to the
[22:41] Wasatch Front, it'd be great, but um, I
[22:45] think funding for trail design in
[22:48] particular, I have a special project and
[22:50] other counties are working on it
[22:52] already. Um, but we basically need
[22:55] funding for the trail design.
[22:58] >> Start it up, get it going.
[22:59] >> Well, it's not necessarily start up. The
[23:01] idea is there. It's just the engineering
[23:03] that has to be done with it. That's
[23:05] where we're having trouble.
[23:06] >> Okay. Thank you. All right, we'll keep
[23:09] moving.
[23:11] We got the top. These are at the top.
[23:13] These not listed in any specific order,
[23:14] but we've done the the three listed
[23:16] first.
[23:21] » Well, I'll always give a plug for
[23:23] maintenance.
[23:25] That is something that for many city
[23:27] councils, the budgeting for maintenance
[23:31] and uh bringing that as a priority. Uh,
[23:35] I know it needs to happen in my city.
[23:37] >> Yeah, let's look at what the comments
[23:39] were around this.
[23:41] Uh, I clicked the wrong one or I have it
[23:44] on the wrong
[23:47] There we go. Sweeping of trails,
[23:49] shoulders, and bike lanes. Understand
[23:51] the safe system approach. Uh, what it
[23:54] means for road design, functionality,
[23:55] and circulation. How that affects active
[23:57] transportation, ebike and e- motorcycle
[24:00] laws, and safety issues.
[24:03] Anything
[24:06] jump out to y'all?
[24:08] >> Ebikes.
[24:10] and lack of safety, especially
[24:12] for children and youth.
[24:14] >> Yep.
[24:15] Ebikes is a growing concern and
[24:18] will continue to grow.
[24:23] » Thank you, Council Member Graph. Yep.
[24:24] Okay,
[24:31] Travis.
[24:33] Evans with you do. Everybody give
[24:35] him a hand.
[24:39] » I Yeah, if I knew I was going to be the
[24:40] only one here, I would have wore my full
[24:41] U DOT Yeah. uniform. I would have got my
[24:43] reflective gear, my hard hat,
[24:45] everything. But, uh, no. So, I am on the
[24:48] uh committee working with DPS to set up
[24:50] the uh the registration and the
[24:52] education portion of the uh the new law
[24:55] that was passed, the HP, I think 381
[24:58] uh that uh outlines the e motorcycle
[25:02] versus ebike and all the different laws
[25:04] related to those. So, uh it is in the
[25:06] works. Uh it does go into effect May
[25:08] 6th. Uh but the education and
[25:10] registration program will be another
[25:12] year after that.
[25:14] >> Okay. And we'll maybe hear a little bit
[25:16] more about that from Miranda in our
[25:17] legislative update. Jory, do you have
[25:19] your
[25:20] >> I mean, the only one I'm I'm looking at
[25:22] these three bullets, you know, the as
[25:24] Travis mentioned, the third one, there's
[25:26] some work being done on that. The second
[25:29] one, did UD do just finish some new
[25:32] design guidelines or new design with
[25:35] active transportation
[25:37] on on roads? I thought there was
[25:40] something with that that was get in the
[25:41] works. Utah Tra Network is working on
[25:44] specific designs for their program.
[25:46] >> The first one is the only one that I
[25:48] see, you know, just keeping the the bike
[25:52] lanes, shoulders, everything kind of
[25:55] cleaned up, right? Like I don't see
[25:57] sweepers out there that often um doing
[26:00] that and it's right where everything
[26:02] gets kicked from the travel lanes. So
[26:04] that'd be the only one I'd see on here
[26:06] that doesn't really have any movement
[26:07] forward. Or even in the winter, you
[26:10] could add any trail upkeep, you know,
[26:13] plowing them, stuff like that.
[26:14] >> Yeah.
[26:14] >> I mean, not this last winter.
[26:16] >> Not this last winter. No.
[26:18] >> Well, I I will underscore what you just
[26:20] said and especially with state routes. I
[26:22] know in Cottonwood Heights, the sweeping
[26:24] uh of the Highly Road, SR 210 and SR
[26:28] 190. I was just riding down and the bike
[26:31] lane that I was supposed to ride in had
[26:33] so much debris. I was in the car lanes
[26:36] where they're moving at 50 to 60 miles
[26:37] an hour. So, thank you for bringing that
[26:40] underscoring that.
[26:42] >> I also Hugh I just have one last comment
[26:44] about that. Um because when I think
[26:46] about design and safety, one of the more
[26:48] expensive ticket items is when you think
[26:50] about crossings and the type of
[26:52] signalization and and safety treatments
[26:54] that you need there. So, I don't I see I
[26:56] don't see those up there. I see like the
[26:58] general um and maybe that would fall
[27:00] under the safe systems approach. So
[27:02] you're looking at like typologies that
[27:04] would probably say it needs like this
[27:05] type of countermeasure, but that's
[27:07] something that I think to keep in mind,
[27:09] right? A hawk signal is pretty
[27:10] expensive. So um and really required at
[27:13] a lot of our roads because of the right
[27:15] of ways and the speeds.
[27:18] >> I could also add that um in gentrifying
[27:21] cities where schools are closing, we
[27:24] have an elementary school in Cottonwood
[27:25] Heights that is closing. And so now the
[27:27] children that live north of Fort Union
[27:29] Boulevard, if they want to walk to
[27:31] school, we'll have to cross Fort Union
[27:33] Boulevard. We only have one viable Hawk
[27:36] signal in that area. So I'm extremely
[27:40] concerned. Uh and I don't think this is
[27:42] just in Cotwell Heights. There's a lot
[27:43] of elementary schools closing and we
[27:45] need to really think about the crossing
[27:47] across uh arterials or collectors for
[27:50] children.
[27:52] >> All right, I'm going to move through
[27:53] these last two for the sake of time.
[27:56] collaboration organizational
[27:57] development. This was an interesting
[27:59] one. Drafting a comprehensive charter or
[28:01] memorandum of
[28:05] something on working as a committee with
[28:07] all the partners and communities. Keep a
[28:10] broad multis- sector approach to address
[28:12] all aspects of transportation.
[28:16] Any quick thoughts, quick impressions?
[28:22] Ted, I see your finger. uh button
[28:26] >> I'm just I I'm now I'm thinking aloud
[28:29] which is always a bad idea especially
[28:31] for me but I I think that this committee
[28:34] can bring that multis- sector kind of
[28:37] perspective to a lot of these issues and
[28:39] it might be a unique role for ATC which
[28:42] then in turn suggests so who might we be
[28:44] missing.
[28:46] Thank you.
[28:49] And the last one, advocacy and
[28:51] education. So make cities look good when
[28:52] they implement at policies and projects.
[28:55] Work with institutions on the state and
[28:57] federal level to shift the mode split by
[28:59] allocating transportation sources in
[29:01] resources in new ways and education
[29:04] period.
[29:13] My opinion is education is the biggest
[29:15] thing starting when they're young.
[29:18] >> Okay. Education of the general
[29:20] population then
[29:21] >> general population and and uh that way
[29:24] kids grow up knowing the laws and
[29:26] parents learn the laws that they should
[29:28] have known when they were a kid
[29:30] >> and and that way we can maybe have a
[29:32] little bit more safety in in our
[29:35] travels. Even driving is the same thing.
[29:38] You're driving and you don't care about
[29:40] the bicyclist, but you should be. And
[29:43] you need to think that that road is not
[29:45] yours. It's everybody's road. And you
[29:48] need to be concerned about those things.
[29:50] And I think that's education starts in
[29:52] the young age.
[29:54] >> Thank you.
[29:56] >> Yes, please. Do you mind using a
[29:57] microphone?
[30:01] » Uh, sorry. Just press the button right
[30:02] below. Turn green. Perfect. And thanks.
[30:04] So, Holly Pearson from Salt Lake County,
[30:06] and I didn't get to introduce myself at
[30:08] the beginning of the meeting, but nice
[30:09] to see you all. Um, yeah, education I I
[30:12] think is so crucial for this because,
[30:15] uh, well, two aspects of it. U, one, I
[30:17] think a lot of people don't think of
[30:20] bicycling or active transportation as a
[30:23] kind of convenient or viable means to
[30:25] get around. And so I think just
[30:26] educating about um resources that are
[30:28] available about you know secure bike
[30:30] parking or lockers for commuters or you
[30:33] know facilities like that options to you
[30:36] know bike to transit and and kind of
[30:39] tying that in with um things that people
[30:42] are concerned about more broadly and
[30:44] making a connection like with air
[30:45] quality. So on you know bad air quality
[30:47] days having sort of a push to connect
[30:50] the dots with with active transportation
[30:52] in that way. And the other aspect of
[30:54] education is actually ties back to
[30:55] safety. So I don't know how strong it is
[30:59] currently, but but driver education
[31:01] around bike safety. Not just educating
[31:03] cyclists about safety, but educating
[31:04] drivers about how to keep cyclists and
[31:07] pedestrians safe. Um, so those two
[31:09] aspects of education I think are really
[31:11] important to work on. I appreciate that.
[31:14] I think in the in the manual that
[31:16] students get to get their driver's
[31:18] license, I think there's maybe like a
[31:20] paragraph about biking in that whole
[31:22] manual. So, DD, did you have something?
[31:24] >> Thanks. You I feel like I I love all
[31:26] this stuff so much. So, I could have a
[31:27] comment about every slide. Um, another
[31:30] thing with education too is like we
[31:32] found when we went to the Bike Utah
[31:33] Summit last year, which was it was a
[31:35] great event. um people talking about how
[31:38] folks in their in their cities maybe
[31:40] they come to a public meeting and they
[31:41] had no idea that you could bring a bike
[31:43] onto Frontr Runner or you could bring a
[31:45] bike onto tracks or how do you get your
[31:47] bike onto the bus and I think it's
[31:49] really important to show that there's a
[31:51] lot of options for multimmodal travel
[31:54] and that also starts with education and
[31:56] providing spaces for people where you
[31:58] know taking them out of that
[31:59] intimidating environment of being on the
[32:01] road in front of a bus and not sure
[32:03] where you should put your bike right so
[32:05] having these kind of like safe places
[32:07] where people are just learning and can
[32:08] ask whatever questions they want.
[32:12] >> And uh there's a plug put in for Bike
[32:14] Utah who does a lot of its education
[32:15] work with youth and can come to your
[32:17] communities. I know uh we just saw a
[32:20] paper for my daughter in fourth grade
[32:21] who's going to go through bike safety
[32:23] training put on by Bike Utah. So
[32:25] resources there for sure. Okay, let's uh
[32:29] keep moving. please join and help help
[32:32] me rank some of this stuff for the
[32:34] remainder of our meetings on what to
[32:36] focus on because there's a lot there and
[32:38] we can't get to it all all the time. Um
[32:41] but if we can
[32:44] focus some of our remaining resources
[32:46] for this year that would be great. This
[32:49] if you haven't joined you still can join
[32:51] on the next slide. So this is ranking
[32:54] the categories in order of importance
[32:57] has them there.
[32:59] Go ahead and just you can drag and drop
[33:02] I think um or just click in the order
[33:04] that you think is the most appropriate.
[33:08] Funding and programming, infrastructure
[33:10] and connectivity, planning and policy,
[33:12] design, safety, maintenance,
[33:13] collaboration, organizational
[33:15] development, advocacy and education. And
[33:18] right out of the blocks, funding and
[33:19] programming into the lead, planning and
[33:21] policy. Oh, nope. Design, safety,
[33:23] maintenance.
[33:25] Yeah. So, just take take a a moment
[33:40] and I have one more question for you as
[33:42] far as
[33:44] after ranking the categories, how should
[33:46] we go about um working on these things
[33:50] together? What's the best
[33:53] uh
[33:56] theater is not the right word. platform.
[33:58] Maybe it's a better word. Do that.
[34:02] Okay, I'm gonna give a five second
[34:04] countdown. Five, four, three, two, one.
[34:07] That's probably faster than five, but
[34:10] so how should we approach these? We've
[34:12] had a thought about doing mini workshops
[34:14] during these meetings. We have three
[34:16] more this year. Um try and set up
[34:19] extended workshops outside of these
[34:21] meetings. um have somebody come in and
[34:24] do sort of a lecture format uh to the
[34:26] committee um standard presentation
[34:28] format which um you know we do some you
[34:32] know keep doing what you're doing or if
[34:33] there's something else and way we should
[34:35] approach this and engage the active
[34:38] transportation committee um and
[34:40] participants if there's an other feel
[34:43] free to put that in the chat
[34:49] and Mayor Walker I'm sorry I'm taking so
[34:51] much time we're wrapping up and we can
[34:53] move on to the next thing here in just a
[34:54] moment.
[34:56] But I appreciate the engagement
[34:58] uh on this topic.
[35:12] Good. Many workshops coming out on top
[35:15] so far.
[35:20] Okay. I don't see anybody else actively
[35:22] taking that poll. So, thank you very
[35:23] much. And I think with that,
[35:29] I'm done. Appreciate it.
[35:35] All right. Thank you everyone. Um, let's
[35:38] go our ne our next item. Uh we're gonna
[35:41] have Cameron Carter Miranda talk to us a
[35:43] little bit about state and federal
[35:45] funding since that's always that was the
[35:47] number one topic on those surveys on act
[35:50] for active transportation projects. So
[35:53] who's take go ahead Cameron?
[35:55] >> Thank you. I'm Cameron Carter with Bike
[35:56] Utah. Um Hugh asked me to speak a little
[36:00] bit about our engagement work with
[36:02] Senator Curtis around the surface
[36:04] transportation reauthorization bill. So,
[36:07] if you don't know, Congress has been
[36:08] working for about a year on this
[36:10] legislation. Um, they do this about
[36:13] every 5 years. So, the last one was the
[36:15] Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
[36:17] passed in 2021, which expires September
[36:20] of this year. So, um, this bill will
[36:23] reauthorize all transportation funding
[36:25] at the federal level. It'll set funding
[36:27] levels, um, decides project eligibility
[36:30] for grants and formula funding. and then
[36:33] um it may adjust some distribution to
[36:35] states, NPOS's and local governments.
[36:37] So, it's a really big bill um has a lot
[36:39] of implications for funding um the state
[36:42] and local level.
[36:45] Um we have heard from our partners,
[36:48] Rails to Trails Conservancy, they're a
[36:50] national nonprofit that does similar
[36:52] work. Um we've heard that some senior
[36:55] members of Congress want to fund only
[36:56] traditional infrastructure, meaning
[36:58] roads and bridges. So, no support for
[37:00] walking and biking. there's this idea of
[37:02] moving back to what they call basics.
[37:05] Um, which is really problematic because
[37:08] of course active transportation is
[37:10] really beneficial for local governments
[37:12] and a lot of cities wouldn't be able to
[37:15] build this type of funding without
[37:16] matching support from the federal
[37:18] government. Um, active transportation
[37:20] funding also has significant benefits.
[37:23] Um, it reduces congestion by shifting
[37:26] trips to walking and biking, improves
[37:28] safety, reducing fatalities and
[37:30] injuries. um supports economies, local
[37:33] businesses and then of course mental
[37:35] health, physical health and social
[37:37] connection. So I think all of us know
[37:39] active transportation is important and
[37:41] we have been advocating with Senator
[37:43] Curtis to help him understand and
[37:46] advocate for these at the federal level.
[37:49] Um
[37:51] sorry
[37:51] >> to interrupt Cameron. Is there a way can
[37:53] you close the box of you on there? Yeah,
[37:57] >> perfect. Now we can see everything.
[37:58] Thank you.
[38:00] Thanks.
[38:03] Okay, so this slide shows the breakdown
[38:05] of active transportation funding. The
[38:08] biggest program is the transportation
[38:10] alternatives. This is 1.5 billion
[38:13] annually and it's for all sorts of
[38:15] projects big and small. The recreational
[38:17] trails program is mainly for off-
[38:19] streetet recreational trails. And then
[38:22] there are a bunch of multimodal
[38:24] discretionary grants. So the ATIP
[38:26] program here um is mainly for closing
[38:30] regional gaps. So like bridges, tunnels,
[38:33] uh major crossings in AT networks. It
[38:36] was authorized at 200 million annually
[38:38] but was only funded one time at 45
[38:41] million.
[38:42] U raise grants, also called build
[38:44] grants, um these are are typically large
[38:47] regional projects. Um SS4A grants are
[38:50] for more safety focused projects and
[38:52] then reconnecting communities grants are
[38:55] for projects that address uh communities
[38:58] that have been divided by highways or
[39:00] railroads. So in total there's about $5
[39:04] billion in active transportation funding
[39:06] that's been authorized. Not all of this
[39:08] has actually been spent. We know a lot
[39:10] of these grants were frozen and then
[39:12] eventually rescended last year. Um
[39:16] this next slide shows just the the pie
[39:19] of surface transportation funding. So
[39:22] the $5 billion is about 4.4% of all
[39:25] surface transportation funding. Um so
[39:28] again it's a small share but it has
[39:30] really important and significant
[39:32] benefits at the local level.
[39:35] Um we organized a signon letter last
[39:38] October uh with other nonprofit partners
[39:40] and eight cities. Um this was a a
[39:44] national effort that we coordinated with
[39:46] the Rails to Trails Conservancy. There
[39:47] were over,200 signatures on that letter
[39:50] uh in support of active transportation
[39:52] funding. We also hosted an indistrict
[39:55] meeting with Senator Curtis at his Provo
[39:58] office. So we we brought some Provo
[40:00] folks um the Provo city mayor and city
[40:02] council member, Kevin and Shauna from
[40:05] MAG joined us and some people from
[40:06] BikeWalk Provo and Bike Orum. Um, and
[40:10] then we are also hosting a community
[40:11] ride for Celebrate Trails Day that
[40:13] Senator Curtis's staff will be joining
[40:15] us for Saturday, April 25th. If anyone's
[40:18] interested, we're meeting at Vineyard
[40:20] Front Runner Station at 10:00 a.m.
[40:24] Um, last slide here is just uh this is
[40:27] what we've been asking for. So,
[40:30] strengthen and grow transportation
[40:31] alternatives, the recreational trails
[40:32] program, secure dedicated funding for
[40:35] the ATP program. Again, there there's
[40:37] authorized funding, but it hasn't
[40:39] actually been funded as intended. And
[40:42] then preserving and deploying multimodal
[40:44] discretionary grants, many of which were
[40:45] rescended and and frozen. So, um, just
[40:49] in general, Senator Curtis has been very
[40:52] supportive of these programs and and he
[40:54] says that he will be, uh, pushing for
[40:57] them. He said he's also wants to fund
[41:00] specific projects with Deermarks. I know
[41:02] he's working with Provo City and likely
[41:04] many others for those projects. And um
[41:08] he also suggested that we're likely to
[41:10] see a shift towards more formula funding
[41:12] and less discretionary grants. Um
[41:16] that's all I know. So I I don't think
[41:19] the bill's been released yet, but we
[41:21] will likely see that soon um since the
[41:24] current one expires in September.
[41:27] Um open to questions if there are any.
[41:35] Cameron, have you had any other
[41:37] engagement with other um members of our
[41:40] federal delegation at all?
[41:43] >> Um,
[41:45] not much. No. So, we've mainly been
[41:47] engaging with Senator Curtis because he
[41:49] has shown to be supportive of biking and
[41:52] walking in the past. Um, and we've sent
[41:55] messages to the other five and there
[41:58] hasn't been much of a response honestly.
[42:03] >> Maybe I could weigh in here Cameron with
[42:05] just a few thoughts regarding
[42:06] reauthorization. One is that um first
[42:09] WFRC is really appreciative of our
[42:12] partners uh like Bike Utah, Rails to
[42:14] Trails for continuing to um prioritize
[42:18] and highlight the importance of these
[42:19] active transportation programs in the
[42:22] surface uh re surface transportation
[42:24] reauthorization. And a lot of what
[42:26] Cameron has shared is we're hearing
[42:28] similar things. that's very consistent
[42:29] in that. Um, yeah, there's a a push for
[42:32] a return to basics. Um, and uh, and also
[42:39] that we're hearing um, the House uh,
[42:43] we're hopefully going to be seeing
[42:44] within the next few weeks uh, some
[42:47] language out of the House for uh,
[42:49] reauthorization. The Senate isn't quite
[42:51] there. Um and so while the bill expires
[42:55] in September, uh we may potentially see
[42:58] a um an extension. This has happened in
[43:01] the past for I think almost all of the
[43:04] previous surface transportation
[43:06] reauthorizations. Um and so we may not
[43:09] see this reauthorized on time. It could
[43:11] be extended at current funding levels.
[43:14] Um still still TBD. I will say one of
[43:17] the reasons why working uh with Senator
[43:20] Curtis makes a lot of sense in this case
[43:22] is because Senator Curtis sits on the
[43:25] Senate uh environment and public works
[43:27] committee. Uh so he has a more direct
[43:30] role in the surface transportation
[43:33] reauthorization. And so WFRC has also
[43:36] been working with Senator Curtis. We
[43:38] also have uh Congressman um uh
[43:42] Congressman Owens and Congressman
[43:44] Kennedy who sit on the House
[43:45] Transportation and Infrastructure
[43:47] Committee. So, we've been uh working
[43:49] with them as well on uh supporting
[43:53] uh one of the the WFRC priorities that
[43:56] we're asking them to prioritize is uh um
[44:01] sorry, I'm losing my words. um is
[44:03] formula funding that goes to
[44:06] metropolitan planning organizations like
[44:07] WFRC. Cameron uh mentioned one of the
[44:10] programs, the transportation alternative
[44:12] program, which is a formula program that
[44:14] we receive funding for. And so the
[44:16] importance of ensuring that Congress
[44:19] reauthorizes
[44:20] um these core programs that give us the
[44:23] funding that we need to do the work that
[44:25] we do. And so, uh, we've been engaging
[44:27] with our congressional delegation quite
[44:29] a bit as well. Um, and they have been
[44:31] helpful, responsive. Senator Curtis,
[44:34] especially him and his team have been
[44:35] really great. So again, we just want to
[44:38] uh thank Bike Utah and some of our other
[44:40] partners for also, you know, this this
[44:43] collaborative teamwork that we're doing
[44:44] to ensure that not only Utah, but NPOS's
[44:48] that local governments um nationwide um
[44:52] come out in a in a positive place with
[44:54] this next uh transportation bill. So
[44:56] thanks for sharing, Cameron. Yeah,
[44:58] Commissioner.
[45:01] >> Um so have we contacted like Congressman
[45:05] Malloy
[45:07] uh cuz she's a super hard worker and uh
[45:10] I think isn't she on the infrastructure
[45:13] committee
[45:15] appropriations. So that would be a good
[45:18] person to talk to and to work with and
[45:20] plus you why have we not talked with
[45:23] Senator Lee? We know
[45:25] >> Yeah, good question. So we we've had uh
[45:27] at least at WFRC we've had outreach to
[45:30] all of our members of the congressional
[45:32] delegation. So each year we at least go
[45:34] out once at least once a year to go meet
[45:36] with them all. And um this last time in
[45:39] February and we went uh surface
[45:41] transportation reauthorization was a
[45:43] topic of discussion for all of the
[45:45] members of our delegation. So we did
[45:47] meet with Senator Lee. Uh we also met
[45:49] with Representative Mallaloy um and the rest of the Utah delegation
[45:54] sharing the importance of these
[45:55] programs. So,
[46:03] » and thank you. Thank you very much. All
[46:06] right. Next, M Miranda's up with a
[46:09] legislative update
[46:13] recap.
[46:15] Bad news session. No, I don't know.
[46:20] Right. Thank you, Mayor. Appreciate it.
[46:24] Um,
[46:26] let me just pop this up for everybody.
[46:29] Well, so session has been over for a
[46:31] little over a month now. Um, I think
[46:35] this week is my last of like these
[46:37] presentations. It feels like for a
[46:39] pretty consistent amount of weeks. We're
[46:41] still talking about what happened during
[46:42] the legislative session. Um, which is
[46:45] important. Um, but anyways, I I want to
[46:49] highlight a few a few different things.
[46:51] obviously focus towards active
[46:53] transportation for this group
[46:55] specifically. Um but first want to just
[46:57] highlight some of the resources that
[46:59] WFRC has if you weren't aware of them.
[47:01] Um on our government affairs um web page
[47:05] we have our bill tracker, our
[47:07] appropriations tracker, um policy briefs
[47:10] on certain bills that passed this
[47:12] legislative session. So uh if you're
[47:14] curious, highly suggest heading there
[47:16] for more information, more detailed
[47:18] information. Um, if you do have
[47:21] questions, I'll also note and maybe I'll
[47:23] have Commissioner Fackerel hold it up.
[47:25] Commissioner, do you see that postcard
[47:26] you have right next to you if you want
[47:28] to hold that up to the group? We have um
[47:31] these legislative summary postcards. I
[47:33] have some by the door if folks want to
[47:34] snag one on the way out. Um, that we've
[47:38] put together at WFRC to really highlight
[47:40] what we felt were some of the top
[47:42] transportation focused pieces of
[47:44] legislation and appropriations that
[47:46] passed this legislative session. I think
[47:48] that document right there is the most
[47:50] succinct um quick reference for some of
[47:53] those some of those big uh outcomes from
[47:56] the session. So feel free to grab one of
[47:57] those. I think folks will some of our
[47:59] someone from our team will hopefully
[48:00] drop that in the chat as well if we get
[48:02] the chance. Um
[48:05] so let's quickly walk through what
[48:08] happened during the legislative session.
[48:09] I want to highlight two key themes that
[48:12] WFRC took away from the session. Um it
[48:18] you know each session has its own
[48:20] character has its own you know feeling
[48:23] to it and these were two that we felt
[48:25] was one that some funds were shifted
[48:28] from existing transportation
[48:31] um resources or needs and put towards
[48:34] housing related infrastructure needs. So
[48:37] there was kind of a shift um where you
[48:39] know there were probably five years or
[48:41] so where we saw really significant
[48:44] one-time and ongoing investment into the
[48:46] transportation system upwards of
[48:48] billions of dollars each year for
[48:51] transportation. Um the you know funding
[48:54] wasn't quite available for that these as
[48:57] we're seeing moving forward these these
[48:59] years and the focus is kind of shifting
[49:01] towards other needs like housing. Um on
[49:04] top of that we also uh one of the key
[49:07] themes with some new tools were released
[49:09] to address infrastructure demands. Um
[49:12] for example the transportation utility
[49:15] fee that local governments can impose to
[49:18] fund their transportation needs. Um
[49:20] certain grant uh and loan programs for
[49:24] uh transportation and other housing
[49:27] related infrastructure. So those are
[49:29] some of the key themes from from the
[49:31] session that we felt uh were important
[49:33] to note. Um I'm going to talk about
[49:37] three I think three different bills that
[49:39] had some active transportation related
[49:43] um aspects to them. Uh some years we see
[49:46] more AT bills than other years. This
[49:49] year it was maybe a little bit more
[49:51] mild. Um but there there were some
[49:53] significant ones. So um in this previous
[49:56] discussion we had a lot of conversation
[49:58] about some of the the key themes. One of
[50:01] those was uh ebike safety. Um, so HB 381
[50:07] e-mobility device amendments by
[50:09] Representative Cutler addressed or uh
[50:12] attempted to start addressing some of
[50:14] those concerns regarding ebike safety,
[50:17] including uh making technical changes to
[50:20] reduce confusion between ebikes and
[50:22] electric motorcycles, establishing
[50:25] safety requirements for um for young
[50:28] ebike users, uh establishing helmet
[50:32] requirements. Um there there's a lot
[50:34] with within this bill. Um WFRC wasn't
[50:38] like in the weeds of um of working out
[50:41] the the ins and outs of this bill. So if
[50:44] you know Travis at UD do wants to add
[50:46] anything more about about this and what UD do is going to do moving forward
[50:51] or you I don't know if you were involved
[50:53] in those conversations as well, but feel
[50:55] free to weigh in if you feel like you
[50:56] want to add any color to to this bill or how it maybe came to be or came to
[51:01] pass.
[51:03] No. Okay.
[51:07] Um, second bill worth worth noting uh is
[51:11] Senate Bill 242. This we regarded as the
[51:15] transportation omnibus, meaning that
[51:18] there this bill had I don't know 20 to
[51:22] 30 different transportation related
[51:26] provisions included in this bill and
[51:28] there were a handful of active
[51:29] transportation related provisions as
[51:31] well. So, I have those highlighted here.
[51:33] The bill did a lot more than just what I have noted. So, notably um and uh
[51:40] and and we've talked about this um
[51:42] before in the past and then we had some
[51:44] public comment related to this as well.
[51:45] This uh amends provisions related to
[51:48] highway reduction strategies in Salt
[51:50] Lake City. This was a follow-up bill, a
[51:54] follow-up provision in the bill to SP
[51:57] 195 from last legislative session. Um
[52:00] the bill made quite a few changes um in
[52:04] into what was what is being required of
[52:07] Salt Lake City regarding highway
[52:08] reduction strategies including um
[52:11] expanding the their study area um
[52:15] requiring that they codified their
[52:16] tiered road structure. So tiered roads
[52:20] uh one through four tiers uh and
[52:22] limiting certain uh highway reduction
[52:25] strategies again um lane narrowing on
[52:28] street parking some of those things um
[52:32] uh lane widths on uh each of these
[52:35] tiered roads. Um and and uh those tiers,
[52:40] like a tier one road, which is more of a
[52:42] regionally significant road, has
[52:44] different requirements than a uh local
[52:48] um a a smaller non-regionally
[52:50] significant road. Um I I certainly don't
[52:54] want to like whitewash, you know, the
[52:58] challenges associated with this or how
[53:00] challenging this is for Salt Lake City.
[53:02] Obviously, this has been um I know a lot
[53:05] of members, especially in the active
[53:07] transportation community, have shared
[53:09] their concerns with this bill. Um and we
[53:12] of course don't want to see um you know,
[53:15] these types of provisions who where it's
[53:18] just specific to Salt Lake City
[53:19] obviously bleed out into other
[53:21] communities. Um uh but I will say one positive thing uh is that UDOT and
[53:28] UTA have both expressed sorry UD do and
[53:32] Salt Lake City have both expressed
[53:35] optimism and of course willingness in
[53:37] working together to address what is
[53:40] being required of them in this bill. And
[53:43] um so I'll just I'll just share that
[53:46] optimism in that both of those partners
[53:49] with you know obviously great
[53:50] transportation teams that we work with
[53:52] regularly um are are willing to uh find
[53:56] the be best road best path forward in
[54:00] addressing these requirements. So that's
[54:02] maybe just one thing I wanted to note
[54:03] there. A sorry, excuse me. A few other
[54:06] things that the bill did is that it
[54:08] defies it defines in code um the Utah
[54:13] trail network. This is important for
[54:16] various reasons important for future
[54:19] changes in code related to active
[54:21] transportation. Um, but Utah Trail
[54:24] Network is now established in state
[54:26] code. And notably, this bill uh allows
[54:30] the active transportation investment
[54:32] funds um which I mentioned before, $45
[54:35] million ongoing for active
[54:37] transportation for the Utah Trail
[54:39] Network um can be used for corridor
[54:42] preservation um where that that use
[54:45] wasn't explicitly stated before. So,
[54:48] positive there. Um that was one of the
[54:50] items that Hugh had mentioned. And then
[54:52] lastly, uh on the the same vein of
[54:55] quarter preservation, HB481, this is the
[54:58] transportation minibus, which had
[55:00] slightly less provisions um than the uh
[55:04] Senate Bill 242. But this would allow
[55:07] for local quarter preservation funds,
[55:10] meaning um that counties have imposed uh
[55:13] to be used for regionally significant
[55:15] active transportation projects
[55:18] identified in uh regional transportation
[55:20] plans. for first and secondass counties.
[55:23] So again, more flexibility in how these
[55:26] funding resources uh local governments
[55:29] have available. Um more flexibility in
[55:32] how they can be used um by local
[55:35] governments. So again, a really positive
[55:37] outcome there.
[55:39] Um just lastly I'll just again in theme
[55:42] in in terms of higher broader themes
[55:45] other things that happened during the
[55:46] session regarding uh appropriations
[55:49] there was new addition a a a new
[55:52] additional funding mechanism for transit
[55:55] passed for the transit transportation
[55:57] investment fund um it's modest growth um
[56:01] over time that would take a portion of
[56:03] state sales tax to go to the TTIF um but
[56:06] still a a great step in the right ction.
[56:09] I had mentioned uh regional
[56:11] infrastructure
[56:12] uh for unlocking housing development. So
[56:15] there's several grant and loan funds now
[56:18] available for local governments. Um
[56:21] technical assistance that uh WFRC, UD do
[56:26] and the other AOGs provide to our some
[56:28] of our more smaller more rural
[56:31] communities. Um that funding was
[56:34] restored because it was previously cut.
[56:36] And so we're happy that the legislature
[56:38] continues to see the value um in
[56:41] providing technical assistance to
[56:43] communities that don't have the
[56:44] technical expertise on staff um and
[56:47] allow and relying on other partners uh
[56:50] like the AOGs to do that. And then
[56:52] lastly, I kind of mentioned some of the
[56:54] shifting of um transportation
[56:58] uh funds. U DOT took some some pretty
[57:01] significant hits to their budget this
[57:04] year. um uh a gas tax reduction uh
[57:09] caused um some reduction in uh
[57:12] transportation revenues that now they'll
[57:14] have to um unfortunately delay some
[57:17] projects. There were other impacts to
[57:19] some of their funds. um not UD do of
[57:23] course is taking this in stride
[57:24] adjusting um their programs as needed
[57:27] but just notable compared to pre years
[57:30] past where there was a lot of new
[57:33] funding going into the transportation
[57:35] system. So um that's all I have to share
[57:38] from this session. Of course would
[57:41] like anyone else to weigh in. Um I know
[57:43] a lot of us here track things during the
[57:45] session and so if anyone has any
[57:47] thoughts feel free um to to share
[57:56] Miranda I'll share something from our
[57:58] partners down in MAG and
[58:01] uh there was a a bill getting run
[58:04] regarding
[58:07] uh canals basically but like water water
[58:10] conveyances and when the holder of that
[58:13] conveyance or that easement is
[58:15] abandoning it. Uh the idea was that
[58:18] they'd have to put that out and allow
[58:20] cities to possibly take over that
[58:22] conveyance method. And the idea that
[58:25] maybe it could be converted into a
[58:28] trail. So it's like a a tie to try and
[58:31] get more trails as canals perhaps get
[58:33] abandoned.
[58:34] >> Is that ringing? I know it didn't pass
[58:36] or go anywhere, but does that ring a
[58:38] bell? And
[58:38] >> you know, unfortunately, it's not
[58:40] ringing a bell. It's not like a
[58:40] transportation one. So, yeah.
[58:42] >> Well, well, I guess the question is was
[58:44] that I know we've seen some of those um
[58:48] some of those bills in the past
[58:50] regarding um water conveyances and
[58:53] canals specifically in the past. I know
[58:56] that that's those haven't passed because
[58:58] of some of the challenges working with
[58:59] the canal district districts. Is that
[59:03] right? Sure. Um, I wasn't aware of that
[59:06] this session, Hugh, but if I did miss
[59:09] that, then I should definitely kind of
[59:11] get up to speed on that.
[59:12] >> Sorry, I'm not trying to call you out by
[59:14] any means. This is I think it was kind
[59:16] of couched in a weird one that maybe W4C
[59:18] wasn't watching because it didn't have
[59:20] anything to say transportation anywhere,
[59:22] but I don't know if anybody else around
[59:23] the table or online knows anything more
[59:26] about it, but okay. Again, this is Yeah,
[59:29] Mag said, "Hey, what about this thing?"
[59:31] So, I just wanted to bring it up. Well,
[59:33] Hugh, it's pretty hard to figure out all
[59:35] the bills because there were over a
[59:36] thousand proposed I think in our
[59:39] >> I think that was maybe their I think it
[59:41] was perhaps the highest number of bills
[59:44] introduced um before which yeah it's
[59:48] hard it's hard to keep on top of all of
[59:50] them as you know mayor
[59:51] >> especially good that it's a small
[59:53] government state so we want to keep that
[59:55] government small so we do the thousand
[59:57] mark in bills anyway Miranda I did want
[1:00:00] to say just before you leave I really
[1:00:02] want to thank you because you did an
[1:00:03] excellent job this year at that session.
[1:00:06] Um, you have a nice calm demeanor. Um,
[1:00:08] and you and it was hectic on all fronts
[1:00:12] because and a lot of this transportation
[1:00:14] stuff came to fruition at the last like
[1:00:17] it often does, but some of this big
[1:00:19] stuff got messed with and and came apart
[1:00:21] or came together depending on your point
[1:00:23] of view at the last minute. And so you
[1:00:25] did a really good job. I I just want to
[1:00:27] thank you personally. I observed you.
[1:00:29] were hard. We were well served by
[1:00:32] your work there and you're you're doing
[1:00:33] a good job. I also appreciate this. I
[1:00:36] think this is really cool. If you tried
[1:00:38] to do this for all the bills, it'd be
[1:00:39] about Bible size. So, you did a great
[1:00:41] job with this. So, again, thanks. We're
[1:00:43] lucky to have Morirana. Good work.
[1:00:44] >> Awesome. Thank you, mayor.
[1:00:46] >> Next item up is um Hugh is going to talk
[1:00:50] to us about the transportation
[1:00:52] improvement program funding for biking
[1:00:54] and walking projects.
[1:01:02] Thanks, mayor. One of the fun things
[1:01:03] about being the staff lead is I get to
[1:01:05] speak to you all um more than other
[1:01:07] folks, which I appreciate.
[1:01:11] So every year um WFRC goes through
[1:01:17] a new transportation improvement program
[1:01:20] to recommend projects that are applied
[1:01:22] for uh from local governments for
[1:01:25] funding. And Cameron mentioned this,
[1:01:28] these are part of these formula funds
[1:01:30] that are authorized by Congress to come
[1:01:33] down in our case to NPOS's. um in in
[1:01:37] some cases it's UD do that's handling
[1:01:38] these areas for Tilla and Morgan but the
[1:01:42] programs that WFRC handles directly um
[1:01:46] are these four that you see up on the
[1:01:48] screen this is a snapshot uh from our
[1:01:51] website uh so if you go to our website
[1:01:54] you can find these and you can learn
[1:01:55] more about the specific programs but
[1:01:57] it's the congestion mitigation and air
[1:01:59] quality
[1:02:00] the surface transportation program which
[1:02:03] is the largest uh pot of
[1:02:05] and sort of all-incclusive um for
[1:02:08] transportation projects the
[1:02:09] transportation alternatives program TA
[1:02:11] program that Cameron was talking about
[1:02:13] and then uh the relatively new carbon
[1:02:15] reduction program. So just raise of
[1:02:17] hands people familiar with these
[1:02:19] programs have heard the terms before.
[1:02:22] Yeah. Okay. Pretty well. So um as I
[1:02:27] mentioned every year we receive
[1:02:28] applications and then um those
[1:02:32] applications get uh recommended for
[1:02:34] funding and just want to go over those
[1:02:38] funds uh the recommendations that were
[1:02:40] made recently by the transportation
[1:02:44] coordinating committee technical
[1:02:46] advisory committee or transcom tax.
[1:02:50] Before we do that
[1:02:53] you still have your phone out. It's the
[1:02:54] same slido thing that you don't have to
[1:02:56] change it on. But um over the last 10
[1:03:00] years, just a little quick quiz, how
[1:03:03] much money has been programmed to
[1:03:05] specific active transportation projects
[1:03:07] in the WFRC urban area through the TIP?
[1:03:12] And I say specific because there's a lot
[1:03:15] of money that gets spent on sidewalks
[1:03:17] and bike lanes as part of larger
[1:03:19] transportation projects. But this is a
[1:03:21] question about specific transportation
[1:03:24] projects that aren't part of a larger
[1:03:26] one.
[1:03:28] >> You is that first one. Um the 43.5 is
[1:03:34] that million or is that
[1:03:35] >> I'm sorry. A million. Yes. I missed the
[1:03:37] M. Just $43.
[1:03:40] Well, you could choose that if you want
[1:03:42] real. Yeah. Yeah,
[1:03:46] that's right. We we crowdfunded that
[1:03:48] with pennies from people's piggy banks.
[1:03:51] So yeah, just so you know, um I'll show
[1:03:56] the the answer right now, but looks like
[1:03:59] majority of people are thinking 73 plus
[1:04:02] million dollars. And here's a breakdown
[1:04:05] of um the last 10 years, not including
[1:04:08] the current year of where that money has
[1:04:11] been spent. So tap in blue and the
[1:04:14] transportation alternatives congestion
[1:04:16] mitigation air quality or CMAC in red
[1:04:18] and surface transportation program in
[1:04:20] that uh yellowish orange throughout the
[1:04:23] years.
[1:04:25] You can see how it's ebbed and flowed,
[1:04:26] but we've had a really um number of
[1:04:29] healthy years as well. And carbon
[1:04:32] reduction program again is a relatively
[1:04:34] newer program, so you don't see that
[1:04:35] green show up until later because it
[1:04:37] wasn't available in those previous
[1:04:38] years. All told, there's been 73 plus
[1:04:42] million dollars programmed from these
[1:04:44] program u these programs. Thank you
[1:04:46] workclap. That's great. So just to give
[1:04:49] you an idea of how much money is being
[1:04:52] spent through these programs again on
[1:04:53] specific um active transportation
[1:04:55] projects.
[1:04:57] Um
[1:04:59] we have two urbanized areas in the WFRC
[1:05:02] area. One is the Ogden Leighton urban
[1:05:03] area. I'll go over those projects first
[1:05:06] just to give you an idea again of how
[1:05:08] many projects are
[1:05:12] there we go were requested from each
[1:05:14] program. How much money was
[1:05:16] approximately available for each
[1:05:17] program. So in that surface
[1:05:19] transportation program
[1:05:22] 17 projects were applied for over $64
[1:05:25] million requested um and about not quite
[1:05:29] $12 million to actually program CMAC.
[1:05:32] Um, not quite. It's a little over $24
[1:05:34] million requested, just over three to
[1:05:36] program. And the TAP, uh, 1.3
[1:05:41] requested and about 1.1 million
[1:05:44] available. And carbon reduction, um,
[1:05:47] over $16 million requested and just over
[1:05:50] $1.3 million available. So, a lot of ask
[1:05:54] um, compared to the needs or the
[1:05:56] resources available. A lot of needs
[1:05:57] compared to the resources available.
[1:05:59] >> I'm just going to go over specific
[1:06:00] biking and walking projects. Not
[1:06:02] everything that was applied for.
[1:06:03] >> May I interrupt you,
[1:06:04] >> please?
[1:06:04] >> So that does not include any of the UTN.
[1:06:08] >> Correct.
[1:06:09] Does not include UTN projects.
[1:06:14] Clickity click. Uh so in North Salt
[1:06:16] Lake, they applied for a sidewalk. Part
[1:06:18] of the reason is to let you know what
[1:06:20] was being recommended by the tax. Part
[1:06:22] of the reason is to expose you to the
[1:06:23] type of projects um that are getting
[1:06:25] recommended to think about for your
[1:06:27] communities. What might you apply for?
[1:06:30] And so this example in North Salt Lake
[1:06:31] City is in Cutler Drive. It's a sidewalk
[1:06:33] improvement
[1:06:34] and um to fill in gaps on one side of
[1:06:37] the street. Uh it has a new UTA bus
[1:06:40] route there. People getting off in the
[1:06:43] um industrial and work district, but
[1:06:45] also leads to several schools that are
[1:06:47] along this route. They requested um
[1:06:50] $790,000
[1:06:52] and u recommended from the tax for
[1:06:55] $790,000 plus dollars. If you have a
[1:06:58] specific question about these, let me
[1:07:00] know. But I'm going to go through them
[1:07:01] because there's there's quite a few. In
[1:07:03] Ogden, they requested an extension of um
[1:07:06] SR39 shared use path is on the north
[1:07:08] side of the road as you head up into
[1:07:10] Ogden Canyon, not Ogden Canyon itself.
[1:07:13] This is phase two of that project. Uh
[1:07:16] multi-use path and requested $488,000
[1:07:19] plus dollars and were recommended at
[1:07:21] that amount of money. And I'll talk
[1:07:23] about next steps um here in just a
[1:07:25] minute. post post recommendation.
[1:07:29] Um, Green Bike in Ogden requested um
[1:07:31] some funds to purchase a van that will
[1:07:34] pick up bikes and distribute them. As
[1:07:36] you can imagine, uh during commute
[1:07:38] times, especially there'll be a dock,
[1:07:40] let's say at the Front Runner station,
[1:07:42] um where there's a bunch of bikes there
[1:07:43] that people grab and then head to their
[1:07:45] destinations and then all of a sudden
[1:07:46] there's no bikes there anymore and there
[1:07:48] might be um bikes full somewhere else.
[1:07:50] And so this van helps to redistribute
[1:07:52] their system. Right now, I think there
[1:07:55] are redistributing bikes on an actual
[1:07:58] cargo bike and carrying things around so
[1:08:00] they could be a little bit more
[1:08:01] efficient. So, they were recommended for
[1:08:04] funding at just over $92,000.
[1:08:08] Uh, in Clearfield, they have an
[1:08:10] ambitious project to build a bridge um
[1:08:13] over SR 193. There is a high school
[1:08:16] here, junior high, and an elementary
[1:08:19] school. A lot of kids crossing the
[1:08:20] roadway. um really expensive project and
[1:08:23] we mentioned seed money earlier as we
[1:08:26] were talking about uh some things to
[1:08:28] consider and this is very much a seed
[1:08:30] type project of $2 million being
[1:08:33] recommended even though the project cost
[1:08:35] is over 20 million.
[1:08:38] So that was all of the Ogden Leighton
[1:08:40] urban area. Now we'll jump into Salt
[1:08:41] Lake. You can see in the SDP over 121
[1:08:45] million requested um not quite 23
[1:08:48] million to program CMAC over 40 million
[1:08:51] requested just over six to program in
[1:08:54] TAP $ 33 million requested 2.1 to
[1:08:58] program carbon reduction 32 million
[1:09:01] requested uh 2 million uh 2.6 6 million
[1:09:04] to program. So, same story, a lot of
[1:09:07] need um compared to the resources
[1:09:09] available. But projects that were
[1:09:12] recommended in Midvale, this is um
[1:09:14] buffered bike lanes on Bingham Junction
[1:09:17] Boulevard, including um pedestrian
[1:09:19] crossing this location in a busy in uh
[1:09:22] commercial area. Requested just over
[1:09:24] 400,000 and were recommended for
[1:09:27] $400,000.
[1:09:29] South Jordan Shields Lane multi-use
[1:09:32] path. This is phase two of this project.
[1:09:34] Um uh was one of the behavs
[1:09:39] uh recognized corridors. Um reconstructs
[1:09:43] or reconfigures the road to add a
[1:09:44] multi-use path on one side uh 12 to 14
[1:09:48] ft and
[1:09:51] um between two programs. This was
[1:09:53] recommended for $4 million out of the
[1:09:55] 5.2 million requested.
[1:09:58] Uh West Jordan and Midvail. This is a
[1:10:00] Jordan River bridge crossing. So, a
[1:10:03] crossing of the Jordan River uh between
[1:10:04] the two cities. It literally lands in
[1:10:06] both cities. There's a request to tie in
[1:10:09] existing neighborhoods to existing
[1:10:10] parks. Um and 1.2 requested. A million
[1:10:15] dollars is being recommended there
[1:10:18] in South Salt Lake City. This is part of
[1:10:21] the what we call the gap on the Parley
[1:10:23] Trail um along 300 West. ties to the
[1:10:27] existing 300 well close to the 300 west
[1:10:30] cycle track in Salt Lake City. Um this
[1:10:34] is uh over $1 million request. Um the
[1:10:38] numbers here are a little skewed because
[1:10:39] we did some refining and it's going to
[1:10:41] be more expensive than what was
[1:10:43] originally the original project cost. So
[1:10:46] they got a little bit more money based
[1:10:47] on that uh new cost evaluation. So just
[1:10:50] over $1.1 million being recommended
[1:10:53] in Bluffdale. Um if anybody's trying to
[1:10:56] go down in the Bluffdale area, 146
[1:10:58] South, there's a big project going on
[1:11:00] down there. Um but just to the west of
[1:11:03] this be some improvements to 146 South
[1:11:06] um after that tunnel is all fixed. And
[1:11:09] for the bike and pet improvements, this
[1:11:11] is uh protected bicycle lanes
[1:11:16] along there requesting 1.5 million and
[1:11:19] got uh recommended for 1.5 million.
[1:11:23] uh South Salt Lake again Gregsson
[1:11:25] neighborhood byway neighborhood byways
[1:11:27] were mentioned earlier in the meeting uh
[1:11:30] connecting to track stations um
[1:11:32] eventually into Salt Lake City's
[1:11:34] neighborhood byway system and Fifth Park
[1:11:36] requested 962,000 received 633 in
[1:11:41] recommendations.
[1:11:43] uh Salt Lake City and Green Bike uh
[1:11:46] looking to expand their station areas um
[1:11:49] more coverage, more bikes, uh looking to
[1:11:52] do ebikes as well. And they requested
[1:11:56] over 700,000 and were recommended for
[1:11:58] $400,000.
[1:12:00] And I believe the last project um is in
[1:12:03] Sandy is if you're familiar with the
[1:12:05] Sandy Amphitheater uh there on off SR
[1:12:09] 209. Originally, they were looking at
[1:12:12] doing um a a hawk crossing of SR 209
[1:12:16] because they have some overflow parking
[1:12:18] to the south side that they've
[1:12:19] contracted with uh the Inter Mountain
[1:12:21] Hospital system there. Um but upon
[1:12:25] conversations with UDAT and others, it
[1:12:27] was deemed that the Hawk would actually
[1:12:28] not be um great there, but there's a lot
[1:12:31] of people moving back and forth across
[1:12:32] the venue and so a tunnel is probably
[1:12:34] more appropriate. So the cost here is
[1:12:37] for their original concept of the hawk,
[1:12:39] but if you do the tunnel, it's more like
[1:12:40] a $5 million project. And after those
[1:12:44] conversations were had is recommended
[1:12:45] that 3.5 million be put towards a tunnel
[1:12:49] uh to the Sandy Amphitheater.
[1:12:52] Oh, last one. Um
[1:12:55] 128 South in Riverton, again part of BI
[1:12:58] Bikeways network, um they're requesting
[1:13:01] some funds to install the protected
[1:13:04] bicycle lane, two-way bicycle lanes on
[1:13:06] this stretch of 128 South uh between
[1:13:09] their parks. And this gets you also to
[1:13:11] the Jordan a connection to the Jordan
[1:13:13] River, which is pretty great. And they
[1:13:15] requested 976,000 were recommended for
[1:13:18] that amount. So that was a lot. Um but
[1:13:21] again what's being recommended in those
[1:13:24] programs now is the breakdown of TAP
[1:13:27] CAMAC STP and CRP across um the two
[1:13:31] urban areas in WFRC and it is over $15
[1:13:35] million that's been recommended. So um
[1:13:37] quite a shot in the arm um to add on to
[1:13:40] that 73 million plus assuming this all
[1:13:42] moves forward. uh next steps for these
[1:13:44] projects, they'll be considered by the
[1:13:46] transportation coordinating committee.
[1:13:48] Um and then the WC council will release
[1:13:52] the transportation improvement program
[1:13:53] for public comment. There'll be a 30-day
[1:13:55] public comment period in the summer and
[1:13:57] then it'll come back and be approved as
[1:13:59] part of the state transportation
[1:14:01] improvement program. So, still some
[1:14:02] steps to be done, but those are their
[1:14:04] current recommendations.
[1:14:07] Any questions? Sorry, that was a lot.
[1:14:11] Anybody excited about anything that they
[1:14:14] saw?
[1:14:14] >> This is Joy. I'll comment here. Um, you
[1:14:18] know, as you look through all these
[1:14:19] projects, I gotta tell you, it's it's
[1:14:21] tough on the cities when you have a, you
[1:14:23] know, a $17 million
[1:14:26] uh spend. And yet, you know, every
[1:14:28] little bit, even this 2 million for
[1:14:30] Clearfield City, I'm sure, would stand
[1:14:32] out because we are still in the process
[1:14:35] of funding our pedestrian bridge for our
[1:14:37] active transportation trail connection.
[1:14:39] So, I guess I'm what I'm saying is you need to start now regardless of what
[1:14:47] your pro how big your project is because
[1:14:49] it takes a while to fund them.
[1:14:53] >> Thank you, Mayor.
[1:14:55] Mr. Taco,
[1:14:57] >> I have couple of big questions for
[1:14:59] everybody in here
[1:15:03] and I hope it doesn't offend somebody
[1:15:06] and it may. Um, as your cities and area
[1:15:13] are planning
[1:15:16] developments,
[1:15:19] how come there's not as much thought
[1:15:22] going into future visions
[1:15:25] of what it should be along with active
[1:15:28] transportation?
[1:15:30] And I have that big question for
[1:15:31] everybody to ask yourselves that as
[1:15:34] you're doing your planning. And I know
[1:15:37] how hard it is to get some people to go
[1:15:39] from traditional to futuristic, but we
[1:15:44] might want to be continuing to look at
[1:15:47] planning.
[1:15:49] I mean, we don't know. I mean, we know
[1:15:51] how many kids we've had. We know how
[1:15:54] many grandkids we're going to have
[1:15:56] approximately. I mean, you know,
[1:15:57] generally it's going to continue to
[1:15:59] grow, but why are we not thinking
[1:16:03] more to the future when we're doing
[1:16:05] these planning so we don't have to put
[1:16:07] so much into it now to take care of all
[1:16:11] these problems we now have.
[1:16:14] >> In other words, look at the planning for
[1:16:17] the long range instead of just looking
[1:16:19] at currently.
[1:16:21] >> And that's probably a great segue to our
[1:16:23] next item if I'm not mistaken. So,
[1:16:26] comment. Thank you.
[1:16:29] Mayor Walker.
[1:16:32] >> All right, Byron, go ahead. You're next.
[1:16:36] >> Alrighty. Good morning, everyone.
[1:16:40] Uh, I am Byron Head. I'm a community
[1:16:44] planner in our community and economic
[1:16:46] development group. here to talk to you
[1:16:47] today about our most recent round of
[1:16:51] transportation line use connection
[1:16:53] program awards uh specifically those
[1:16:55] that relate to active transportation. So
[1:16:58] you're all likely familiar with our TLC
[1:17:00] program. It's kind of become our our
[1:17:02] staple uh uh technical assistance
[1:17:06] program. Um we do this in conjunction in
[1:17:10] partnership with UD do UTA and the
[1:17:12] governor's office of planning and budget
[1:17:14] to support cities as they um work to
[1:17:16] implement the Wasatch Choice vision uh
[1:17:18] and create their centers um enhance
[1:17:21] access to opportunities, provide people
[1:17:23] with um real travel options and maximize
[1:17:26] the value of public uh investments.
[1:17:30] Um the kind of range of projects that we
[1:17:32] can do through the TLC program um range
[1:17:36] from very high level 30,000 foot bar
[1:17:39] looking um into the future kind of
[1:17:42] general plans and transportation master
[1:17:45] plans and stuff like that uh all the way
[1:17:47] to implementation strategies and
[1:17:49] ordinances and things that are much more
[1:17:51] uh focused on the here and now and
[1:17:54] smaller geographic area.
[1:17:57] Um so the program uh as a whole awarded
[1:18:00] 15 new projects this year um with a
[1:18:03] total of almost $1.8 million in funds.
[1:18:07] Um the active transportation directly
[1:18:10] related projects. uh we have five of
[1:18:13] those with about $640,000 in project
[1:18:16] funds and that doesn't include several
[1:18:18] general plans that we're also going to
[1:18:20] be doing that will certainly have you
[1:18:22] know a a link to active transportation
[1:18:24] but maybe not as a a full focus. Um so
[1:18:28] yeah, active transportation is alive and
[1:18:30] well in the communities uh along the
[1:18:33] Wasatch Front and uh our our AOG area as
[1:18:36] well.
[1:18:37] Um here's the list of the five projects
[1:18:39] we'll be we'll be undertaking. Uh we
[1:18:42] have one in Davis County, two in Salt
[1:18:44] Lake County, and two in Weber County.
[1:18:48] And then I'll just briefly go through
[1:18:50] each one of these um for you. Um Davis
[1:18:53] County Regional Trails Wayfinding
[1:18:55] Signage Plan. Um, this is going to be a
[1:18:58] project to look at unifying the signage
[1:19:01] and information and and striping and all
[1:19:04] that stuff for three regional trails
[1:19:07] within the county. Those being the DNRG
[1:19:09] trail, the Legacy Trail, and the West
[1:19:11] Davis Corridor Trail.
[1:19:14] Next up is Draper's uh transportation
[1:19:16] master plan. And don't worry, Mayor
[1:19:18] Walker, we will also take care of the
[1:19:20] MAG portion of Draper. We won't leave
[1:19:22] the south side of the mountains out
[1:19:24] here. Um, this will incorporate the new
[1:19:27] stationary plans that were recently
[1:19:29] adopted by the city as well as the river
[1:19:31] to range project that we're working on
[1:19:33] finishing up this year. Uh, identify
[1:19:36] priority connections and, uh, try to
[1:19:38] anticipate the impacts and needs related
[1:19:40] to the point development and also
[1:19:42] provide the city with an impact fee
[1:19:44] facilities plan. Um, next up is Mil
[1:19:48] Creek. We'll be doing a feasibility
[1:19:50] study to try and find a connection
[1:19:52] across 215 for the city. We have uh you
[1:19:55] know kind of the neighborhood behind the
[1:19:57] Canyon Rim Shopping Center and then the
[1:19:59] neighborhood on the west face of the
[1:20:01] like Granger Peak Foothills that there's
[1:20:03] really no good way to connect with those
[1:20:05] right now. And so this is a project to
[1:20:08] try and find a way to connect across
[1:20:09] this big barrier um made by the highway.
[1:20:15] And then up in Weber County, Ogden
[1:20:17] Valley, newly incorporated city. Very
[1:20:19] exciting. They're be be doing uh a lot
[1:20:22] of the work that needs to be done to
[1:20:24] create an initial vision for the city uh
[1:20:27] with their general plan and then also
[1:20:28] doing a transportation master plan and
[1:20:30] zoning roadmap. So they want to ensure
[1:20:32] that their their land uses are
[1:20:34] strategically located um to again enable
[1:20:38] those transportation choices because
[1:20:40] even if you have a great 10 mile linear
[1:20:43] facility connecting a neighborhood with
[1:20:45] a grocery store, not very many people
[1:20:47] are going to choose to to use that when
[1:20:49] it's going to take you an hour or two to
[1:20:51] get there. Um and then also this plan
[1:20:54] will uh or project will ensure that
[1:20:56] existing and planned recreational trail
[1:20:58] networks are connected via uh you know
[1:21:01] walking and biking modes so that people
[1:21:03] can get to and from their recreation
[1:21:05] without having to necessarily get in
[1:21:07] their car.
[1:21:09] And then uh our last project is up in
[1:21:11] West Haven. This is kind of a a follow
[1:21:13] on from a project awarded last year
[1:21:16] dealing with the city's land use element
[1:21:17] of their general plan. This will be
[1:21:19] their transportation element and
[1:21:20] transportation master plan for the city.
[1:21:23] Um they want to again identify some
[1:21:25] priority connections. They'll um include
[1:21:29] a an active transportation element to
[1:21:31] identify what new facilities they need
[1:21:33] as they continue to grow. And then the
[1:21:36] plan will also include some traffic
[1:21:37] calming recommendations to make it a
[1:21:39] more pleasant experience for anyone
[1:21:41] who's out on the roads that is not in a
[1:21:44] car.
[1:21:47] And that is all I have uh for you today.
[1:21:51] I will uh turn back over to Mayor Walker
[1:21:53] if there are any questions.
[1:21:57] » All right. Thank you, Byron. That that's
[1:21:59] great. Great use of the money, too. Um
[1:22:03] item nine is next and it's the preferred
[1:22:04] scenario outline map for review for our
[1:22:07] review and comment with WF sorry WFRC
[1:22:11] will give a brief overview of the public
[1:22:13] comment period for the 2027 through 2055
[1:22:17] regional transportation plan. Go ahead.
[1:22:23] » Okay. Um, so our uh preferred scenario
[1:22:28] map is now uh the draft preferred
[1:22:30] scenario map is now available for public
[1:22:32] comment. Um, and I can show you here on
[1:22:34] our website how to navigate to that. Um,
[1:22:36] the quickest way probably just to scroll
[1:22:37] down to our news. You'll see right here
[1:22:40] and you can click on that and then
[1:22:41] there's a link. Um, but if you also want
[1:22:43] to go and navigate, um, you can go to
[1:22:48] our regional transportation plan and
[1:22:51] then scroll down to the in progress 2027
[1:22:54] 2020 2055 RTP and then from there scroll
[1:22:58] down here to review the draft scenario.
[1:23:01] So once you get to that um, page will
[1:23:03] look like this. Um, you can select from
[1:23:05] roadways, transit or active
[1:23:07] transportation projects or all three at
[1:23:09] once. Um, and I'll just show you really
[1:23:12] quickly what the AT map looks like. Um,
[1:23:14] so you can zoom into
[1:23:16] um, a region. Um, you have your line
[1:23:20] projects here, your point projects where
[1:23:22] that's like a grade separated crossing
[1:23:23] or an grade crossing. Um, and then to
[1:23:27] add a comment, you'll come over here to
[1:23:29] the right hand side where it says click
[1:23:31] here to leave a comment. You'll drop a
[1:23:33] little pen here. Um, it could be on an
[1:23:35] existing project or maybe there's
[1:23:37] something else that you'd like us to to
[1:23:39] know or to point out. Um, enter your
[1:23:42] name, the city you're with. Um, and then
[1:23:45] your comment and then that'll be
[1:23:46] available for us to review. Um, you can
[1:23:49] also change the base map if it's a
[1:23:52] little bit unclear from this one. Um,
[1:23:54] you can come in here and look at, say,
[1:23:56] satellite imagery. Um, can maybe help
[1:23:58] contextualize a little better where you
[1:23:59] are on the map. Um, there's some other
[1:24:02] base maps available as well.
[1:24:04] um to maybe make the road facilities
[1:24:06] more clear. Um and then following this
[1:24:09] public comment period between now and
[1:24:11] our fall workshops, we will be um
[1:24:13] looking at how these projects should be
[1:24:15] phased. So we're looking at uh we're
[1:24:17] scoring them against each other based on
[1:24:18] different criteria like how well they
[1:24:20] connect into the regional network um how
[1:24:22] they improve safety a number of criteria
[1:24:24] scoring those projects against one
[1:24:26] another and then also looking at the
[1:24:27] available funding um and looking at how
[1:24:30] those should be phased into sort of
[1:24:31] decade long buckets. Um yeah any
[1:24:35] questions?
[1:24:40] » Thank you. you had a question. You go
[1:24:42] ahead.
[1:24:43] >> No. All right.
[1:24:44] >> Item number 10 is next and it's uh the
[1:24:47] Utah Transportation Commission is going
[1:24:49] to be programming Utah Trail Network
[1:24:51] projects over the coming months. For
[1:24:53] more information, just to give you a
[1:24:55] heads up, visit the UDOP prioritization
[1:24:58] website. Um and so that if you're
[1:25:01] interested in getting involved in that,
[1:25:02] look there. The next meeting is June the
[1:25:05] 9th, 2026.
[1:25:07] Um I'd be ready for a motion to adjourn.
[1:25:13] I move to I move to adjourn.
[1:25:15] >> Motion by planes or a second
[1:25:19] welcome to stay.
[1:25:23] >> I'll second the motion.
[1:25:25] >> This is Travis Mo.
[1:25:26] >> Thanks Travis. All in favor of
[1:25:27] adjourning say I. I. I.
[1:25:30] >> All right. It's non debatable.
[1:25:32] We'rejourn. Thank you.