[1. MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO APPROVE an Amendment to the Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2021 - 2025 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): FM# 439891-5 SR-869/SW 10th Street Connector TSM&O Smart Work Zone]

THE FIRST ACTION ITEM IS REGARDING A TIP AMENDMENT FOR THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CORRIDOR.

DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS ONE, JUST THE BACKGROUND AND WHAT IT IS?

>> WE DO HAVE STAFF IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ON IT.

THERE'S BACKUP IN THE MATERIAL, BUT WE DO NOT HAVE A PRESENTATION ON IT, BUT WE DO HAVE STAFF FOR QUESTIONS.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> DOES ANYBODY [NOISE] HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE.

MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE BROWARD MPO.

[LAUGHTER] THANK YOU.

PROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2021-2025 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WITH THE FM NUMBER FOR SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTOR TSM&O SMART WORK ZONE.

>> FROM WHO? WHO WAS THAT?

>> NATACHA YACINTHE.

>> OKAY.

>> IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION? [NOISE] C13.

>> WHO IS C13? NOT SURE. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND]

>> WHO IS C13, THAT CAN'T BE RIGHT. [NOISE] OKAY. ALL RIGHT, RICHARD.

>> OKAY.

>> [NOISE] GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE AGAIN, WE'LL PASS THIS ON CONSENT UNLESS SOMEONE HAS AN ISSUE, RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE, OTHERWISE, WE'LL PASS ON CONSENT.

[NOISE] SEEING NONE.

[2. MOTION TO RECOMMEND BROWARD MPO APPROVE the DRAFT Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Multimodal Priorities List (MMPL)]

WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ACTION ITEM, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES LIST FOR FY22.

WE SAW THIS PRESENTATION OF THE PRIORITIES LAST MEETING AND THEN THERE'S A FEW UPDATES THAT HAVE HAPPENED SINCE OUR LAST MEETING. MR. GIES.

>> DEAR MADAM CHAIR, PETER GIES, SYSTEMS PLANNING MANAGER WITH THE BROWARD MPO.

AS THE CHAIR JUST MENTIONED.

THIS IS A FOLLOW-UP TO THE PRESENTATION THAT WE GAVE LAST MONTH IN APRIL AT THE TAC MEETING.

THIS TIME AROUND, WE'RE ASKING FOR ADOPTION OF THE DRAFT MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST, AND THIS MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES LIST IS GOING TO BE USED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEXT TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR NEXT YEAR.

ESSENTIALLY, THE MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES LIST THAT YOU'RE ADOPTING TODAY IS GOING TO BE USED FOR THE UPCOMING YEAR CYCLE TO DEVELOP A NEXT TIP IN 2022.

THIS MARKS THE BEGINNING OF THAT CYCLE AND OUR LIST OF PRIORITY PROJECTS THAT WE TRANSMIT TO DOT TO BEGIN THAT PROJECT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

SINCE APRIL, WE'VE HAD A FEW CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO THE MULTIMODAL PARTIES LIST BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN MONEY THAT CAME FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

[00:15:03]

WE ALWAYS TRY TO PLAN FOR MONEY THAT FALLS FROM THE SKY, AND THIS ISN'T ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES, VERY MUCH LIKE THE ARRA FUNDS BACK IN '08.

THESE CARES FUNDS ARE PART OF CORONAVIRUS RELIEF.

IF YOU WOULD GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

YOU WILL SEE THAT THE CARES FUNDS THAT WE INCORPORATED INTO THE MULTIMODAL PARTIES, MADE UP OF TWO DIFFERENT APPROPRIATIONS.

ONE WAS A USDOT APPROPRIATION AND THE OTHER ONE WAS THE CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE AND RELIEF SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, THAT WERE PASSED AT THE END OF LAST YEAR, AND COMBINED, THESE TWO APPROPRIATIONS AMOUNTED TO ABOUT $12.3 MILLION THAT THE MPO COULD APPLY TO EXISTING TRANSPORTATION-RELATED PROJECTS, AND THESE FUNDS, THESE CARES FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR OBLIGATION UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2024.

THERE IS A SHORT WINDOW FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THESE FUNDS.

IF WE GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WE KIND OF DETAIL THE APPROACH THAT WE TOOK IN APPLYING THOSE $12.3 MILLION TO EXISTING PRIORITIES THAT ARE ON OUR LIST OF PARTY PROJECTS.

WE FIRST STARTED ON FOCUSING ON MPO PARTIES THAT WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2020 BY OUR MPO BOARD, AND THE 2045 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN.

WE HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT WE IDENTIFIED MPO PARTY PROJECTS THAT WE'RE READY TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY THE OBLIGATION DEADLINE OF SEPTEMBER 2024 TO ENSURE THAT WE COULD UTILIZE ALL OF THE CARES FUNDS IN AN EFFICIENT AND TIMELY MANNER.

AFTER SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2024 THOSE FUNDS GO AWAY, THEY TURN INTO A PUMPKIN AND UNFORTUNATELY WE'LL NOT BE ABLE TO APPLY THOSE FUNDS TO ANY PROJECTS.

WE NEED TO BE VERY STRATEGIC IN APPLYING THOSE FUNDS TO PROJECTS THAT WE KNOW ARE IN THE PIPELINE AND THAT WE KNOW ARE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED BY 2024.

WE WORKED WITH FDOT TO IDENTIFY SOME PROJECTS THAT WERE EXISTING IN THE PLAN THAT MAYBE HAD SOME OUTSTANDING FUNDING NEEDED.

WE ALSO LOOKED AT SOME FDOT DELIVERED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT WE COULD APPLY THE FUNDING TO.

NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS HOW THE CARES FUNDS ARE SHOWN IN THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST.

YOU WILL NOTICE THAT THERE THE CARES FUNDS ARE CALLED OUT IN BLUE TEXT WITH THE PHASE NUMBER OR THE PHASE ACRONYM DASH CARES.

THAT INDICATES THAT WE ARE INDICATING THAT WE SHOULD HAVE DOT APPLY CARES FUNDING TO THE SPECIFIC PROJECTS.

THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDING NEEDED WILL BE SHOWN ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT, AND THESE ARE THE AMOUNT OF CARES FUNDS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO APPLY TO THAT PROJECT.

THEN IN THE EXTRA DESCRIPTION UP ABOVE, WE PROVIDE FURTHER INSTRUCTION TO DOT WHERE WE WOULD LIKE THOSE FUNDS TO GO BY FISCAL YEAR.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THESE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT WE IDENTIFIED FOR THE CARES FUNDING, AND YOU WILL NOTICE UP AT THE TOP ARE OUR UNIFIED PLANNING WORK PROGRAM PROJECTS.

THERE WAS ABOUT $1.15 MILLION THAT WE APPLIED TO THE BROWARD MPO'S UPWP TO SUPPORT OUR PLANNING EFFORTS AND PLANNING STUDIES.

THOUGH, THAT $1.15 MILLION IS SPREAD ACROSS TWO FISCAL YEARS, 2023 AND 2024, BUT $650,000 AND FIVE $500,000 DOLLARS RESPECTIVELY.

THEN WE HAVE OUR LOCAL DELIVERY PLANNING STUDY, WHICH IS EFFECTIVELY OUR METRO TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION COLLABORATIVE.

THESE ARE SEED FUNDS TO HELP STAND UP THAT PROGRAM AND MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN BEGIN FUNDING THE MTECH PROGRAM TO DELIVER LAP PROJECTS FOR LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES.

THAT IS FOR $300,000 IN TOTAL, A $150,000 EACH FISCAL YEAR IN 2023 AND '24.

FOR THE NEXT TWO PROJECTS TO STATE ROAD SEVEN, TRANSIT CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS, WE ARE ASKING FOR A SLIGHT CHANGE FROM WHAT WAS IN THE AGENDA. AS A RESULT OF A MEETING THAT WE HAD WITH DOT THIS MORNING, WE LEARNED THAT BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS CAN ONLY BE SUPPORTED IN FISCAL YEAR 2024.

WE HAD ORIGINALLY THOUGHT THAT WE COULD DO THOSE IN 2023 AND BY OBLIGATING THE FUNDS AND 23 OF THOSE FUNDS HAVE TO SLIDE TO 24.

WE COULD MAKE THAT WORK, BUT DOT HAS ASKED US TO ACTUALLY INDICATE THAT THESE FUNDS WOULD GO OR WOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WOULD BE APPLIED IN FISCAL YEAR 2024.

I'M AT THE END OF THIS. I WILL ASK THE CHAIR IF WE COULD PASS THE ITEM WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THIS IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION HERE PER OUR CONVERSATION WITH DOT THIS MORNING THAT WE SLIDE THESE TWO PROJECTS OUT FROM 2023, 2024.

THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WAS APPLIED TO THESE PROJECTS, NOR DOES IT IMPACT THE OBLIGATION DEADLINE OF THESE PROJECTS.

WE WILL STILL SPEND THE REQUIRED FUNDS BY THE SEPTEMBER 30TH IN 2024 DEADLINE, AND YOU'LL SEE THIS IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY, ALL THE WAY TO THE RIGHT, TO FULFILL AND COMPLETELY FUND CONSTRUCTION OF BOTH OF THOSE PROJECTS. NEXT SLIDE.

THESE ARE THE REMAINING PROJECTS THAT MAKE UP THE $12.3 MILLION.

WE HAVE THE MOBILITY HUB AT CYPRESS CREEK.

THERE'S AN OUTSTANDING LANDSCAPING PHASE FOR $272,134 THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO APPLY THE CARES ACT FUNDING TO IN FISCAL YEAR '24.

[00:20:02]

THE NEXT TWO PROJECTS, A SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS OFF SYSTEM FOR 2023 AND 2024, $200,000 IN EACH YEAR IS THERE TO HELP US KICKSTART OUR OFF SYSTEM SAFETY PROGRAM WHERE WE WOULD LIKE TO PROGRAM PROJECTS FOR DESIGN IN THOSE RESPECTIVE YEARS AND START REALLY GETTING SAFETY PROJECTS MOVING.

WE HAVE A LIST OF LOCATIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH COUNTERMEASURES THAT WE WILL BE DEVELOPING OVER THE NEXT YEAR.

THIS CARES MONEY PROVIDES US A REALLY GREAT START TO ADVANCE THE DESIGN OF THOSE PROJECTS, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WE WOULD HAVE TO BE WAITING TO THE NEW FIFTH YEAR AND BECAUSE THIS CARES FUNDS CAN BE SPENT RIGHT AWAY AND THEY NEED TO BE OBLIGATED BY 2024.

WE SAID LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET OUR SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STOOD UP AND SPEND MONEY OFF SYSTEM SINCE ON SYSTEM IS LARGELY BEING TAKEN CARE OF BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

THEN THE FINAL PROJECT THAT WE HAVE ON HERE IS A DOT PROJECT, THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTOR TSM&O SMART WORK ZONE, YOU ACTUALLY JUST PASSED A TIP AMENDMENT FOR THAT PROJECT.

THIS IS TO FUND OR ACTUALLY SUPPLEMENT AND REPLACE FUNDING THAT ALREADY EXISTS IN THE WORK PROGRAM FOR THIS PROJECT FOR STATE FUNDS AND WE WOULD BE PUTTING IN CARES FUNDS IN ITS PLACE IN FISCAL YEAR 2023.

AGAIN, THAT IS FOR CONSTRUCTION.

THIS IS HOW WE ALLOCATED THE AVAILABLE $12.3 MILLION ACROSS THOSE PROJECTS.

I THINK THIS WAS A REALLY GOOD AND EFFICIENT USE OF THOSE DOLLARS, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THEY WILL BE SPENT BY THE OBLIGATION DEADLINE.

THESE PROJECTS SUPPORT ALL OF OUR MPO PRIORITIES, BOTH FROM AN MTP STANDPOINT, FROM A MMPL STANDPOINT, AND ALSO FROM A BOARD STRATEGIC PLAN STANDPOINT.

I THINK THIS IS FANTASTIC.

THIS IS GREAT THAT WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT ARE COMING FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NEXT SLIDE.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF CHANGES TO THE DRAFT MMPL SINCE THE APRIL 2021 TAC/CAC MEETINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS THAT WERE IN THE DRAFT MMPL, AND I'M GOING TO QUICKLY RUN THROUGH THOSE.

I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR ANY OF THE POINTS HERE SO IF WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU WILL NOTICE THAT FOR THE UPWP PROGRAM, WE ADDED THE $150,000 OF CARES FUNDS AS I MENTIONED IN THE LAST PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION.

WE GOT ADDITIONAL RESOLUTIONS OF SUPPORT FOR SOME CSLIP PROJECTS.

WE CHANGE THE RESOLUTION PROGRAM READY ICON FROM "NO" TO "YES".

THE PRIORITY NUMBERS ARE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN. THAT'S GREAT.

THOSE PROJECTS WILL GET TO MOVE FORWARD AND WILL BE CONSIDERED PROGRAM READY. NEXT SLIDE.

ALSO FOR THE COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN, WE ADDED CONSTRUCTION FUNDING VIA CARES FOR THE TWO STATE ROAD 7 PROJECTS THAT ARE SHOWN HERE, PRIORITY 2 AND 3.

THERE WAS A SMALL SCRIVENERS ERROR WITH RESPECT TO PRIORITY NUMBER 9, WHERE THE PROJECT WAS SHOWN THAT BOTH THE CITY OF COOPER CITY AND PEMBROKE PINES AND WE HAVE NOW CHANGED IT TO JUST COOPER CITY.

THE REMAINING PRIORITIES, 10, 11, AND 13, ALSO RECEIVED A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT IN BETWEEN THE APRIL TAC MEETING AND WHAT YOU SAW THERE AND THE FINAL ADOPTION HERE.

THOSE RESOLUTION ICONS CHANGED FROM A "NO" TO "YES".

THEY ARE NOW PROGRAM READY AND WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING IF FUNDING IS AVAILABLE WITHIN THE DOT WORK PROGRAM.

A COUPLE MORE SMALL ADJUSTMENTS TO REMAINING, COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN PRIORITIES.

WE HAD TO CORRECT A DESCRIPTION FOR PRIORITY NUMBER 17, AND IT WASN'T THAT THE DESCRIPTION HAD TO BE CHANGED, IT WAS SIMPLY INCORRECT.

SOMEHOW, THERE WAS A DUPLICATE DESCRIPTION FROM ANOTHER PROJECT AND THERE SO WE JUST CORRECTED IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ORIGINAL PROJECT SCOPE WAS SHOWN CORRECTLY ON THE MATH FOR THAT COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLANNING PRIORITY.

EIGHTEEN WAS ANOTHER CORRECTING THE RESOLUTION FROM "YES" TO "NO", BUT IN THIS CASE, WE WENT REVERSED.

WE THOUGHT WE HAD A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT, WE DID NOT.

PRIORITY NUMBER 23 CHANGE THE RESOLUTION ICON FROM "NO" TO "YES", BECAUSE WE DID RECEIVE A RESOLUTION AND ALSO CORRECTED THE CITY, CHANGING IT FROM DEERFIELD BEACH AND POMPANO BEACH, TO JUST DEERFIELD BEACH BECAUSE THE PROJECT ONLY FALLS WITHIN THE CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH.

PRIORITY NUMBER 27, AGAIN, CHANGE THE SCOPE OF WORK ICON FROM "NO" TO "YES".

IN THIS CASE, WE WERE ABLE TO VERIFY THAT THIS PROJECT HAD THE REQUIRED WAIT-ELIMINATION STUDY AND THEREFORE THE SCOPE OF WORK IS CONSIDERED COMPLETE FOR THAT PROJECT.

EXCELLENT. THE FINAL REMAINING PROGRAMS, MOBILITY HUBS, YOU'LL SEE HERE WE'RE ADDING CARES FUNDING, AS I MENTIONED THE PREVIOUS SECTION.

THE SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND SAFETY.

WE'RE ADDING THE ADDITIONAL CARES FUNDING FOR THE, OFF SYSTEM SAFETY PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS, AND THEN ALSO CARES FUNDING FOR THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET TSM&O PROJECT WORK ZONE.

THIS WAS ADDED AS A PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE CARES FUND COULD BE SPENT ON THAT PROJECT.

THEN THE TURNPIKE PROVIDED US WITH A VERY SMALL REVISION TO THEIR PRIORITY LIST WHERE THEY REMOVE THE PAGE HEADER AND THE VISION PLAN PROJECT LIST AND THAT WAS REQUESTED BY FLORIDA'S TURNPIKE ENTERPRISE STAFF.

NEXT SLIDE. WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, OUR DIRECT CONTEXTS ON THE MULTI-MODAL PRIORITY LIST ARE HERE ON THE SCREEN.

DR. JIHONG CHEN AND CHRISTOPHER RESTREPO ARE YOUR CONTACTS.

BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO

[00:25:01]

THE ADOPTION OF THE MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES LIST TODAY.

>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> YES. KARL KENNEDY.

>> SURE. GO AHEAD, CARL.

>> I WAS WONDERING ABOUT THESE FUNDS, THE CARES FUNDS, ARE THERE RESTRICTIONS ON THE TYPES OF USE? THEY HAVE TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE VIRUS?

>> THEY WERE AS A RESULT OF THE VIRUS, I GUESS, YOU COULD CALL THEM STIMULUS TYPE DOLLARS THAT ARE THERE TO BE SPENT ON TRANSPORTATION RELATED PROJECTS.

THAT WAS ESSENTIALLY THEIR RESTRICTION.

THEY HAD TO BE TRANSPORTATION RELATED.

THEY COULD EVEN BE SPENT ON OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE AND OTHER THINGS BUT WHAT WE CHOSE TO DO IS LOOK AT OUR WORK PROGRAM AND IDENTIFY PROJECTS THAT WERE IN THE PIPELINE THAT WE KNOW COULD BE DELIVERED BY THE SEPTEMBER 30TH DEADLINE AND APPLIED THE FUNDS TO THOSE PROJECTS.

>> DID THE FUNDS HAVE TO BE SPENT OR CAN THEY BE JUST OBLIGATED?

>> I BELIEVE BILL IS MAYBE ON THE LINE. BILL CROSS, CAN YOU CLARIFY WHETHER THEY NEED TO BE SPENT OR WHETHER THEY NEED TO BE OBLIGATED BY THE 2024 DEADLINE?

>> I'M SITTING HERE, PETER. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

YEAH, THEY NEED TO BE OBLIGATED.

THE ACTUAL EXPENDITURE IS NOT BY THE END OF THE FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR OF '24, BUT THEY HAVE TO BE OBLIGATED BY THAT POINT.

>> THANK YOU, BILL.

>> THEY'RE NOT GOING TO POSSIBLY DRY UP ON THOSE PROJECTS THEN?

>> NO. I THINK, AS PETER POINTED OUT, THE PROJECTS WERE CAREFULLY SELECTED TO HELP ENSURE THAT THESE WERE PROJECTS THAT COULD BE DELIVERED TIMELY SO THAT WE DIDN'T LOSE ANY OF THE MONEY.

WE DID FOCUS ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT WERE BEING DELIVERED BY DOT.

AGAIN, WITH AN EYE TOWARDS, YEAH, WE ABSOLUTELY DO NOT WANT TO SEE THESE MONIES GO AWAY, GO BACK TO DC.

>> THANKS.

>> THANK YOU, KARL.

>> GREAT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> YEAH, I HAVE A FEW.

>> RICHARD, NICK, AND ANDREW.

[OVERLAPPING]

>> SORRY, WHO'S GOING?

>> RICHARD FIRST.

>> CAN NICK GO FIRST?

>> I THINK RICHARD'S FIRST IN THE QUEUE.

>> OKAY. SURE. RICHARD.

>> THANKS. IS THERE A REASON WHY THE ONES THAT ARE DESIGNATED FOR CARES MONEY, THEY DON'T SHOW THE MONEY IN THE PARTICULAR YEAR OR YEARS THE MONEY IS GOING TO BE EXPENDED?

>> THAT'S AN EXCELLENT QUESTION, RICHARD.

THE REASON WHY YOU DON'T SEE THE MONEY THERE, REBECCA, MAYBE WE CAN SLIDE IT BACK TO THE BEGINNING SO THAT YOU CAN GET A LITTLE BIT, YEAH, RIGHT THERE.

THE REASON WHY YOU DON'T SEE THE CARES MONEY IN A PARTICULAR YEAR IS BECAUSE THE WAY WE HAVE THE MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES ARE STRUCTURED IS THAT ANY FUNDING THAT YOU SEE IN A SPECIFIC FISCAL YEAR COMES DIRECTLY FROM THE DRAFT TENTATIVE WORK PROGRAM THAT DROPPED IN JANUARY.

IN ORDER TO REMAIN CONSISTENT, WE DID NOT WANT TO SHOW THIS NEW FUNDING IN THE PARTICULAR FISCAL YEAR BECAUSE IT WAS ACTUALLY NOT SHOWN IN THE DRAFT TENTATIVE WORK PROGRAM YET.

THESE ARE FUNDS THAT WILL BE APPLIED AFTER PROBABLY SOMETIME OVER THE SUMMER.

SO AGAIN, WE HAD TO GO THROUGH THIS LOGICAL HURDLE OURSELVES AND MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST.

BUT THE SHORT ANSWER IS WE DID NOT APPLY IT IN THOSE FISCAL YEARS BECAUSE THOSE FUNDS WERE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE DRAFT TENTATIVE WORK PROGRAM AND NOT SHOWN IN THERE.

>> IT SAYS TYPE OF WORK FOR UPWP FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.

CAN WE GET SOME EXAMPLES OF WHAT THIS MONEY IS GOING TO BE USED FOR?

>> SURE. SO THE UPWP CONTAINS A WHOLE HOST OF PROJECTS AND YOU CAN GO ON OUR WEBSITE AND ACTUALLY SEE WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE.

BUT I CAN GIVE YOU SOME EXAMPLES, THINGS LIKE TRAFFIC COUNTS ACROSS THE HIGHWAY SYSTEM BOTH ON AND OFF THE STATE SYSTEM ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO, BIG DATA COLLECTION, FOR EXAMPLE, CELL PHONE DATA AND ORIGIN-DESTINATION DATA.

THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO.

FUNDING FOR OUR LONG-RANGE PLAN, FUNDING FOR OUR TACTICAL URBANISM PROGRAM, FUNDING FOR THINGS LIKE OUR SAFETY STUDIES AND OUR SAFETY PROGRAM.

THOSE ARE THE TYPES OF PLANNING PROJECTS THAT YOU WILL FIND IN UPWP.

BUT AGAIN, I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO TO THE BROWARD MPO'S WEBSITE, GO UNDER WHAT WE DO, AND THEN YOU'LL FIND THE UNIFIED PLANNING WORK PROGRAM UNDER BUDGET.

>> THIS MONEY WILL HELP YOU THROUGH THESE SOONER OR ADD TO IT OR BOTH?

>> SO MIKE, I THINK I'M GOING TO LEAN ON YOU HERE A LITTLE BIT.

>> SURE. YOU'RE DOING A GOOD JOB, PETER. THANK YOU.

[LAUGHTER] SURE, UPWP IS OUR TWO-YEAR BUDGET.

BASICALLY, IT'S THE OPERATION, WHAT YOU SEE HERE ARE THE FACILITIES, ALL OUR PLANNING STUDIES, PAYING FOR STAFF.

SO ANY MONEY THAT WE GET IN FOR THE UPWP WILL SUPPLEMENT THAT.

[00:30:03]

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO MOVE ANYTHING FORWARD, IT'LL JUST ALLOW US TO DO SOME MORE ROBUST PLANNING.

WHEN PETER HAD MENTIONED DATA COLLECTION, WE HAD ALREADY HAD DATA COLLECTION IN OUR BUDGET.

WE FELT THAT THERE WAS SOME NEED FOR ADDITIONAL DATA COLLECTION AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER AREAS IN PLANNING THAT WE WANT TO BEEF UP A LITTLE BIT AND THIS WILL ALLOW US TO DO IT.

>> [OVERLAPPING] I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS THAT WOULD THIS MONEY BE BETTER SPENT ON A PROJECT AS OPPOSED TO JUST PLANNING?

>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, MIKE, LET ME TRY TO ADD TO THIS.

THIS IS BILL CROSS.

PROBABLY OVER HALF OF THE TARGETED MONEY, THIS INCREMENTAL MONEY, RICHARD, IS GOING TO SUPPORT THE PLANNING LEVEL SAFETY WORK.

THE KEY THING FOR US IN THIS MTP THAT WE ADOPTED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WAS TO BEEF UP THE FUNDING AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SAFETY PROJECTS.

THIS CARES ACT REALLY PROVIDES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO JUMP-START THAT.

AS PETER SAID, INSTEAD OF WAITING UNTIL NEW 5TH YEAR, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS BY PULLING SOME OF THIS ADDITIONAL MONEY INTO THE UPWP, WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO FUND THE UPFRONT PLANNING STUDIES WHICH OUT OF THOSE PLANNING STUDIES, THOSE THEN FEED INTO THAT ADDITIONAL DESIGN MONEY THAT YOU ALSO SAW THAT WE SET ASIDE IN '23 AND '24, 200,000 EACH OF THOSE TWO YEARS, THOSE ARE FOR THE DESIGN WORK.

A GOOD PORTION OF WHAT WE'RE SETTING ASIDE IS ACTUALLY TO JUMP-START THE PRODUCTION CYCLE OF FUTURE SAFETY CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.

>> OKAY. JUST A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS.

UNDER CSLIP LIST, I NOTICED THAT UP UNTIL PROJECT NUMBER, SCROLLING THROUGH HERE, 17, EACH OF THESE PROJECTS TALK ABOUT BEING REMOVED FROM THE DRAFT TENTATIVE WORK PROGRAM BECAUSE OF LAP TRANSITIONING.

AFTER THAT PROJECT, IT'S NOT LISTED FOR ANY OF THE REMAINING CSLIP PROJECTS. IS THERE A REASON FOR THAT?

>> YES. RICHARD, IF YOU REMEMBER AND I'M SURE YOU'RE VERY ACUTELY FAMILIAR WITH THE LAP TRANSITION THAT TOOK PLACE THIS YEAR, THERE WERE PROJECTS THAT WERE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE WORK PROGRAM THAT WERE GOING TO INITIALLY BE DELIVERED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION THAT THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHOSE TO MOVE OVER TO LAP DELIVERY.

SO THOSE PROJECTS ONE THROUGH 17 ARE GOING TO BE TRANSITIONED INTO LAP.

THE PROJECTS 17, I BELIEVE IT IS THROUGH 31, ARE TECHNICALLY NEW CSLIP PROJECTS THAT NEVER MADE IT INTO THE WORK PROGRAM AND THEREFORE, THEY DON'T NEED TO TRANSITION INTO LAP, THEY WILL AUTOMATICALLY BECOME LAP.

THOSE NEW PRIORITY PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE PROGRAMMED OUT LIKELY IN THE FOURTH AND FIFTH YEAR OF THE NEW WORK PROGRAM VERSUS THE PRIORITIES 1 THROUGH 17, ARE ONES THAT WE REALLY NEED TO PROGRAM IN '24 IN THAT FIRST YEAR, MAYBE SOME IN '25 AS WELL BECAUSE THOSE WERE INITIALLY INCLUDED IN A WORK PROGRAM AS DOT DELIVERED PROJECTS. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

>> YES, IT DOES. THANK YOU.

TWO MORE, SORRY, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HERE.

BUT I DID NOTICE IN THE COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN LIST, PROJECT NUMBER 10 HAS SOMETHING IN RED ON THE MARGINS, THERE'S THIS PROGRAM THRESHOLD.

DOES THAT MEAN THERE'S A CUTOFF THERE FOR THE ONES BELOW THAT PROJECT FOR SOME REASON?

>> YES, RICHARD, THAT IS CORRECT.

WHAT WE TRIED TO DO AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST PAGE FOR THE COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN IN THE TOP RIGHT-HAND CORNER, YOU WILL SEE A FUNDING TARGET IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE, AND THAT PERCENTAGE IS A FUNDING TARGET THAT WE WANT TO HIT PER THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO INDICATE TO DOT IS THAT IF YOU PROGRAM A PROJECT PAST NUMBER 10, YOU'VE ACTUALLY EXCEEDED THE FUNDING THRESHOLD FOR THAT PROGRAM, AND WE WOULD LIKE THE DOT TO REACH OUT TO US IF THEY PLAN ON PROGRAMMING ANY PROJECTS BELOW THAT LINE BECAUSE IT TECHNICALLY EXCEEDS THE ANNUAL AVAILABLE FUNDS BASED ON THE PERCENTAGE ALLOCATED FOR THAT CYCLE.

>> GOT IT. OKAY. ONE THING TO NOTE IS ON THE ROADWAY LIST IN THE MAP, YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF DUPLICATE NUMBERS, JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THAT MAP AND MAKE SURE THE NUMBERING IS CORRECT.

YOU HAVE TWO PROJECTS, NUMBERED THREE ON THERE.

>> THAT MAY ALSO BE THAT THEY'RE TWO SEPARATE SEGMENTS, BUT WE'LL DOUBLE-CHECK.

>> I THINK THEY CORRESPONDED TO SEPARATE PROJECTS, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING I NOTICED.

FINALLY, ON THE SYSTEM SAFETY LIST, I SAW PROJECT NUMBER 15 WHICH IS PART OF THE CARES THING IDENTIFIED,

[00:35:01]

THERE'S NO DESCRIPTION, JUST A SAFETY IMPROVEMENT, AND THEN YOU GO TO 16 AND THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION ON WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT PROJECT.

ALSO, BEING CARES IN MIND.

WHY WOULD 15 HAVE HARDLY ANY DESCRIPTION, AND 16 HAVE AN EXTENSIVE DESCRIPTION?

>> I'M JUST PULLING UP THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES, JUST GIVE ME A MOMENT HERE.

YOU SAID NUMBER 15 AND 16? WITH PROJECT NUMBER 15, AS BILL MENTIONED, THIS IS BASICALLY A BOXED FUNDING FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE GOING INTO DESIGN FROM OUR SAFETY PROGRAM.

IF YOU WANT TO GET AN IDEA OF THE TYPES OF PROJECTS THAT MIGHT BE MOVING INTO DESIGN FOR THIS SAFETY PROGRAM HERE, YOU CAN LOOK UP ABOVE IN THE ONES THAT SAY SAFETY STUDY.

WE ARE LOOKING TO FUND ALL OF THOSE PROJECTS FOR A SAFETY STUDY USING SOME UPWP FUNDING.

THAT'S WHAT BILL WAS JUST MENTIONING EARLIER TO YOUR FIRST POINT.

THOSE PROJECTS WILL DEVELOP SAFETY REPORTS THAT HAVE SPECIFIC COUNTERMEASURES ON PROJECTS THAT WE ULTIMATELY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD INTO DESIGN.

BECAUSE WE DON'T EXACTLY KNOW WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE JUST YET IN TERMS OF WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO AS PART OF THE DAVIE ROAD EXTENSION OR RIVERSIDE DRIVE? WE HAVE BOXED SOME FUNDS HERE TO THE TUNE OF $400,000, $200,000 EACH FISCAL YEAR FOR '23 AND '24 TO THEN ULTIMATELY SUPPORT THE DESIGN OF THOSE PROJECTS.

SO THAT'S WHY THAT IS LACKING SOME DESCRIPTION.

BUT ULTIMATELY, THE LOCATIONS UP ABOVE THAT ARE DESCRIBED FOR THOSE SAFETY STUDIES ARE WHAT WILL POPULATE THE DESIGN IN THAT SPECIFIC ITEM.

THE ITEM NUMBER 16 IS AN EXISTING DOT PROJECT THAT ALREADY HAS A SCOPE OF WORK AND IT'S IN CONSTRUCTION, AND THAT'S WHY YOU SEE FUNDING APPLIED TO IT IN FISCAL YEAR '23, AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE SO MUCH DESCRIPTION THERE.

>> THAT'S IT, THANKS.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THE GREAT QUESTIONS.

NICK, ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I DO. [NOISE] MY QUESTIONS ARE IN REFERENCE TO A PROJECT THAT'S RANKED NUMBER ONE ON THE TRANSIT LIST, AND THAT'S THE PROJECT FOR THE ONE-WAY PAIRS FOR ANDREWS AND THIRD AVENUE.

I BELIEVE THAT THIS PROJECT WAS TRANSITION TO SURTAX.

IT SAYS POTENTIAL SURTAX, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS FUNDED.

AT LEAST THE FEASIBILITY STUDY MENTIONED IN HERE WAS FUNDED VIA SURTAX.

I'M CURIOUS AS TO WHY IT'S STILL REMAINS IN THE LIST AND NOT AS SURTAX.

THEN THE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO THAT REALLY IS IN LOOKING AT THE SCOPE OF THAT FEASIBILITY STUDY, TRANSIT DOES NOT SEEM TO BE AT THE FOREFRONT OF THAT SCOPE.

I'M NOT SURE IF IT BELONGS IN THE TRANSIT CATEGORIZATIONS IN THE PRIORITIES LISTED.

>> NICK, TO ANSWER THE FIRST PART OF YOUR QUESTION, THIS WAS A NUMBER ONE PRIORITY FROM THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN.

THE THOUGHT HERE ALWAYS IS AT THE MPO WOULD SET ASIDE SOME FUNDING TO HELP SUPPLEMENT ANY ADDITIONAL WORK THAT MAY BE REQUIRED FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THE FEASIBILITY STUDY THAT THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE WAS WORKING WITH THE COUNTY ON AS FAR SURTAX IS CONCERNED REQUIRED ADDITIONAL SUPPORT, THIS PROJECT WOULD BE THERE TO PROVIDE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR THAT.

WE HAD SOME LENGTHY CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW THIS PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY HELP TO SUPPORT THE SURTAX PROJECT.

THE PROBLEM HERE IS OBVIOUSLY THAT AS SOON AS YOU APPLY A DOLLAR OF FEDERAL FUNDING TO A PROJECT, YOU FEDERALIZE THE PROJECT.

THERE WASN'T A DESIRE TO DO THAT AS PART OF THE FEASIBILITY.

NOW, THERE'S NOTHING THAT PRECLUDES THIS PROJECT FROM THEN MOVING ON TO A POTENTIALLY ANOTHER PHASE, SAY LIKE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT, WE'RE NOT EQUIVALENT.

THAT'S WHY THAT FUNDING IS STILL THERE BECAUSE IT IS STILL A PRIORITY WITHIN THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN.

THE INTENT, AGAIN, WHEN WE MET WITH THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE ON THIS PROJECT AS PART OF THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN, WAS TO CREATE A TRANSIT ONLY LANE AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.

THAT'S WHY WE SAW THAT THIS FIT BEST UNDER THE TRANSIT PROGRAM HERE.

WHAT YOU WILL ALSO NOTICE IS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PROGRAM READY CRITERIA ALL THE WAY ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE.

YOU WILL NOTICE THAT THE SCOPE OF WORK AND PARTNER COLLABORATION ARE BOTH SHOWN AS A NO, WHICH INDICATES THAT THIS PROJECT IS NOT PROGRAM READY, WHICH MEANS THAT THE MPO HAS NOT SEEN A VALID SCOPE OF WORK COME OUT OF THIS YET THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE USE OF THOSE FEDERAL FUNDS, NOR HAVE WE SEEN THE APPROPRIATE PARTNER COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT SINCE THE COUNTY OWNS THIS ROADWAY.

UNTIL WE SEE THAT WE WOULDN'T SPEND ANY MONEY ON THIS PROJECT ANYWAY, AND WE KNOW THAT THERE'S ADDITIONAL COLLABORATION THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

BUT FOR THE TIME BEING, BECAUSE IT SITS IN OUR METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN, THERE IS $10 MILLION THERE AS PART OF THE MTP, WE ARE GOING TO KEEP IT ON THE MULTI-MODAL PRIORITIES LIST.

BUT AGAIN, NO FUNDS WILL BE AT WELL APPLIED TO IT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT PROGRAM READY.

>> SURE. THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.

THANK YOU, PETER, FOR THAT EXPLANATION.

I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, IF THE STUDY COMPLETED AND THERE WEREN'T SUBSTANTIAL TRANSIT COMPONENTS, BUT THAT YOU STILL WANTED TO MOVE THROUGH A FIT, COULD IT BE MOVED TO A DIFFERENT CATEGORIZATION WITHIN THE PLAN,

[00:40:01]

LIKE TO EITHER ROADWAY OR JUST SOME OTHER CATEGORY? I GUESS I'M JUST CURIOUS ON HAVE PROJECTS EVER MOVED BETWEEN CATEGORIES IN THE LIST [OVERLAPPING] IF SOME CHANGES IN SCOPE?

>> YES, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION, NICK.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO ENTERTAIN THE MTP AMENDMENT AND WE HAVE AN ANNUAL CYCLE FOR THAT.

IF AND WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT FOR THAT, WE CAN SIT DOWN WITH YOU ALL IN THE CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION TO SEE IF IT IS MORE APPROPRIATE TO TAKE THESE FUNDS AND MOVE THEM OVER TO THE ROADWAY SECTION.

BUT I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DISCUSS THROUGH THE MTP AMENDMENT PROCESS.

I MEAN, TECHNICALLY, THE PROCESS IS ALWAYS OPEN, BUT WE PROCESS MTP AMENDMENTS AND NO, STARTING IN NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT, PETER.

>> YEAH.

>> THANK YOU, NICK. ANDREW PENNY, YOU HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> YES. THANK YOU. PETER, GREAT PRESENTATION.

YOU ALWAYS GIVE US A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT'S EASY TO DIGEST.

I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW I APPRECIATE THAT [NOISE] AND MY EARS DID PERK UP WHEN I HEARD YOU MENTIONED FUNDING TO DELIVER LAP PROJECTS THAT FELL OFF AS OF LAST YEAR'S TRANSITION.

>> YEAH.

>> WERE THERE SPECIFIC PROJECTS IN MIND?

>> MAYBE REBECCA, YOU CAN PULL UP THE PRESENTATION AGAIN IF YOU DON'T MIND.

I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT STARTS WITH THE CARES FUNDS.

WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, ANDREW, I'LL TRY AND ANSWER YOUR QUESTION HERE.

THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS WITH SOME MPO MUNICIPAL PARTNERS.

YEAH, RIGHT THERE. THANK YOU, REBECCA.

WHAT YOU'LL SEE HERE, ANDREW, IN ITEM NUMBER 3 AND 4, THE LAST TWO GRAY ITEMS, THIS IS THE RESULT OF OUR MAYORS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS ROUNDTABLE WHERE WE GOT A FEW OF OUR MUNICIPAL PARTNERS IN THE ROOM, ELECTED OFFICIALS EXPRESSING AN INTEREST IN HAVING THE MPO HELPED DELIVER A LAP PROJECTS ON BEHALF OF CITIES.

THIS WILL BASICALLY BE A SEPARATE ENTITY CALLED THE METRO TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION COLLABORATIVE.

THEY WILL BE THERE AS AN ENTITY TO HELP DELIVER LAP PROJECTS ON MUNICIPALITIES BEHALF.

THAT WAY THEN, THE BURDEN OF LAP DELIVERY DOESN'T NECESSARILY FALL DIRECTLY WITHIN MUNICIPALITY.

IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE MTECH ORGANIZATION COULD DELIVER A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY.

I KNOW BILL CROSS, OUR RESIDENT EXPERT OF MTECH IS HERE.

I DON'T KNOW, BILL, IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN OR I MISSED ANYTHING HERE WITH RESPECT TO THAT.

>> NO. I THINK YOU COVERED IT WELL, PETER.

I'LL JUST ADD THAT THERE WILL BE MORE INFORMATION COMING BACK TO BOTH THE TAC AND THE BOARD IN THE COMING MONTHS AS THIS MOVES FORWARD.

BUT FOR NOW, LET ME STOP THERE AND I'M GLAD TO TRY TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS.

>> OKAY. I'LL TAKE IT A LITTLE FURTHER.

WHEN WE TRANSITIONED TO LAP, WE HAD TWO PROJECTS FALL OFF AND MARKETING THAT I CAN THINK OF ONE.

SOUTH BAY BOULEVARD, WHICH WAS ACTUALLY PART OF COMPLETE STREETS MASTER PLAN, I BELIEVE, AND ROYAL PALM BOULEVARD AS WELL.

IS 150,000 GOING TO CUT IT TO GET THOSE PROJECTS OFF THE GROUND OR YOU STILL TRYING TO MAKE THE CUT AS THAT WHO'S IN AND WHO'S OUT?

>> WELL, YES. LET ME GIVE MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON WHAT THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

THE IDEA IS THAT, CITIES WHO ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING THROUGH THIS CO-OPERATIVE WILL BE ABLE TO THROW IN TOGETHER AND DELIVER THEIR LAP PROJECTS.

FROM OUR RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS, WE'VE PRETTY MUCH FIGURED THAT IT COST A TYPICAL CITY ABOUT A $100,000 IN RESOURCES TO DELIVER A PROJECT THROUGH LAP.

THERE'S NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT COST OF GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GETTING APPROVED BY DOT AND ALL THAT ADMINISTRATIVE PAPERWORK THAT'S NECESSARY.

THE IDEA BEHIND MTECH IS THAT THERE WOULD BE A SMALL GROUP OF CONSULTANTS THAT DO THIS DAY IN DAY OUT.

THEY'D BE EXPERT IN THE PAPERWORK AND ALL THE REST.

ANY CITY THAT WAS A MEMBER ORGANIZATION OF MTECH WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO HAVE THEIR PROJECT DELIVERED BY MTECH.

THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT A CITY JOINS AND EVEN IF A CITY IS A MEMBER, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT THEY USE MTECH TO DELIVER EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEIR FEDERAL LAP PROJECTS.

[NOISE] IT'S GOING TO BE VERY FLEXIBLE.

THE FUNDING IS PRIMARILY GOING TO COME THROUGH THE PROJECT FUNDING.

THERE IS, OF COURSE, AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROJECT MANAGEMENT ALLOWANCE AND ALL FEDERAL DOLLARS, THOSE PROFESSIONAL FEES FOR THE ENGINEERS TO DESIGN FOR CEI AS WELL AS THE MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT OF THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE.

[00:45:06]

ALL OF THOSE COSTS ARE GOING TO BE PAID BY THE PROJECT ITSELF.

[BACKGROUND] THE DOLLARS THAT WE'RE SHOWING HERE ARE JUST PART OF THE SEED MONEY TO HELP STAND THIS UP.

THEY ARE NOT FOR ANY ACTUAL PROJECTS.

PROJECTS WILL CONTINUE TO BE IDENTIFIED, PROGRAMMED, AND FUNDED THROUGH THE NORMAL MPO AND DOT PROJECT FUNDING PROCESSES.

I HAD HOPED TO DELIVER THIS MESSAGE IN AN UPCOMING MONTH OR TWO IN A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPREHENSIVE WAY, BUT SINCE YOU ASKED, THAT'S THE OVERVIEW MESSAGE.

>> ANDREW, I GUESS THE ONLY CLARIFYING POINT I'LL ADD HERE IS THAT THE MONEY THAT YOU SEE HERE, IS NOT CAPITAL MONEY, IT'S NOT FOR PROJECTS.

IT IS THERE AS PLANNING SUPPORT SERVICES TO STAND UP THE ACTUAL DELIVERY OF PROJECTS, SO TO HELP WITH A LAP DELIVERY PROCESS.

>> RIGHT. THAT'S WHERE WE FELL OFF, BECAUSE WE LOST THE DESIGN, THE CEI, THE SKILLED PEOPLE THAT GO THROUGH LAP OF FOR THAT THOUGHT.

THAT'S WHERE WE LOST, THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO KIND OF SUPPLEMENT.

>> ANDREW, LET ME JUST CLARIFY THAT NOTHING ULTIMATELY WAS LOST BECAUSE WE DID WORK WITH DOT TO ENSURE THAT THE DESIGN PHASE OF LAP WHILE SEPARATE FROM A CONSTRUCTION PHASE, IT IS ELIGIBLE FOR FEDERAL FUNDING.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE TO COME OUT OF YOUR POCKET.

THAT WILL BE FUNDED AS A UNIQUE AND SEPARATE ITEM.

THEN A COUPLE YEARS LATER, THE CONSTRUCTION FUNDING WHICH SHOW UP IN THE PROGRAM.

>> RIGHT. AS A REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES.

[NOISE] IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO ENHANCE THOSE BUDGET ITEMS FOR THE LAP DELIVERY AND THE DESIGN, THERE WAS ANOTHER LINE ITEM FOR DESIGN DOWN FURTHER.

>> NO, THERE IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENHANCE THAT.

IN FACT, I THINK WE'VE [NOISE] COME UP WITH A VERY GOOD PROGRAM.

THE COSTS ARE GOING TO BE NEGOTIATED AS YOU MOVE FORWARD AND YOU ENTER THE INDIVIDUAL LAP AGREEMENTS.

AGAIN, MY RESPONSE HERE NOW JUST TO BE CLEAR, HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH MTECH.

THIS IS JUST THE NORMAL PROJECT PROGRAMMING.

THE PROCESS THAT WE'VE SET UP WITH DOT IS ONE WHERE THE DESIGN WILL GO THROUGH LAP AND THEN THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE WILL GO THROUGH A SEPARATE LAP AGREEMENT.

THE CITIES, TO A LARGE EXTENT ARE BEING MADE WHOLE HERE.

I'M NOT SURE WHEN YOU SAY, CAN YOU GET MORE MONEY, WHAT YOU REFER? ARE YOU REFERRING TO IN GENERAL THE SIZE OF THE OVERALL POT OR YOU'RE REFERRING TO AN INDIVIDUAL PROJECT BUDGET? [NOISE]

>> WELL, YEAH. ITS JUST IT CHANGED THE GAME WHEN WE HAD TO GO THROUGH LAP AND I GET IT THROUGH REIMBURSABLE EXPENSE, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

I LIKE THE OLD WAY WHERE FORT HANDLED EVERYTHING.

YOU GET YOUR RESOLUTION AND IT'S IN CREWS CONTROL.

>> ANDREW, AND I DON'T THINK YOU'RE ALONE IN THAT.

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE THAT METHODOLOGY.

HOWEVER, FROM THE MPO STANDPOINT, THIS IS A WAY SINCE IT HAS CHANGED, MTECH AND WHAT WE HAVE PLACED IN THE MMPL, THE MONEY THERE LIKE BILL SAID IS SEED MONEY AND STAFF HAS REALLY BEEN LOOKING THROUGH, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO LESSEN THE BURDEN THAT WAS ON CITIES AS WE TRANSITION AND THIS IS WHERE WE THINK THAT WE HIT THE MARK HERE THROUGH MTECH AND THE SEED MONEY THAT'S PLACED HERE.

I'M THINKING, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM BILL TOO IS I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE MONEY THAT'S NEEDED TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE IT'S ALSO GOING TO BE PROGRAMMED IN THE WORK PROGRAM AND THE TIP, THERE'S GOING TO BE MONEY THAT'S THERE, BUT THIS IS FROM THE PLANNING SIDE TO SET UP MTECH TO HELP MOVE THIS THE PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THESE PROJECTS FORWARD.

>> RIGHT. I HAD TO ASK. THANK YOU.

>> IT'S ALWAYS GOOD.

>> THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION, ANDREW.

>> ANDREW, I APPRECIATE THE VOTE OF CONFIDENCE IN THERE, FOR A STATEMENT.

>> [LAUGHTER] THANKS.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE MAGGIE BARSHEFSKY.

>> YES. HI. I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THE RED LINE VERSION AND I'M CHECKING OUT THAT ONE THAT YOU MENTIONED VERY BRIEFLY, THE CSMP, PRIORITY NUMBER 23, WHERE IT'S STATED THAT THEY REDEFINE THE PROJECT BASICALLY TO DROP POMPANO BEACH.

[00:50:05]

IS THAT THE THIRD AVENUE PROJECT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE?

>> I WANT TO BE CLEAR. THE PROJECT WAS NOT REDEFINED TO DRAW A POMPANO BEACH.

I THINK WE INCORRECTLY HAD POMPANO BEACH LISTED ON THERE.

>> OKAY.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHY, IS THAT WE WERE RIGHT ON THE BORDER BETWEEN POMPANO AND DEERFIELD BEACH.

SO WE ACCIDENTALLY INCLUDED THAT IN THERE.

>> OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY THOUGH.

THERE IS ONE THAT WAS ON THE BORDER WHERE IT WAS KIND OF AN L-SHAPED PARTIALLY ON SAMPLE AND PARTIALLY ON THIRD AVENUE.

I JUST WANT TO FIND OUT IS THAT THIS ONE OR WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

>> THE PRIORITY NUMBER 23 IS NORTHEAST THIRD AVENUE FROM SAMPLE ROAD TO HILLSBOROUGH BOULEVARD.

I WOULD NEED PROBABLY SOMEONE FROM THE COMPLETE STREETS TEAM TO CONFIRM WHETHER THAT WAS IT, BUT MAYBE.

>> YES, THAT'S THE ONE.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT'S THE ONE THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE PORTION THAT WAS ON SAMPLE, DEALT WITH LIGHTING AND ANY PORTION OF IT THAT WAS ON SAMPLE, THAT INCLUDED POMPANO BEACHES, SOUTHERN PORTION OF SAMPLE WAS BASICALLY OUT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND IT WAS JUST DEALING WITH IMPROVEMENTS ON THE SIDEWALK AND LIGHTING AND ETC.

THIS IS NEWS TO ME, I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY IT.

FROM WHAT I UNDERSTOOD IT WAS NOT ERRONEOUSLY POMPANO BEACH.

IT WAS IN FACT A PORTION OF IT WAS IN POMPANO BEACH.

>> SO MAGGIE, I JUST GOT A CHAT MESSAGE FROM MR. RICARDO GUTIERREZ ON THE TEAM AND HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO GET BACK WITH YOU SEPARATELY ABOUT THIS ITEM TO DISCUSS IT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT, DR. YACINTHE.

>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, JUST A GENERAL QUESTION REALLY REGARDING THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST PROJECTS.

AS THE PROCESS IN ITSELF CHANGE BECAUSE AT THE PORT, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY REQUESTS FOR OUR PRIORITIES LIST.

I'M JUST WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A CHANGE IN PROCESS.

>> I KNOW, AND JIHONG, I MAY CALL ON YOU HERE FOR THIS ONE WITH RESPECT TO THE INCLUSION OF THE PORT AND AIRPORT IN THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST.

I BELIEVE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NOT NEED TO INCLUDE IN A MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST, CORRECT, JIHONG?

>> YES, PETER, I THINK TWO YEARS AGO, WE COMMUNICATED WITH FDOT.

FDOT SAID WE DON'T NEED TO INCLUDE THE SEA PORT PRIORITY IN AIRPORT IN MPL.

>> I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

>> WE COMMUNICATED WITH FDOT AND FDOT STATED THAT AS PART OF THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST THAT RUNS THROUGH THE MPL ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, THE SEA PORT AND THE AIRPORT PROJECTS DO NOT NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THERE.

YOU ALL HAVE YOUR PROJECTS IN THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT PROJECTS AND YOUR PRIORITIES LIST LIVES IN THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN HERE AND YOU ALL WORK DIRECTLY WITH FDOT TO PROGRAM THOSE PROJECTS.

>> CLARIFY FOR ME, PLEASE.

WE WORK DIRECTLY TO PROGRAM THE [NOISE] PROJECTS THAT ARE CURRENTLY ON THE METROPOLITAN PLAN THAT GETS UPDATED EVERY?

>> EVERY FIVE YEARS OR THROUGH AN MTP AMENDMENT.

>> SO ANY ADDITIONAL PROJECTS WE WOULD LIKE TO BE INCLUDED HAS TO WAIT FIVE YEARS IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

>> NO, THEY COULD COME THROUGH AS A METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN AMENDMENT.

>> IS THAT ONCE A YEAR?

>> THAT IS ONCE A YEAR. YEAH.

>> OKAY. SO WE WEREN'T NOTIFIED ABOUT THAT, BUT THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

>> NATACHA, MAYBE YOU AND I CAN HAVE A SHORT CONVERSATION OFFLINE AND WE CAN WALK THROUGH BECAUSE I KNOW WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH ON THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN AMENDMENTS, SOME OF THAT.

SO MAYBE WE CAN CLARIFY THIS.

>> NO. NOT THE AMENDMENTS AS FAR AS THAT THE PRIORITIES LIST THAT THE PORT IN [INAUDIBLE] , I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE AIRPORT BUT THE PORT WAS NOT INCLUDED AS WHAT WAS NO LONGER NEEDED TO INCLUDE THE PROJECT AS PART OF THAT PRIORITIES LIST. THANK YOU.

>> GREAT. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I WILL ADD, WE'VE COME A LONG WAY IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS WITH THE MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST FROM A ONE LINE EXCEL DESCRIPTION TO THIS GREAT DOCUMENT THAT YOU ALL PUT TOGETHER.

IT MAKES IT MUCH EASIER TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE GOING AND WHAT THE PRIORITIES ARE FOR EACH CYCLE AND I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR AND I JUST WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT WE ARE MAKING THAT REQUEST TO HAVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE APPROVAL FOR THOSE TWO PROJECTS.

[NOISE]

[00:55:03]

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BEFORE WE MOVE THIS ITEM.

OR I WILL ASK FOR A MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE BROWARD MPO APPROVE THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR FY 22 MULTIMODAL PRIORITIES LIST WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AS PRESENTED.

I HAVE A MOTION BY [INAUDIBLE] AND A SECOND BY EMILY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? NONE. UNLESS YOU HAVE A CONCERN WITH THIS, WE WILL PASS THIS ON CONSENT.

IF YOU HAVE A CONCERN, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND, OTHERWISE, WE WILL PASS ON CONSENT.

GREAT, SEEING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU. PETER. SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTOR PROJECT.

[1. Report From Partner Agencies - Florida Department of Transportation - SW 10th Street Connector Preferred Alternative]

ANYTHING? GO AHEAD.

>> HI. I'M PHIL SCHWAB, I'M THE CONSULTANT PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTOR.

ON THE LINE ALSO IS VANITA SAINI AND I'M NOT SURE SHE'S GOT-

>> [LAUGHTER] GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

I WAS TRYING TO GET THE ZOOM WORKING, I GUESS IT IS NOW.

THE FDOT DESIGN PM FOR SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET, I'LL LET PHIL PRESENT.

WE'RE GOING TO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE AND THEN THE NEXT STEPS AFTER THAT.

WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYONE MIGHT HAVE.

>> GREAT. AS FAR SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET, I KNOW MANY OF YOU HAVE ALREADY HEARD DIFFERENT PRESENTATIONS THROUGHOUT THE YEARS OF THE STUDY.

THE GRAPHIC HERE YOU'RE GONNA SEE IN A SHORT VIDEO IS PART OF THIS PRESENTATION.

I WON'T SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON IT EXCEPT THAT THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET PROJECT IS IN THE BLUE AND TO THE RIGHT YOU'LL SEE A I-95 INTERCHANGE PROJECT AND I-95 EXPRESS LANES THAT ARE ONGOING STUDY AS WELL, WHICH WERE REALLY LINKED UP CLOSELY WITH.

AS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IT AND AS A PROJECTS MOVE FORWARD INTO THE NEXT PHASE AND TO THE LEFT OR TO THE WEST AS THE TURNPIKE INTERCHANGE STUDY, WHICH IS STILL LOOKING THROUGH THEIR CONCEPTUAL STUDIES AND THEY DON'T HAVE FUNDING FOR CONSTRUCTION.

JUST FYI ON THAT BUT I LIKE TO MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN QUITE A BIT OF INTERACTION WITH THE PUBLIC AND WITH THE OFFICIALS AT CITY AT DEERFIELD BEACH HAS REALLY MADE A LOT OF POSITIVE IMPACTS ON THE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES THAT HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT AND HOW THEY PROGRESS THROUGHOUT THE STUDY SO THIS IS JUST A LIST OF SOME OF THE MORE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT REALLY IN MY MIND, ARE DIRECT RESULT OF THAT INTERACTION WITH THE PUBLIC AND ALSO THE INTERACTION WITH THE CITY OF DEERFIELD BEACH OFFICIALS AND STAFF.

THERE WAS A BRIDGE LOCATED OUT TO THE WEST IN FRONT OF ONE OF THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES THAT WE WERE ABLE TO MODIFY THE DESIGN AND MOVE THAT TO THE WEST FURTHER DESIRES AND GET RID OF THAT BRIDGE FROM THE FRONT OF THEIR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.

ALSO FOR THE CONNECTOR LANES, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE TOLLED AND ALSO TRUCKS WILL BE PERMITTED.

THERE WON'T BE ANY RESTRICTIONS TO TRUCKS ON THE CONNECTOR LANES AND THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE COURT OR WE'VE INCORPORATED A 12-FOOT SHARED USE PATH SO THAT BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS CAN UTILIZE IT AND THEN ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IS REALLY ON THE 95 PROJECT WHERE WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE CONNECTIONS TO THE GENERAL USE LANES FROM THE CONNECTOR LANES AS WELL AS TO THE EXPRESS LANE.

IT REALLY ALLOWED A LOT MORE TRAFFIC TO UTILIZE THE CONNECTOR LANES, WHICH ALSO RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVES THAT WE COULD DEVELOP THAT CREATED MORE BUFFER SPACE AND LANDSCAPE OPPORTUNITIES.

THE NEXT VIDEO IS YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IS ABOUT TWO AND A HALF MINUTES, SO IT'S NOT TOO LONG, BUT IT GIVES YOU A GOOD IDEA SOME OF THE RENDERINGS THAT WE HAVE AND SOME OF THE REASONING THAT SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS ALTERNATIVE.

[MUSIC]

>> THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IS NEARING COMPLETION OF THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTOR PD&E STUDY AND REACHED A DECISION ON A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.

THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTORS STUDY LIMITS SHOWN HERE IN BLUE, BEGINS AT THE SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY NEAR INTERCHANGE WITH FLORIDA'S TURNPIKE AND EXTENDS THE I-95 IN BROWARD COUNTY.

[01:00:03]

ADJACENT STUDY ALONG I-95 SHOWN IN GREEN, WE'LL ADD EXPRESS LANES AND CONNECTOR RAMPS TO I-95.

THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAS EVALUATED SEVERAL ALTERNATIVES THROUGHOUT THE STUDY.

AFTER CONSIDERING ALL INPUT TO DATE, FDOT SELECTED THE WITHOUT RAMP ALTERNATIVE WHICH PROVIDES THE BEST BALANCE OF BENEFITS WHILE MINIMIZING IMPACTS.

ALTHOUGH ADDITIONAL LOCAL AXIS RAMPS, EAST OF POWERLINE ROAD OF THE WITH RAMP ALTERNATIVE PROVIDES MORE ACCESSIBILITY, THEY DO NOT PROVIDE BETTER TRAFFIC FLOWS.

BY CONTRAST, THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE MEETS ALL THE NEEDS OF THE PROJECT WHILE ALSO MINIMIZING THE IMPACTS ALONG THE LOCAL LANES AND STILL PROVIDES LOCAL ACCESS TO AND FROM THE CONNECTOR LANES EAST OF MILITARY TRAIL.

THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE HAS BOTH REGIONAL AND LOCAL BENEFITS.

BY COMPLETING THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NETWORK, THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE REDUCES CONGESTION AND DELAY ALONG LOCAL SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET WHILE ALSO IMPROVING TRAFFIC FLOW, OPERATIONS, SAFETY, EMERGENCY RESPONSE, EVACUATION, AND PROMOTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

IN FACT, THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WILL HAVE 22 PERCENT LOWER TRAFFIC LEVELS IN 2040 THAN IN 2016 ALONG LOCAL SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET.

A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THE LOCAL LANES LOOKING EAST HELPS VISUALIZE SOME OF THE BENEFITS AND REDUCTION OF IMPACTS THAT THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ACHIEVES INCLUDING A CONTINUOUS 12-FOOT-WIDE SHARED USE PATH ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE, INCREASE IN BUFFER AREAS FROM THE ROAD TO THE COMMUNITIES.

MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR LANDSCAPING, PRIVATE PROPERTY AND EXISTING LARGE TREES CAN BE AVOIDED AT WATERFORD COURTYARDS.

TRANSMISSION POLES REMAIN IN APPROXIMATELY THE SAME LOCATION.

THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE IS ANTICIPATED TO BE APPROVED BY THE FDOT OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT BY GRANTING LOCATION AND DESIGN CONCEPT ACCEPTANCE THIS SUMMER.

THE PROJECT WILL MOVE INTO THE FINAL DESIGN PHASE, WHERE ADDITIONAL PROJECT DETAILS WILL BE DEVELOPED AND SHARED WITH THE PUBLIC.

FDOT WILL CONTINUE TO ENGAGE THE PUBLIC AS THIS PROJECT ADVANCES.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN THE SOUTHWEST 10TH STREET CONNECTOR PD&E STUDY.

>> AS PART OF OUR DECISION ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, WE HAVE MET WITH THE CITY AND ELECTED OFFICIALS AND SEND OUT E-MAIL NOTICES TO ALL THE ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION, AS WELL AS A PROJECT DATABASE THAT HAS GOTTEN PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL OVER THE YEARS.

EVERYBODY WHOSE REGISTERED OR WHO HAD REGISTERED FOR THE PUBLIC HERE WILL GET NOTICE.

WE'VE ALSO SENT OUT A PRESS RELEASE.

OUR WEBSITES UPDATED, WHICH INCLUDES A FLYER AND ALSO INCLUDES THE VIDEO THAT YOU JUST SAW.

WE'VE UTILIZED SOME SOCIAL MEDIA TO GET THE WORD OUT.

WE'VE GOTTEN A FEW QUESTIONS HERE AND THERE AND VANITA'S TEAM AS THEY LOOK TO MOVE FORWARD THE DESIGN AFTER LDCA IS WORKING ON A LOT OF ADVANCED ACTIVITIES.

IF YOU MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A REPEAT.

I THINK FROM WHAT YOU JUST HEARD THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO GET THAT LOCATION DESIGN CONCEPT ACCEPTANCE THAT REALLY ALLOWS THE PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD IN THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.

YOU SAW IN ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS, THE ADVANCEMENT OF AN ITS PROJECT TO HELP THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS IN ADVANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.

WE ARE LOOKING TO TRY AND PUSH FUNDING EARLIER, IF POSSIBLE RIGHT NOW THAT'S FUNDING IS SCHEDULED FOR EARLY 2024.

THE MAJOR CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW IS SLATED.

YOU WOULD SEE EARLY IN 2024 SINCE THE FISCAL YEARS 2024, AND 25 HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION FUNDING.

WE MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

I THINK THAT'S ALL WE HAD AND ROB BOSTIAN WAS THE PD&E PROJECT MANAGER AND BONITO WHO'S HERE IS PICKING UP WHERE ROB LEFT OFF AND CARRYING IT THROUGH TO THE IMPLEMENTATION.

WITH THAT, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR PHIL OR VANITA?

>> DR. YACINTHE, GO AHEAD.

>> NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION.

JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW HOW YOU GOT THE WATERFORD COMMUNITY TO ALLOW A NONE-RAMP ATTENTIVE. I WAS JUST CURIOUS.

>> WATERFORD COMMUNITY? THE WATERWAYS COMMUNITY, HOW YOU GOT THEM TO ACCEPT THE NON-RAMP.

IT'S NOT AN NON-RAMP.

WE HAD AN ADDITIONAL SET OF LOCAL ACCESS RAMPS THAT WOULD SERVE JUST TO THE EAST OF POWERLINE ROAD.

IF YOU GET IN AND OUT OF THE LOCAL LANES TO THE EXPRESS LANES OR TO THE CONNECTOR LANES AND

[01:05:01]

VICE VERSA SO YOU COULD ACCESS POWERLINE ROAD.

WE'RE NOT PROPOSING THAT.

THAT'S NOT PART OF THE ALTERNATIVE THAT'S MOVING FORWARD.

BUT IF YOU WERE TO COME IN OFF FOR THE SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY, YOU CAN STILL ACCESS LOCAL 10TH STREET JUST TO THE WEST OF MILITARY TRAIL.

THE TRAFFIC FLOWS MOVE VERY WELL THROUGH THE LOCAL STREETS WITH THE ADDITION OF THE CONNECTOR LANES.

ADDING THOSE RAMPS REALLY DOES NOT IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC FLOWS ANYMORE THAN WITHOUT.

THE TRAFFIC FLOWS ARE PRETTY GOOD.

YOU CAN GO QUICKER IN THE CONNECTOR LANES, SO IT DOES MAKE FOR A QUICKER TRIP.

THAT'S WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO GET AT IS PROVIDING MORE ACCESSIBILITY IS GREAT, BUT THE IMPACTS THAT IT WAS CREATING JUST DIDN'T IT MAKE IT WORTH IT FROM A NUMBER OF POINTS OF VIEW.

>> OKAY. JUST ONE MORE QUESTION MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY?

>> YES.

>> AT THIS POINT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT TO LATE, JUST WONDER WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY EQUITY ANALYSIS THAT WAS CONDUCTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT? NO, THERE WAS NOT AN EQUITY ANALYSIS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT WE'VE COME A LONG WAY OVER THE YEARS.

IT'S GREAT TO SEE MAKING PROGRESS.

I THINK SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS.

WE'LL MOVE ON TO NON-ACTION ITEMS OF COMMITTEE REPORTS ARE IN YOUR PACKET OF WHAT HAPPENS IN THE OTHER MEETINGS.

IF ANYONE HAS ANY COMMENTS TO SHARE, MEMBER COMMENTS WITH THE GROUP?

[1. Member Comments]

NO. SEEING NONE.

WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM.

DR. YACINTHE, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT?

>> ACTUALLY, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE MPO STAFF BECAUSE IN THE PAST YEAR THAT'S KEEPING US TOGETHER AND GET THIS MEETING'S GOING IN HYBRID MEETINGS, NON-HYBRID MEETING, REBECCA, MICHAEL, WANT TO SAY THANK YOU ALL BECAUSE I KNOW IT'S NOT EASY TO KEEP US GOING BUT WE KEPT ON GOING AND WE'RE ALMOST THERE.

WITH THAT, KUDOS.

>> THANK YOU. GREAT.

>> THEN OUR NEXT ITEM,

[4. Notice of Public Meetings for the DRAFT Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2022 - FFY 2026]

WE HAVE THE OTHER ONES.

I DID WANT TO DRAW EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION TO IS THE NUMBER 4, WE WILL BE HAVING FOR OUR NEXT MEETING.

IT WILL BE A PUBLIC MEETING FOR THE DRAFT TIP.

IT'LL BE ANOTHER IMPORTANT ONE.

WE'LL BE GETTING THAT DRAFT AS SOON AS THE MPO RECEIVES IT AND LOOKS THROUGH IT.

PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO LOOK THROUGH THAT AND SEE HOW IT'S GOING.

I KNOW OUR NEXT MEETING.

IT'S THAT TIME OF YEAR FOR US WITH THE TIMELINES OF PASSING THINGS.

IT WILL BE ANOTHER IMPORTANT, IT WILL BE A VOTING MEETING FOR OUR NEXT MEETING.

THAT IS IT FOR US.

THANK YOU ALL IN PERSON AND ONLINE FOR ATTENDING TODAY.

HAVE A GREAT MONTH AND SEE YOU BACK HERE ON JUNE 23RD.

>> SAME TO YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU.

>> BYE.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

REGULAR ITEMS (All Items Open for Public Comment)

ACTION ITEMS

NON-ACTION ITEMS

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

May 26, 2021 Technical Advisory Committee

REGULAR ITEMS (All Items Open for Public Comment)

ACTION ITEMS

NON-ACTION ITEMS

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item