[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] step you're down [Music] here [Music] an good good [Music] sounds good to me good place get rolling huh we got It's Time we got enough people here okay he was woring about 10 minutes morning everyone uh the Metropolitan planning organization board meeting of May 9th 2024 is called to order I remind everyone to please silence all electronic devices please note that this meeting is being broadcast and a video of the meeting will be available after the meeting is concluded on the County's website this time I ask you all to please rise for invocation and Pledge of Allegiance merciful Creator your hand is open wide to satisfy the needs of every PR make us thankful for your loving Providence and Grant that we remembering the account that we must one day give may be faithful stewards of your good gift amen I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all U Madam clerk please call the role City Commissioner St here councilman Lance Smith Mayor John Eric here commissioner Ronald E Oakley here commissioner Seth waitman here commissioner Cather sty commissioner Jack Marano chairman M Murphy here okay um do we have anybody signed up for a public comment anybody wish to speak all right we're going to move on to our action items then um the meeting minutes from the April 11th 2024 no board meeting are not yet available and will be presented at the next no board meeting which is scheduled for June 13th 2024 um we have our no advisory committee reports citizens advisory committee Mr Johnny korus good morning uh thank you I just am going to review um I'm going to focus on one of the action items that we reviewed at the CAC um all of the other items that you will see today uh the CAC saw and they recommended to approve those items for all of the action items uh the item that I want to focus on is the role of the transit providers in a in a potential Regional no and I really appreciate the CAC the effort that they're putting into this we did a uh we'll call it a deep dive at the CAC meeting U they're really trying to understand the implications of each one of these decisions uh and I really appreciate that and after significant discussion uh the CAC voted unanimously to recommend the transit providers on a potential Regional no board be represented through one voting seat um that would rotate U through each of the three transfer providers and they also recommended that that would be a non-elected official uh like I said there was a lot of discussion and I really appreciate them trying to understand the implications of of each one of these decisions um they know that there will be significant discussions upcoming uh and again I appreciate their efforts there any questions about the discussion or anything anyone all right thank you thank you sir uh next up we have uh the technical advisory committee Mr Klay Watkins good morning chairman and commission members um I too I'm mainly going to focus on only one item that was discussed during our meeting everything else was a passed unanimously um the techn advisor committee did have a pretty long and stin some discussion also on the same item that Johnny just spoke of the role of the transit providers um we actually have a different re slightly different recommendation um our recommendation was to provide that each of the three providers would be have a seat uh a non-elected official would that and they would all have voting um our concern with leaving it as a rotation of every three years would sort of leave Pasco out only have a voice when it comes to public transportation on that third year instead of um entirely so that was that was basically all of our all our recommendations see if you guys have any questions no thank very much thank you all right next up we have bicyle and pedestrian advisory committee M DEA Mitchell I just wanted to take this opportunity to introduce to you our vice chair de Mitchell who lives in San Antonio on this side of the county and just really appreciate the the work that she does and Brian does for this committee so I just wanted to get take advantage of this opportunity welcome thank you morning chairman Commissioners um I have a few quick things that I wanted to go over with you this morning first um we did approve the 2529 tip however we would like to make a special note that there was an item removed from the tip a state road 504 a lighting project that was pulled as a result of not finding an agreement between between Duke power and the county to install lighting we would just encourage as lighting is such a safety concern that that item be Revisited and that we come to some sort of resolution if possible to get that item back on the in the future we also voted for the merger presentation similarly to the CAC that the rotating seat of three Transit providers would alternate with oneyear terms um also an appointed not voted for seat in addition to that the orange belt project Trail updates the bpac would like to suggest that in addition to the current Crossing at 54 in Trinity that we also include the segment at 54 near the cemetery that was a midblock push lighted crosswalk not as an alternative route but as an additional route to what is currently planned and also um we spoke quite a bit about the safety of walking and biking and utilizing those crosswalks the importance of that and thus why we feel that the crosswalk lighted midblock and so for any questions on those items sure commission the 54 like what was the impass with Duke I I believe that the financial responsibilities of Duke were we just were not able to come to an agreement that the cost was was just going to be prohibitive for putting those in um and the conversations to my knowledge have stopped on that so we would like to encourage that that be Revisited well i' like to see were you involved in that yeah like to have some get some details and Clarity on that particular issue can thank you thank you that there would be a need for some lighting in that area too and yeah yeah definitely yeah that's it's a critical safety issue any other questions all right thank you okay we're going to move on to our next action items uh number one Tampa Bay M merger presentation um Miss tenia Gorman sir good morning everyone morning so I want to go back before I start this conversation this presentation um of our initial discussion um that we had with the current role of Transportation operators uh about in February when I came to you the first time I also have Miss Nina elen the executive director of go Pasco here that will come up and say a few words after the presentation um just to kind of give you the perspective of the Transit Agency so initially when I came to the board in February of this year we discussed the current role of Transit operators on the board we I set up this slide to demonstrate how Hillsboro and Ford pelis has um they have Transit Representatives on their board uh Hillsboro has four and Ford pelis has one they actually on Ford pelis board serves a countywide planning Authority on PSTA and the m board however go however Pasco andp does not have um any representative from the their Transit Agency so I just wanted to purpose the conversation with that oh oh sorry I apologize thank you so again the purpose of this discussion is to have a a discussion here with the N board because on May 17th we're going to go to the TMA and we're going to bring back the the consensus of the pasia board on how the transit operators should sit sit on the regional no board the goal is to clarify our position as the Pasco and po if the transit how the transit providers should be sitting on our merge mer M our potential merged no board um again this is a discussion that we will that we will continue to have we're going to have more discussions about who's going to be on the board so remember just keep that in mind it won't get resolved in one day and as I said before uh hillsbor Transit Authority they have an appointed official uh go Pasco is part of the BC and PSTA is an elected official on on PSTA board is voting member of the no board so we come to the role of the transit provider on the merge Tampa Bay M MBO what would we like to see the first part of the discussion is voting member or non- voting advisor um those are the two categories that we are currently looking at um so just keep that as we're going along also I know we might want to get down into the number and how big the board is it's very easy to go that path but it's it we really want to focus on who is sitting on to the board um yes we can start looking at numbers but then it gets convoluted because we don't know truly know yet who is going to be sitting on the board we haven't had our future discussions of small cities so we want to ensure that we're keeping the discussion flowing and not get stuck too much on how where the seats are we want to just pick who is going to be on the board right now so option A a voting member at a minimum one public transportation op operator har PSTA go Pasco would be a voting member of the merge n board so when you have a voting member you'd have direct public transportation operator voice options for the voting member would include an elected or appointed official again keep that in mind you can have some it could be appointed but it could be elected or elected or an appointed official could have one seat per operator on a rotating seat uh followed by go Pasco for one term psda for one term and so forth option b non voting advisor public transportation operators to provide a similar role to how we have secretary Glen and this allows public transportation to communicate freely there really is no sunshine um an appointed official or staff would be would would serving this role um one Transit operator for County a rotating seat or other Arrangement so right now the recommended action is for us to discuss each scenario and then come up with a consensus that we'll take back to the TMA board but before we have that discussion I'd like uh L Elin to come up from go Pasco to further this discussion with you good morning Nina Pasco so after reviewing some of the presentation we believe that uh each Transit Agency should have a representation at this TMA board just because we know what is going on in our Transit world and we will be able to provide not only our vision but also our projects and share with all all of you or all the members in this board uh and we'll have a voice in regards of our future projects um currently we only have we don't have representation heart and PSA have a representation at that board so to me it's like either all three are in as a as a board members or we are a non board M that have to be the three Transit agencies so we all heard at the same time so that's my my take on that thank you question I guess I have a question good commissioner if we have um go ahead a member on there does that take away from our other members that we have on the on that n board if you put a Transit member it will reduce the well right now the discussion is how many Transit members but if you put three versus one of course that will impact um how many members are on our board so we can't have our number they've given us now and a person for this we can discuss any alternate option that you'd like to discuss that does not mean we can't do it we can definitely present it to the TMA um but it's left up to us to decide the N you know do we want our Transit provider on there um I will say this Hart and PSTA are in Authority so and currently sit on their n board so therefore the likelihood of them advocating for that for PE for their Transit entities to be on the board will be very high okay chair commissioner so I guess for what we have before us I'm I'm more comfortable with the option b mainly because we've seen just challenges around heart and turn over there so until you know Hillsboro and Pasco uh you those are those are employed position so there's turnover in that spot or somebody gets promoted or what have you I think I think advisory would best suit us um because if the elect's in the chair then you're looking at four four years at least of of consistency so I'm for option b okay thank you and option b doesn't take away from your number on the correct still takes away okay yeah I would Sor I'd lame for that also non voting is that the option b um how does that fall within the I guess if they're on they're still on the board as far as Sunshine if you want to talk to people outside and they're on the on the board wouldn't really be able to right with option b and non voting there would be you be fine with that but the other option but option A there would be you would be a board member you'd be considered a Bo board yeah yeah I think I'd much rather be able to talk to them and they're the experts yeah right right mhm and as you mentioned Mr similar to the role of secretary gwy you know secretary Gwen's representing do and he's a non voting advisor type and so you know he can talk and so I would think that the transit authori since they are um part of the county the three County governments that would be a good way for them to be to with the option b that does seem to me to be the uh first blush to be the best option yeah I C well okay so so we don't have to vote on on this today do you or um well we want to take it's not a vote that it will stand we're not voting for IT department be the nonvoting advisor what we're doing is taking consensus today to bring to the TMA meeting on the 1 on the 17th okay it's a consensus because we have two Commissioners missing today and I would like to hear their input on what we're talking about yes and I did I did make an effort to speak with the N board as it relates to this so they are they will be aware all right can we have a recommended action for the of non voting advisor yes okay um have a motion I'll move so uh for the consensus today make sure we have import input from commissioner Smith and starky and Mariana them but to move forward with uh exploring option b second all in favor I against all right and for clarity is that is that the one or three one one I'm sorry one one voting advisor got it all right and that would be rotating among the Three Counties correct is that how we left that to correct okay correct I just wanted to take a moment you have in your packet um the Tampa Bay M policy clarification if you guys were watching the TMA you while we're watching the TMA previously uh last month there was a discussion at the last TMA in February there was a discussion about the two authorities port and Aviation as it relates to if Hillsboro County contributes to the um to any of their uh fees or gives them any money of any kind that can support their uh entity the airport does not receive any funding from Hillsboro County County but however the port does receive a very minimal contribution of $150,000 annually to support the port Tampa Bay uh for a Pilot radio system and that amounts about for about 0.2% of the total estimated revenues for uh which totals in about 11.7% of the revenue so um I just wanted that for a point of clarity and I wanted to make sure the board this was on the record as it was requested from the last TMA all three npos have shared with their no board questions all right thank you thank you I'll stay uh I guess you can just stay right there then huh draft list of project priorities so I have uh come to uh most of the board to discuss our our 2024 list of priority projects um we have had much discussion um we came to you last month to let you know that we have developed an automated process on the list of party projects which is an amazing accomplishment for Pasco M and now we have put that process into action and this is our list of the 20124 uh party projects as you can see there's quite a bit of um projects that were funded ST sr52 which many of you drove down here this morning uh is is almost we're almost there fully funded the last two segments on the bottom if you can remember last month we came to you for a letter um of support to give for a mega grant that would help us uh move 52 along and complete it faster those are the last two segments on the bottom we have quite a few projects that are currently underway and programs so we're really excited about this program list and can't wait to see what is coming next of course our number one priority is 4154 we truly believe as a county that is very important also as we are um uh working with FTE and the county uh to Biden veteran uh veterans in 54 so having porting one in 54 also uh that interchange built that would be a great um installment to the 54 improvements we already have the DDI so hopefully when all this gets done we'll be able to flow through that whole Corridor with no issues um as you can see number two is also of important to us uh it was taken out at the last for program uh due to fiscal constraints but however uh we are requesting it as number two because we want to make sure that that um that that uh interch that I'm sorry the southbound distributor is also um have Ingress and egress for emergency vehicles so that's super important to safety um and this year we have a new addition that we're really proud of uh we are helping to allocate 1.5 million to go Pasco to support their bus fleet and also supporting the Ada bus stops so we are truly um trying to help move people and not Cars we know we still have to move cars but this is just one step closer to that Vision that we have of Pasco um moving people around so we're really excited to have that on our list as you guys can see we have on this on the east side we have Giger Road Safety improvements we've been working extremely hard with the city of zepper Hills to accomplish this project um they will have a full depth Road Reclamation completed by the county um in the next fiscal year coming up starting October 1 and then then po will support and put safety projects on safety uh safety um improvements on there as we go through the project um a couple other highlights of course we know rangeland extension uh that is a big highlight for us here we know we have to build the road before we can get that interchange so we're we're very happy to support that project we also have Sun Lake Boulevard that's another key highlight um north of Bud Beckley to South Angeline property line we want to make sure we're helping to support close that Gap and then subsequently thereafter we have all of our 301 projects I won't bore you too much to death to death with um all the intricacies of our uh projects but as you can see we're going through and we're making sure that a lot of our bigger projects smaller projects are floating to the top we know our bigger projects will be taken care of but we want to start turning that dirt and showing that we're making Headway with these list of priority projects and then we come to our sidewalks um Wire Road and curly I know commissioner waitman and I spoke about this this really supports um his even though this isn't in his district but a lot of the children from his district go to the schools that are nearby there so we're very happy to be supporting this project by way of the County as well so I won't take up too much of your time I know we reviewed this quite a bit but if there's questions comments or concerns anything any conations heartburn you can let me know can you go back to the sidewalk slide said why Wells cuz it's broken into two segments sr54 to W curly South that's well okay y roads okay yep you got thank you anybody have any questions you're still going no no you no you you stop me you stop me stop I understand on the first slide I understand that the um swany way uh intersection will now be instead of a roundabout that it's going from what I'm hearing from the our legislative delegation it's instead going to be a a signal intersection that there's going to be some land acquisition to um straighten out the St Jo Road intersection I believe that's still going to be a roundabout but they're working on no it is going to be an intersection okay it will now be an intersection I do apologize I'd heard that during a earlier this year from our legislative that that have been changed so I will update that it will be reflected all right okay go ahead and continue no you're fine did you did you want to discuss um well there's one that I know on the list is our um multi paath on Grand Boulevard um I know we're starting some of it with the incorporating the new Fire Station from Gulf from Mar from Marine Parkway to Gulf but then we still have the whole rest of the way down the main street and I see it's unfunded um is there something we need to do to to get that moved along um on the list at all there's something we're lacking um I think I believe that we just have to present it for one of the projects of interest and the next call for projects and we'll get um see what you have done so far as far if there's any p& any design and you can go through um the Su process and Achieve uh federal and state funds if that's what you're looking to do um it it's all left for the call for projects that's how we take in the projects so okay anyone all right all right like I got off the hook easy all right well we will uh do a motion to um adopt the draft 2024 the party projects so moved second all in favor I I opposed all right good to go all right all right moving on to uh draft no fiscal year 2025 29 Transportation Improvement program Mr Scott Ferry thank you Mr chairman and good morning board morning before you in your packet is the no's draft fiscal year 2025 through 2029 Transportation Improvement program or tip the nopo's tip is updated on an annual basis and the tip is a 5year schedule and program of federally and state funded transport Improvement projects in Pasco County so in that regard the tip differs from the M's other key planning products in that this is a funding this is a funding document and not a planning document the the tip reflects the no's shortterm Transportation Improvement Project funding priorities and again it's one of the no's core products the tip is developed by the noo in coordination with the Florida do the Florida Turnpike Enterprise go Pasco and the Seven local units of government in Pasco County and projects in the tip are primarily determined through the application of the no's datadriven project prioritization scoring and ranking methodology which has contained through the lock which tenia just finished presenting to you the tip project reflects the the draft tip that's before you reflects the project priorities that this board adopted at your board meeting last June and it also reflects the project priorities of the Florida do as reflected in their 5-year fiscal year 25 through 29 draft work program it also reflects Regional priorities as established through Regional cooperation through other Regional npos this is just a this is a quick illustration to help you understand how projects flow through the MP's work program projects begin with the uh they begin in the Mo's long range Transportation plan which we are currently working to update they begin in through the needs list and then they filter down into the n's list of project priorities which is then provided to the Florida DOT to build their their tentative work program every year and then those projects then filter into the M's tip this is just a quick highlight of some of the funding funding amounts that are in this draft tip there is 212 million that is provided for new road for roadway capacity there is 124 million that is provided for resurfacing 31 million for bicycle and pedestrian improvements 54 million for Transit operations and improvements there is 1 million for for safety improvements and there's 5 million for no planning efforts this is a highlight of some of the new major capacity project additions in this tip document there is a new project to fund $10 million of RightWay acquisition for US31 from south of State Route 56 to south of State Route 39 and there is also $4.4 million that's being used to fund RightWay acquisition for the the widening of Old Pasco Road from County Route 54 to north of Sunny drive and there's also 1.1.7 million that is being included added to this draft tip for construction funding for that roadway Improvement project in fiscal year 2028 a few of the bicycle and pedestrian Improvement projects that are being added into this this tip there is 4 $4.4 million that has been provided for to construct a b bike bicycle and pedestrian path on pin Ranch Road in the Newport Richie area there is also $675,000 that's being used to fund a sidewalk um in the Pasco Elementary School area and there is $510,000 for design and $4.6 million for construction of various pedestrian Crossings along us9 the anticipated adoption date of this draft tip is June the 13th the effective adoption date anticipated is July the 1st that concludes my presentation are there any questions or comments any questions thank you sir you're welcome may I may I may I ask for a for a motion to sorry apologize Mr chair move approval second all all in favor I I opposed thank you good thank you sorry about that I was moving on all right uh let's see next up we have a Consolidated planning Grant Miss Laura I'm even going to try Shater Bor Shater good morning morning I am seeking your approval for the new Consolidated planning grant for the fiscal years of 25 through 2026 These funds are utilized by the no for the implementation of the transportation related planning activities outlined in our unit um unified planning work program also known as the upw thank you for your consideration any questions good all right we get a um move approval second all in favor I I oppose thank you all right Pas County MP organization final unified planning work program you're going to hear a lot of me today I'm sorry it's the end of the year so every year we come before you every two years we come before the m board to update our unified planning work program it is the 2-year budget that the N completes uh and updates and tells the federal government and state what our plans and programs are for the next two years our budget is currently a little over 3.1 million as Lori spoke previously uh we de obligated about a million dollars to um to to roll into this first year we have a lot of planning and programming to do over these next two years you're going to see a lot of different items come before you uh we plan on having conducting a freight plan Subara analysis we'd like to do a sidewalk G planning program um we're looking at an ADA compliance plan uh we have several plans and programs that we want to get done and make sure that we're doing it it also includes our payroll um and our office supplies remember the no is 100% Grand funded so everything we do uh we do it through our grant so this is a massive undertaking the staff did amazing I'd like to thank them for our help we revamped the entire process this year uh even with less St than we normally have so uh we are now in a a much better place moving forward so I ask you to uh review and approve the unified planning work program for for fiscal year 25 and 26 good move to approve second all in favor I I opposed thank you all right new members appointment for no technical advisory committee Mr Scott Ferry the Pasco mpo staff recommends the approval of Mr Brian kellari to serve as a regular member and Mr Troy SWAT to serve as an alternate member of the Pasco M technical advisory committee Mr cigary is an operation specialist with the transportation services at the Pasco County school system and Mr sweat was recently appointed as a project manager for the city of Dade City the no um the no Tac the the technical advisory committee also REM recommends the appointment of these two individuals to the committee anyone have any questions on these individuals Mr chair move approval second all in favor I I opposed thank you thank you okay takes care of our action items uh we do have one presentation on the agenda uh innovate Pasco 2015 long range Transportation plan project update and needs plan development overview Miss Allison flute flu I knew I get it wrong everyone does thank you Mr chairman members of the board I appreciate the opportunity to provide you an update with where things are with our uh longrange Transportation plan development and share with you um where we have gone with the development of our roadway needs plan got it so just to provide you a status update on our project progress um we have since the last time I spoke with this group made some progress in the development of our needs plan um that has also led to some of the initiation of our project prioritization process we're focusing on our roadway project specifically with that project prioritization um I mentioned the last time we've already completed our uh Revenue analysis development so that's something that we'll have ready to support us as we move into the development of our cost feasible plan once we've kind of nailed down this recommendation section but a lot of what we have been doing since the last time that we spoke with this group has been focused on uh public engagement so specifically uh we have been reaching out to stakeholders across the county um and also members of the general public so that has included Outreach um to folks like Chambers of Commerce rotary clubs neighorhood associations as well as uh presentations obviously to this group um we've had specific stakeholder meetings with representatives from County staff as well as some of our municipalities from the Western and Eastern sides of the county um our community workshops our outward facing publicly invited workshops took place in uh late April the 23rd and 24th the intent of those was to uh start getting eyes on our uh first draft of our roadway needs plan but through all of these this has been a very Dynamic process we've continued to have this evolve based on comments that we're receiving so what you're looking at is even building on some of the feedback that we've gotten to date um we're excited that we're going to be uh launching an online compliment to some of those in-person public uh workshops that we had as well that's going to be something that happens uh this week um and then we are going to be continuing some of our stakeholder Outreach um over the next week as well with an additional meeting with County staff um we've had some prior conversations with go Pasco about those conversations will be continuing next week as well and then we'll be back in front of you all in June for your next update but I did want to provide uh a little bit of an update on kind of where we stand in moving from the needs plan into ultimately the cost feasible plan and then most of our time today will be spent looking at the roadway needs plan itself so during the last time I spoke with this group we focused on the parts and pieces that were needed to get us to kind of the beginnings of that roadway needs plan and we're Focus fing right now on the roadway needs plan specifically but there will also be a bicycle and pedestrian needs plan and a Transit needs plan both of those are in different stages of development um but we do find it useful to kind of lead with the roadway needs plan because we know that a lot of what we're doing with some of our other travel modes is going to be responsive to some of the things that we see in those roadway recommendations so it's important for us to make sure that we have those unconstrained recommendations for our roadways from there we're going to move into project prioritization that's an important step for us obviously as we start to understand what we're seeing from all these different uh quantitative pieces of information that we have that kind of hearken back to the goals and objectives that we spoke to you about several months ago toward the Inception of this process and then finally resulting in our cost feasible plan where we take those project priorities match them up against our available revenues and that's where we going to arrive at that cost feasable plan that takes us all the way out through 2050 so now we'll get on to kind of the main event here which is the roadway needs plan itself so one of the things that we obviously do is we want to take a look at the 2045 plan that's our starting point and then we look at other plans that have been undertaken since then we pull in some of those tools like the travel demand model and our available safety data and then information like our stakeholder and public feedback we're also looking for Segment continuity we want to make sure that we're not leaving anybody behind if we have four lanes on two sides of a roadway segment we have two lanes in the middle even if our data is not necessarily saying hey this has to get there we don't want to create a bottleneck problem in the future so that's something that we were trying to avoid so just to show you a little bit of a comparison we uh did look with our new travel demand model data um to make sure that we weren't over uh kind of overestimating on some of our roadways there were 13 Corridor segments where we actually did remove a recommendation from what we had seen on the 2045 plan um for those of you all that are looking at your tables you can see all of those removals down at the very end of your table they're on the final page of that table um just to kind of uh take a look at those if you're interested those all had lower congestion levels um than what perhaps they were were showing in the previous plan so that's just something to kind of note there but we also had uh quite a few segments that were added and these were places where we may be seeing higher congestion levels that were were expected as compared to the last plan or that we saw safety issues that were uh kind of manifesting themselves and this is where I want to give a shout out to the safety action plan that the county is getting ready to commence because this is a really nice place for us to kind of start that process of studying what some of the safety needs are and then that plan is going to pick up where the lrtp leaves off and gets into a lot more detail and has a lot more opportunity to really dig into what some of those recommendations can be so we do have 28 corridors that were added and then we had two corridors that were modified and what that means is that there was already an improvement included um but we actually looked at changing um that project and ultimately what both of those were were um uh continuity changes so overpass Road and sunclose Parkway kind of making sure that we had a consistent cross-section across both of those roads so now we'll kind of move into uh the map itself and I just want to kind of point out a couple of highlights as we go through a tour and I realized that this is kind of small um so we also have some large format uh roll plot maps that Scott has um and he's going to I think hand those out to y'all as well if you want to take a look at those or you can obviously continue to refer to the screen but as he does so I am going to maybe just highlight a couple of things and certainly I'm happy for anybody to interject with with questions as we go you will see that many and in fact most of our recommendations are going to look very familiar to you we carried many things forward there were needs that had been demonstrated in Prior planning efforts those same needs were kind of conveyed forward again so you know great example would be Sunlake Boulevard um places like Sunlake Boulevard Ridge Road rangeland and to Road you're going to continue to see those uh recommendations out there with Sunlake Boulevard as a four-lane divided section Ridge Road continuing out as a four-lane divided and then rangeland and hour um having a couple of sections in there proposed as a four-lane and then the us41 to airon cut off as a two-lane uh section for range London Tower so other things that are kind of notable I'll just point out a few particular facilities and and you all are welcome to ask any questions that you may have as well um we do have a series of recommendations on uh sr54 and on 52 as well on 54 um we have our four-lane widening on a section of that between Morris Bridge and us301 um something that is new is we've actually added Corridor improvements and that may help me just kind of Orient you to some of the different facility types that you're seeing there cor improvements is something that's that's a newer designation here and this really stems specifically from that safety data that we were looking at so you may see some of those diamond intersections those are all safety related intersection issues that we saw and if you see those green Dash roads those are Corridor improvements and those are all related to safety so these are safety issues that we saw that kind of went beyond that intersection level to an entire foror level uh the biggest one that I think is easiest to see on the map is US1 19 um the entirety of US1 19 is highlighted for corridor improvements and those are really focused on safety um so as I said that kind of goes beyond a particular intersection to just highlight that we need to look at that as a section um you can see kind of the differentiation between some of our widenings and new locations there I'll also just point out a few of the new interchanges there are only three that are highlighted on the map they should look familiar to you one of them is on Sun Coast Parkway and then we have two on 54 one of these is already included in the cyst 54 and 41 and the 54 and call your Parkway is something that um the no actually recently had a conversation with fdot about we know that that's being looked at at minimum as an intersection Improvement and it's kind of being thought about as kind of a long-term need so the idea here in showing it as an inner change is that there may be a desire for that that was something that was talked about in the past um we can kind of put that as perhaps a little bit more of an aggressive um int if the need demonstrates itself kind of going forward so that was the rationale um that you'll see for that so just highlighting a couple of other um corridors of note we also had um some of those Corridor improvements on a s small couple sections of US 301 up in the northern portions one in Dade City one north of Dade City um kind of looking up on the US 98 section as well and also Al the widening of US 301 down on its southern side um from 56 to 39 um you'll see uh widening on mois bridge and chansy road just to kind of point out some of the things that are in this uh side of the county those are conveyed forward uh from recommendations that were in the 2045 plan um we still have the widening and new location on overpass Road I just wanted to point that out as the old pass go to Old Bridge section is being shown as a six lane and then the handcart road to Fort King is a four Lane section and then just one other that I kind of picked out of interest is old Lakeland Road um from County Road 54 to the 98 bypass I did want to point that out as a as a four-lane road and that kind of continues the section that we have on chansy so that's my very brief and quick tour of some of the recommendations across the county um again this is something that uh we invite you all to look at ask any questions at this time that you may have um this is also information that is going to be provided um in the public online Forum that is going to be going live hopefully today um there's actually going to be an interactive map where folks can go and look at these different things and see those attributes that are being recommended and there's a comment form where if they have any you know thoughts that they want to provide us um suggestions that they may want to see that they're going to be able to offer those up so that's also a great tool for you all um if you want to be able to kind of zoom in and look at something in more detail so with that I will just pause um I have one slide after all this but I did want to see if there were any questions at this juncture any other questions um I have one please um along US 19 uh it says Corridor safety improvements pretty much looks like you know all up 19 can you me example of what what you're talking about there absolutely yes so those Corridor safety improvements that we're talking about for US 19 are exclusively going to be F focused on safety improvements so examples of what that could mean um take many different forms we could be talking about offset turn Lanes to improve sight distance at a particular intersection we could be talking about pedestrian bicycle safety where we see that being a problem where maybe it's addition of crosswalks or better signing and striping at a particular location um it could be uh even looking at driveway closures um in certain locations if we see that the Turning conflicts are going to be a problem um or median installation where there may not be one currently um so anything where we kind of see those conflicts presenting themselves that we can look to reduce those conflict Point points would be something that falls within that realm of a corridor Improvement and again that's something that with the uh County Safety Action Plan is going to be able to be dug into and in a lot more detail and it also Builds on some of the work that the state is already kind of looking at on 19 do do signal timings come into play in that at all yes it can do so absolutely because if you're reducing some of that unexpected stopping that can help for sure thank you excuse me did you want this to be receive file into the record yes motion to receive and file move to receive and file for the record second all in favor all right thank you you did have one final slide okay just to highlight our next steps there it goes all right so our next steps are to finalize our roadway plan uh we'll be doing that following this additional feedback that we'll be receiving from our stakeholders as well as the public process um we are as I mentioned in development of our bicycle and pedestrian needs plan and Transit needs plan um so those two things are going to be kind of coalescing as we uh start to finalize our uh roadway needs plan as well and then finalizing that roadway project prioritization um so that we can move into um financially constraining our planning process so as we come back to you all in June we will have much more to share on the prioritization and kind of moving into that cost feasible uh process so I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the board today thank you very much thank you appreciate it okay um all right we're on to other business of course our next meeting will be um June 13th on the west side side does anybody have anything else for other business like to talk about just appreciate secretary gwy being here today welcome y thank you anything you might want to add good last call anyone anyone all right looks like we adjourn for today good Mr chair [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]