["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] ["The Star-Spangled Banner"] Mayor, if you could use your mic. Got me now? All right, perfect. We'll do this again. Call to order, Transportation Policy Committee meeting, February 26, 2025. First item on the agenda is a new item, added, review and discussion regarding new required review processes by the Federal Highway Administration and the U.S. Department of Transportation for NPO and State DOT actions involving the Transportation Improvement Program, Unified Planning Work Program, Air Quality Conformity Determinations, and Transportation Management Area Certification Reviews. Mr. Aviglia? All right. And there's our PowerPoint. All right. A lot's been happening over the last month or so. We wanted to bring the Policy Committee up to speed on what we know and maybe more importantly what we don't know. Last Thursday we did receive a notice that the U.S. Department of Transportation was initiating a new review process for some NPO actions and processes. This involves our Transportation Improvement Program, our UPWP, any certification reviews, and any air quality conformity determinations. And this review is intended to ensure that these documents and these processes are complying with Trump administration priorities. Now, there's some information going out about this being a freeze on processes, and we did receive a clarification from U.S. DOT Monday that officially there is no pause or freeze, that the processes are still moving forward, but we do have an additional layer to the planning process that did not previously exist. I wanted to review where we are on these four items that have been identified in this guidance. First, with the Transportation Improvement Program, that document was adopted by you back in August. We do have an amendment to that document that is scheduled for your vote today. And so that amendment would be subject to this new review process. For the Unified Planning Work Program, just as a reminder, this is the document that serves as our operating document. It identifies how we intend to use federal dollars as an MPO, or federal planning dollars as an MPO over the course of the fiscal year. We are actually about to submit a draft for the FY26 UPWP for review. In fact, we intend to do that tomorrow. And that would then bring it to you for your adoption in April. Again, this document, this new document would be subject to that review as well. And there's some question about what happens if that document is still in review when we get to July 1st, the beginning of our fiscal year. As far as our certification review is concerned, that was completed back in 2023. We do not have another one scheduled until 2027, so that's not something that is immediately on our radar screen. And for air quality conformity, fortunately we are considered an air quality attainment area, so that does not apply to us. But we put that up there to let you know that this does significantly increase the number of actions that USDOT will need to review on a national basis. So here's what we know for right now. At least for the time being, administrative modifications to our documents are not subject to this policy review. But we do have some limitations on what we can actually consider as a modification. It's basically anything that would be a grouped project, and that generally covers operational, safety, bike ped, or maintenance projects. It also allows us to adjust projects that are already in the TIP for an increased cost or a slight change in the project limits or maybe a slight modification to the scope of work. However, if it's something brand new or it's something considered to be a pretty significant change to a transportation facility, that has to be performed as an amendment and would be subject to this new review process. The other thing, at least as far as we know, projects that were already included in the TIP, basically what you adopted back in August and then what was included in Amendment 1, can move forward without additional review. However, we have heard from some of our counterparts in other parts of the country that there's some consideration of actually changing that. So that might be interesting to see how that might play out. Now, we had some new guidance come in this morning. About 9 o'clock this morning from KYTC. And this is new language that we're being told we must consider for all of our documents. And this impacts everything from our transportation plan, our TIP, UPWP, any studies that we might perform with federal dollars. And we can no longer use the term environmental justice in those efforts. We also have been instructed not to use the following terms. Racial equity, climate change, energy impacts, greenhouse gas emissions, Justice 40, or the Council of Environmental Quality. And this is effective immediately. Now, Title VI, the Civil Rights Act, is unaffected for the time being. And I think that's a statutory issue there. Basically, legally, that cannot be changed without an act of Congress. Now, why we can make the other changes without an act of Congress, but Title VI is still okay. I'm afraid you'll need a constitutional law attorney to help you with that. And I am not a constitutional law attorney. This is a very lucrative time for those folks, however. So some things that we don't know here. Who will be performing these reviews? Back on Thursday, it was advertised that the Office of General Counsel in D.C. would have to perform these reviews. As of Monday morning, there were a grand total of four attorneys in that office. The guidance that we received Monday morning seemed to back off on that a bit and suggested that someone else might be doing that review. But we don't know if it's going to be the division office, which for us would be in Frankfurt, or is it still DOT headquarters, just another office? And then are there other topics that could be subject to a review? The previous executive orders that have been issued are very broad and don't give a lot of specificity. And so that does leave open the possibility that we could have other things that are on the list of things that we're not supposed to talk about as part of our processes. We just don't know what those are at this time. How long will these reviews take? That's going to be greatly dependent on who actually conducts the reviews. It should be noted that the grand total nationwide is probably somewhere in the thousands of actions that are subject to this review. It could be north of that number even. And we also don't know what the consequence is if something is found that the administration doesn't like. So is it as simple as just removing the offending word or phrase or analysis, or do we have to start all over if they find something? We don't know. And then I've brought up the question about our work program. Traditionally, we have to have a sign-off by the Federal Highway Administration before July 1st to authorize us as an MPO to actually conduct work to be able to be eligible for reimbursement after that date. And so if our document still has not been reviewed, we don't know what the consequences of that are. So what's next? Well, officially, we're moving forward as if nothing has actually changed, because after all, there's no official pause or freeze. We are, however, going through the documents that we're getting ready to issue, including the tip amendment that we're going to bring before you today. We're going to describe how we're changing that to try to avoid a potential red flag issue by someone within the U.S. Department of Transportation. At the moment, we're also not recommending any revisit of anything that you've already adopted or that has already been completed. We're not being asked to do that at this point, and we're certainly not going to initiate that unless we're told we have to. This is also a good time to review some of the restrictions we have on talking to members of Congress, because that sometimes comes up during these times of policy reconsiderations. There is a federal law out there that says that you cannot use federal funds to lobby members of Congress or state representatives. And since my position and my staff position are funded through federal dollars, we basically take the tact that we do not initiate conversations with those folks or their staffs, but we can answer their questions if they have something that comes up. However, as members of representatives of your communities, you do not have those restrictions. And so that's why in situations like this or in two years when we have a new Transportation Authorization Act being considered, we do ask that you be involved at that level and let our congressional delegation know how specific things impact our region and whether you have a concern about those or not. Now, we're happy to give you a briefing before you have any conversations like that, but really you are the ones that have to have those conversations. So I feel like I may have given you more questions than answers, but that's what we have. And so, Mr. Chairman, we're happy to address any questions. I believe we have one from Councilmember Gray. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Chris, for your explanation of everything that's going on. It's a lot. And thank you for being diligent about staying on top of everything. So since we can essentially lobby, I mean, I do it all the time, can you make sure that we have, do we have all the information going forward regarding where we are with our current, what we've already decided on in all of the previous projects we have approved, that you can submit, say, to one of us who may be in Washington, D.C., next week, speaking with our leaders on the federal level? So, yeah, in terms of actual projects, everything we have is on our website. Okay. And so we always point to folks to the LexAreaMPO.org and go to plans and programs, and everything that you have adopted as a priority is in one of the, is either in the Metropolitan Transportation Plan or our Transportation Improvement Program. Part of the challenge through this process, though, is there's not been a lot of official guidance. There's not been a lot on paper or through an email or something that we can trace back to a particular office. And so that's been part of the challenge with this whole process. And also regarding one of the slides where we're evidently global warming is really, according to the current leadership, is not real. So I know that, but we live in a real world, and we see the things that we see, and we see the change in the weather, and we see the effects of gasoline in our atmosphere and the gases. So I know we have an agreement or that we as a group decided on regarding our, I guess it was the gas emissions. Is that still, as of right now, is that still a thing, or did we just throw it out? Yeah, the instructions we have been given is that we can no longer have those conversations in documents that are funded through federal funding. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Aviglia? All right. We appreciate it. And if you would, just keep us updated on any updates coming up. Appreciate it. Okay, moving on, first item action will be to approve our approval of minutes, meeting minutes from January 29, 2025, TPC meeting. And that is pages 1 through 6 in your packet. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by raising your right hand. All opposed, like sign. Motion carries. Okay, next up we have resolution 2025-2, amend the Lexington Area Transportation Improvement Program for fiscal years 2025 through 2028, pages 7 through 25 in your packet. Mr. Aviglia. All right. So this is a pack of projects that we presented to you last month. These are projects that we initiated a call for projects for to use our suballocated dollars. And at least as of this morning, there were three pots of money that were directly suballocated to the MPO. The first is the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program. We refer to it as SLX. And that can be applied to any regionally significant project or study. We have the Transportation Alternatives Program, which is primarily bicycle and pedestrian projects. And then we have the Carbon Reduction Program. And just those words that have been struck out don't exist there. So just there are projects that we can apply certain funds for as well. So just to remind the Policy Committee to be eligible for these dollars, you have to be an agency that is authorized to receive and utilize federal dollars. So we're talking the State Transportation Cabinet, LFECG, SAVE, Nicholasville, Jessamine County, LexTran, et cetera. We did receive 25 project applications. We have five requests for supplemental funding for projects that have already been funded. And then we have two other applications that were submitted for that were previously awarded funding. And then finally, to meet eligibility requirements, we do need to meet all federal requirements for the specific program, plus any new requirements that have been sent out over the last 30 days. And then the project also has to be identified within either our Metropolitan Transportation Plan or Bike Pad Master Plan, which we consider an extension of that plan. And then if we had something moving forward at the time as far as an amendment to one of those documents, then that project could be considered conditionally eligible, and that affected the Waller Avenue project, which you did approve an MTP amendment back in January for that. And then we have a couple of maps here, or three maps total. Basically, the project has to be on one of these three maps in order to be eligible for our suballocated dollars. And then this is the bikeway network from our Bike Pad Master Plan. Okay, we need to put some discussion here, and this is based on the new language that we received this morning. We do have a scoring process for projects. Through this process, you did approve that process in 2023. We did have two items here, which are on the list of terminologies that may raise a red, or probably will raise a red flag. One was transportation equity, the other was greenhouse gas reductions related to the carbon reduction program. And so, one of the things we now know is that equity is a big focus of attention by the current administration. And the way we defined it doesn't address racial equity specifically, but we know that the broader term equity is something that has been told us could be a problem. So, what we went ahead and did is we went back through the 25 projects that were submitted to us. We rescored all of them, removing the equity consideration and the greenhouse gas consideration. And it does not result in any change in project recommendations. I think that's because, to a large extent, the project priorities in the MTP still take those two items into account. And when the applications were submitted, the folks who were applying for these funds were also taking into account those two areas. So, what we do have, though, is it's going to look a little funny when we show you the revised scores, because we now have some projects with lower scores that are being proposed for an earlier implementation, and ones that score higher being a little bit later. But I would remind the policy committee that project timing is based on when the applicants told us they would be able to implement these projects. Just a reminder, you also identified an area of emphasis for 2025. It's basically design phases, especially for bike ped facilities or purchasing transit vehicles or trying to address complete streets initiatives or safety projects. And most of what was submitted to us is checking the box on one of these areas. So, let's talk about the supplementary funding requests that came to us. There are five projects that were part of this, totaling $5.8 million. One of the things that we're going to ask the policy committee to consider doing a little bit differently, and this affects a number of the other projects on the new list as well, is that these projects here can qualify being processed as a tip modification rather than as a formal amendment. Each of these five projects are already in our tip. Three of the projects are a bike ped project, so they would qualify as a grouped project in that sense, and thus be able to be processed as modification. And then the Citation Boulevard projects are already in the tip, they just need more money, and we can handle those administratively as well. The reason why handling these as a tip modification rather than as formal amendment is because tip mods right now are not subject to that additional review by USDOT, at least for the time being. And so by doing it this way, we think we can probably get the monies awarded and the projects moving forward faster. This also... oh, that didn't work out, okay. The I's should have been check marks here, so I apologize for that. But we went through each of the new awards here and identified the projects that could be processed as a tip modification, and the ones that are significant enough that, no, we still have to process those through a formal amendment. On this list, Waller Avenue and New Circle Road are the two projects that we still have to go through a formal amendment process. They're not currently in the tip, and they're a pretty significant reconstruction of existing roadway facilities. And so that's probably not eligible to be considered as a tip mod. The others on this list are either bike ped projects or, in terms of the trolley service, these are bus purchases. So those do qualify as a group project and can be processed as a tip modification. And then on this list, we have another two projects that are also a very significant rebuild of existing facilities. So this is the Richmond Avenue or Kentucky 169 project in the city of Nicholasville, and then Alexandria Drive, which is a safety project, but it's also a pretty significant rethinking of that section of roadway. And so we feel that those two probably still need to be processed through a formal amendment. The other projects here are bike ped projects, and we feel can be processed through a tip modification. And- Question? We do have a question. Thank you. Just have a question about those. Is the time frame, did those change for some, the year that they were supposed to be completed? We're not recommending a change at this time, since those are the times that the applicant said we can actually get to implementing those work phases. Okay. I thought the Mason-Healy one was further out, and I thought the first part of the design, the Campus to Commons, was sooner. So Campus to Commons actually has three different sections here that are here. And so the Least End of Versailles section is a little bit sooner than the other two phases. And then, yeah, I think Mason-Healy we always had as 2026. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Brown, did you have a question or comment? Yeah. Yeah, I did. I did. And, Chris, that's a little further back, and I appreciate you going through and rescoring those. But maybe the slide back. And I'm thinking about future, another one. It's where the language, the language about equity. I think it was in red. Transportation equity. So if we felt like that category was still important in consideration of scoring these items, can we just change the language of that category to transportation accessibility as opposed to transportation equity, and we can continue to take that in consideration as we score? So we are going through and trying to identify other ways to describe some of these categories. Okay. So that's something that you're going to probably bring back to us to consider going forward? Almost certainly. Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay. So this results in about $23.3 million, a little more than $23.3 million being awarded. We still have $2 million that we're not awarding through this process, in addition to monies that we intentionally set aside as a contingency. And we already have had a number of folks come to us who are project managers for projects already in the tip, telling us we need more money. So it's not a bad thing that we're not awarding everything here. Plus, we do not know the long-term status of the carbon reduction program. So it's possible those projects we may have to rethink as far as a funding strategy sooner rather than later. The most important thing from this slide is that we did conduct a public outreach process associated with this exercise. We did conduct a public comment period between January 31st and February 18th. When we are completed with the staff presentation here, we will conduct a public hearing for anyone who wishes to address the TPC on this matter. We did receive a total of 11 comments. They're kind of all over the place here, but we did receive two comments that were supportive of the entire proposed recommendations, one supportive of Armstrong Mill, three opposed to the Waller Avenue project, and the concerns that were brought up were pretty much the same concerns that were expressed last month when you were considering an amendment to the transportation plan. One that was opposed to the LexTran project, basically feeling that it was a better use of those resources to support the existing fixed route services. But we had two that were supportive of the downtown trolley project. One general complaint about the extensive use of bike lanes. One request to consider the North Limestone Roadway project. One, a request to consider bike lanes for Green Tree and Shinaway Roads. And then one request to complete the Legacy Trail to Georgetown. And a note here, the city of Georgetown actually has received funds from the Transportation Alternatives Project or Program to actually complete that connection. So before too long, that trail will not dead end at the county line. So we did present this to our bike ped advisory committee, which is our standard process. And they did express support for all except the Waller Avenue project. And they expressed their concerns about the bike lane being sandwiched in between the main lane and the main through lane and the right turn lane. And also about the extent of the cross, or extending the length of the crosswalk across North or South Lime and Nicholasville Road. And the increased exposure to traffic that that can create. So this is where we come to the action that we're requesting from you. And we are asking that you consider something a little bit different than what we normally do. We still need your approval on each of these projects since these are each funding awards that either we have not vetted through you previously or we're asking for a significant amount of additional dollars for a particular project. But we're asking that you consider directing us to identify the projects that are eligible to be processed as a tip modification to go ahead and do so. And then the ones that still have to remain in this tip amendment would still be part of this process. And we can go back through those projects if you wish so that we know which is being processed through which process. And so at this point we can go ahead and conduct a public hearing for comments here. And I believe we did have comment cards available for folks if they wanted to speak. But I'm not sure if we have any that have been submitted. But I believe we also per policy allow folks to address the board even if they have not filled out a card. Okay. Mr. Chair. Great. Thank you, Mr. Avila. At this time we will open a public hearing to hear any comments on the proposed amendment to the transportation improvement program. Anybody wishing to comment on the proposed amendment? If you would, please state your name and address for the record. Hi, I'm Erin Arnold Davis, 215 West Main Street, Suite 150, Lexington, Kentucky. I am here on behalf of Visit Lex. I am the Director of Destination Stewardship and Community Engagement. And we would like to express our strong support for the proposed trolley program to the purchase of the vehicles. The purchase of the vehicles to use as trolleys will allow the city to resume the trolley service in a new and improved way. It will play an essential role in enhancing public safety, sustainability, and parking accessibility in Lexington. Particularly in our busiest entertainment districts. It'll also put us in line with many of our tourism competitors who have public trolley programs to aid in getting visitors to and from some of the major sites in our destination. First and foremost, the trolley program will significantly improve public safety. With Lexington's thriving nightlife, it's crucial to offer alternatives for individuals who have been enjoying the bars and breweries in the city. And a reliable trolley service will help take people off the roads, reducing the risk of impaired driving, and making our streets safer for everyone. From an environmental perspective, the program aligns with Lexington's commitment to sustainability. And by encouraging people to use the trolleys rather than personal vehicles, we can reduce the number of cars in the road, can help lower emissions, and ease traffic congestion, contributing to a greener and a more efficient transportation system. Parking challenges in Lexington's popular entertainment districts are also a growing concern. The trolley service will provide a convenient solution to this problem by offering visitors and residents a reliable alternative to driving and parking. This will reduce the pressure on parking spaces and improve accessibility in high traffic areas. We must consider public safety in parking lots and taking vehicles off the road, just like the traffic issues, help with a solution to parking and safety. Ma'am, if you would, try to wrap it up. We have a three-minute time limit, if you could. Okay, so anyways, for all of these reasons, I strongly support this initiative and urge its approval. The Lexington Trolley Program is an investment in our city's safety and accessibility for both residents and visitors. Thank you. Sorry, that didn't go down. Thank you for sharing. I appreciate it. Any other comments on the proposed amendments for the Transportation Improvement Program? Yes. If you would, please state your name, address, for the record. My name is Kaylee Payton, address 1200 Manchester Street. And I'm speaking on behalf of Barrel House Distillery. First and foremost, good afternoon, council members. My name is Kaylee Payton. And again, I'm here speaking on behalf of Barrel House Distillery to show our strong support for the implementation of a city trolley system connecting key areas in Lexington, such as the Distillery District, Downtown, Chevy Chase, and beyond. Lexington has a strong, rich history, a thriving bourbon and food scene, and vibrant neighborhoods. But one of the biggest challenges we face is making it easy for visitors to explore all that we have to offer in our city. A trolley system would serve as a bridge connecting tourists and businesses to attractions that they might not have considered visiting otherwise. Instead of staying in one area, visitors would have the opportunity to see more of our city and of our vibrant community. Whether it's grabbing lunch on the East End, to shopping in Chevy Chase, or experiencing the incredible craft beverage selection that the Distillery District has to offer. And I think this trolley would also be a great way for locals and tourists to see our new park, Town Branch. Additionally, this trolley would alleviate ongoing parking challenges, making it more convenient for everyone to enjoy our city without the stress of finding a parking spot or paying for a parking meter. More importantly, as a business that serves alcohol, we recognize the importance of responsible transportation. And this trolley system would help keep our roads safer by reducing the number of people who may otherwise drive after consuming alcohol. We believe that this trolley would not only boost tourism in our city, but it will also strengthen the city's reputation as a visitor-friendly destination. Investing in this trolley is not only an investment to our community, but it's to our local economy, local small businesses, and to the overall experience that our city has to offer. We encourage your support in making this vision a reality, and on behalf of Barrel House Distillery, thank you. Thank you for your comments. Okay, anyone else would like to address the committee? Hello. If you would, please state your name and address for the record. Hi, everybody. My name is Rebecca Burnworth. I'm at 1170 Manchester Street, Suite 160. I wanted to speak on behalf of the trolley project, and we are in favor of that. I also run the – we have a Lexington Distillery District messenger group where we all discuss items, and this is one that I know gets the full support of all businesses down there, Councilwoman Reynolds. If you need letters to that effect, we can certainly try to get those as well. But following her, she said pretty much everything I think we're all thinking down in the distillery district. We do, you know, tourism for Lexington and being connected to downtown, being kind of that extra piece of downtown, we definitely want to be connected to take drunk drivers off the road to have that other opportunity for alternative transportation. I grew up in Cincinnati near Philadelphia and lived in Cleveland before I moved here, and I will say having this piece, this is actually why I take my children back to Cincinnati is so we can get on the Cincinnati Bell Connector and take it all over the entertainment district and just have a blast and not have to worry about anything. So I think I'd love to see that here in Lexington. Like I said, if you need anything as far as letters of support, I know you'll have all of those from our side down there. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else would like to address the committee? Sir, if you would, please state your name and address for the record. Jeff Wiseman, 1200 Manchester, co-founder of Barrow Hostess Sewing Company in 2008. I wanted to first just let you know that I was in Rhode Island, Newport, last August. They have a trolley there, very small city, and it was wonderful. It let us definitely explore the city. And I talked to them about what they were doing, and they reduced traffic there by 15%. I would like to yield the rest of my time back to Erin if she has anything to say. Let her finish, or are you done? That's all I got. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anyone else would like to comment on the proposed amendment? All right, seeing none, any questions or discussion from the committee? Mr. Brown? Thank you, Mayor, and I have a question for Chris. And this is in regards to the trolley service downtown. I know that that applicant only asked for 70% where they could have asked for 80% match of that. With some remainder of that carbon reduction funding remaining, would it be a big lift for us to increase that ask, the 80% with the remaining funding? Yeah, let me go back to the slide where we're showing what remains. So we actually have $380,000 that was not awarded. So I think that we would be able to do that 80% without too much trouble. Okay. I don't have a calculator on me, but I would be interested in making a motion to do that. Do we need the exact amount, or would the percentages be appropriate, and is now the appropriate time to do it? Are you going to make a motion, Council Member? Yeah, but he's working on the amount. I think he's calculating the percentage. Yes. $480,000, and let me see what we had here. So it's an additional $60,000 added to that project. So with that, I'd make a motion to increase the award to the downtown trolley project to a total of $480,000, which is a $60,000 increase. So moved. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? And just let me just make sure that we're acknowledging that you're authorizing the funding for all these projects, but for the ones that are eligible to be processed as a tip modification, that is your instruction to do so. Make sure that that's. No, I think we can do it all as one. I just want to clarify that that is something you're okay doing. Okay. So the motion is to increase the funding by $67,000? $60,000. $60,000 for the trolley. Okay. So we have a motion, have a second. Any discussion? Okay. All in favor, signify by raising your right hand. All opposed, like sign. Motion carries. Great. Okay. Moving on, we have Resolution 2025-3, Adoption of Lexington Regional Highway Safety Targets for Calendar Year 2025. Mr. Aviglia. All right. There are a set of five performance targets that federal law requires MPOs to consider. Two of these have to be considered. on an annual basis and the first one regards highway safety. There are five metrics we're required to adopt a target for or at least consider supporting the state targets on. They are total fatalities, total serious injuries, which we also refer to as life-threatening injuries. We have a fatality rate, a serious injury rate, and then a combination of non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries, which is mostly bicyclists and pedestrians, but there are other categories that fit in there. And as I mentioned, we can either adopt our own targets or we can support the state targets. This is a process that has been established through federal statute and regulations and we do follow those. The target must cover five years, but the challenge here is that four of those five years is actual hard data from what's happened in the immediate past four years. So the only year that we get to play around with is for 2025. Now another important factor here is that the MPO has adopted a Vision Zero policy. So our goal, our official goal, is to achieve zero fatalities and serious injuries by the year 2050. Now the state targets currently do not incorporate a Vision Zero goal. They do have a goal that these metrics should not increase, but they do not work towards zero. And so given that, if we're going to be consistent with our policy, then we need to be on a trend line heading towards zero when we adopt our targets. So let's first review what happened last year. So last year our adopted goal was for 40 fatalities, 109 serious injuries, and 23 non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries. What actually occurred last year in each case was worse than that, and in terms of serious injuries and the non-motorized categories, it was much worse. So that's that's something that I think everyone has picked up on. There's the new street committee that the LFUCD Council has initiated, and then of course we have a number of other initiatives that the MPO is in the middle of. But this is why this is why we're working on these efforts. These are the three main targets that we're looking at, and you can see here that we're trying to be on this trend line towards zero by the year 2050. And the target number that we have on here is what we would insert into the year 2025 when we're actually sending this to the federal government. So we're trying to show that we're on this trend line here. Now we don't have to approve that number. We can approve something lower. We can actually approve zero if you want to. But I think the last time that we actually had zero fatality or traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries was probably the year before we first sold a motor vehicle in Fayette County. So if we follow this trend line here, what we would be inserting for calendar year 2025 would be 38 fatalities, 105 serious injuries. The fatality and serious injury rates are determined by how many motor vehicle miles of travel are occurring, and then 23 non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries. Now again, that's just one data point in what's a five-year target. The other four years are actual hard numbers. And so what ends up happening in here is when we plug in that 38, considering the last four years were some of the worst years we've had in the last 20, is that the target actually goes up for fatalities relative to what we adopted last year. And that's a hundred percent because of the what's actually been occurring within our region. So in order to bring that number down, then our calendar year 2025 target would have to be at least, I believe it's 32, to actually be going downwards. And we haven't had a year with 32 fatalities or less probably for the last decade. So that's part of the challenge that we're facing here. And I hope I hope it's a wow moment for folks. So this is something that we are required to do. There's not a, according to the federal government, there's no consequence for adopting a target that you do not meet. But this is intended to have a conversation about this particular topic. And what are we doing to drive the numbers down? Or maybe what are we not doing? Or what's an impediment to us accomplishing these sort of things? So with that, we do have to have a public hearing for this since we're actually adopting our own set of numbers here. And then we can go ahead and address questions by the Policy Committee. Okay, so should we do public hearing before? Yes, let's open the public hearing. All right, at this time we'll begin the public hearing for adoption of the 2025 regional highway safety targets. Anyone interested in addressing the committee? Seeing no public input. We have any questions from the committee? Mr. Wu? Thank you, Chair. Chris, can you go back a couple of slides to, yeah, that one and then the three charts with the downward graphs. What is the, I guess, what is the impact of picking one number versus another? Picking a, you know, a number that's on that trend line versus picking, quote-unquote, a realistic number that more reflects what's been happening? What's the consequence of one number versus another? So there's no practical consequence. It doesn't change how much money comes to our area. There's no, nothing that the federal government's going to look at and say, okay, you're not meeting reasonable progress towards your goal, so there are consequences. So there's nothing like that. It's really to have a conversation. Their intent is to have a conversation on this and have an honest assessment of what's going on within your region and for the policy committee to be considering these numbers when you're adopting the transportation plan and programming projects within the TIP to basically make sure that those projects are actually doing something to help improve the situation. Okay, so our choosing of the number, I think it was 38, would only be higher than, will you go back one, would only be higher than, kind of, if we were going by that strict trend line, which, you know, like, to be realistic, that line's gonna go, correct, gonna be a little bit squiggly or have a curve to it. Actually, a lot squigglier. Yeah, a lot squigglier, realistically. So my inclination would be to pick a number that's realistic based on what has been happening here in Lexington, that it would be unrealistic for us to say, oh, we're gonna go from 40 to 30 next year. And then to 20, you know what I mean? And it maybe sets us better, up better for success to be realistic about what we can potentially do and hopefully, you know, we can make a bigger dent year by year than what we even project. But I think being realistic might be a little better. Thank you. Yeah, so if we were going to be realistic, then our target, say, for fatalities would probably be something more like 45 or 46. There are two schools of thought here. There's the one where it's, you, going realistic, you know, this is something that has been the long-term trend. The other one is, well, let's, let's try to show that we're trying to at least make some progress towards a particular goal. And then through this process, we can see if we're actually on track to actually accomplish that or not. And then ask some of the tough questions about, well, if we're not on that trend line, then why is that? What, what is an impediment for us getting there? And to some degree, too, I can see, like, you know, that obviously a direct straight line is not realistic. You know, if we're, if this is something we're trying to tackle and we're really starting kind of now, to me, the potential sort of curve of it is that it's going to be slow going for the next couple of years as we start, you know, creating these ideas and implementation. And then hopefully that it's going to dip faster as we start implementing engineering, education, enforcement, all the different things to reduce it. I mean, we're not even bringing on our Vision Zero person until next month, you know what I mean? So it's, it's all kind of starting. So I feel okay about starting at that realistic figure and realizing that progress might be a little bit slow in the first couple of years. And then hopefully it'll, you know, ramp up as we go. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions from the committee? Mr. Baker? Thank you. So if I understood that correctly, it was plus, we were plus one from what our goal was? So, so yeah, from what we adopted as our goal last year, from what actually occurred, yes. And do you have the number for the previous year? Were we actually, were the actual fatalities down from? So 2023, I remember was 57 fatalities. That's, I was looking at the statewide numbers. We were actually reduced from the previous year. So that is good to know that there was a reduction. We were just plus one to our goal compared to our goal, right? Yes. Okay. Ms. Reynolds? Thank you, Mayor. I think that it's important to have goals and to try to go downward and we have been improving overall. I don't think saying 38 fatalities is that far off from saying 40 fatalities. I'm not saying that we couldn't go up or or not reach it. I don't think it's a bad thing to have a goal of something better and it's only a few off on that particular one on the fatalities. We might have to talk about the other, the other ones. So just my thoughts. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions from the committee? Okay. Seeing none, we'll open the table for a motion for the resolution 2025-3, adoption of the Lexington Regional Highway Safety Targets. I move to adopt the 2025 Highway Safety Targets for Vision Zero. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by raising your right hand. All opposed, like sign. Motion carries. Okay, moving on. We have resolution 2025-4, approval of MPO support of LexTran Transit Asset Condition Targets for CY 2025. Mr. O'Billion? All right. This is the second of the performance targets we have to consider on an annual basis. Today we'll talk about public transportation asset condition. We have one transit provider within our area that this applies to, and that being LexTran. And there are two classes of things that we have to establish targets for. One is for vehicles and the other is for facilities. For vehicles, that's separated into two different categories. There are revenue vehicles. Those are the buses. Those are the ones that actually carry passengers. And the goal is to have a useful life benchmark, or a fancy term for how old is the vehicle, of 14 years or less. In 2024, for LexTran, 25% of their fleet was older than 14 years of age. That's an improvement from what it was the year before, where it was 41% of their fleet. So that's a significant improvement. But their target is actually less than that. It's actually 20% of their, no more than 20% of their fleet, is older than 14 years. So they're clearly trying to stretch themselves to try to improve the age of their fleet. The non-revenue vehicles, these are their support vehicles. And Fred can probably explain what kind of vehicles those are. Their 78% of their fleet is actually beyond the eight-year age range. That is the goal. And these are goals that are set by the Federal Transit Administration. So we have no flexibility in what those ages are. The 78% figure is still better than what we had in 2023, but it's still a small improvement. Their goal is less than 40% of the service vehicle or non-revenue vehicle fleet to be older than eight years of age. So again, another target where they're trying to stretch themselves here. But the LexTran folks always ask me to remind you that even though a vehicle may be beyond that useful life benchmark, they're still safe and reliable. And they are doing Yeoman's work maintaining those vehicles in a safe operating condition. For facilities, the FTA has a very prescriptive method to evaluate those facilities. It's called the term scale. And there are five facilities that LexTran has that meet that definition. And the scores are anywhere from one being poor to five, no defects. And we are happy to say that every facility that LexTran has exceeds the benchmark score of three. And their goal is to have less than 5% of their facilities scoring below a three. Now here we traditionally vote to support LexTran's targets. We don't see any reason why we should consider something different. So our recommendation to you is to support LexTran's targets. And because we're supporting someone else's, we do not need to conduct a public hearing for this particular action. Unless you want to. Yep. Mr. Wu. Thank you, Chair. Maybe Fred is the best person for this answer. Will you go back a couple of slides? Yeah. Can you give us a definition between, I think I understand, revenue vehicles. Can you tell us about what vehicles constitute non-revenue? Absolutely. Non-revenue vehicles we use in support of a revenue service. So that would be something like a van that would transport our operators from our headquarters to the transit center. That could be a vehicle that our supervisors would use to meet a bus in route. It could be a vehicle that our maintenance team would use to do a bus swap. So it's all those smaller vehicles you see. They're all LexTran branded out in the community that is doing the work to support the fixed route service. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Aviglia? Seeing none. Sorry, Mr. Wu. I was going to move to approve. Okay. We have a motion to approve. I have a second. I have a second. Any discussion? All in favor signify by raising your right hand. All opposed, like sign. Motion carries. Okay. That wraps up our action items for the agenda. Next up, we have information discussion items, review, and discussion regarding the KYTC strategic highway investment formula for tomorrow program shift and the MPO role in the development of the 2026 state highway plan. Mr. Aviglia. All right. So we're just going to breeze through this. We wanted to make you aware that it's that time again where it's time to develop the state highway plan. This is done every two years in advance of the full legislative session. And this is basically the process that KYTC uses to fund or how they're going to use the funding that is under their purview for highway projects throughout the state. It is intended to be a date and driven objective approach. And the MPO does have a role in this process. And that role actually begins with our next meeting in April where we're going to be considering sponsoring certain projects for scoring purposes. And so once a project is sponsored, there are seven attributes that they are evaluated for. These are the seven attributes. And then we will get a score sometime in July for each of the sponsored projects. And we have an opportunity to award a scoring boost to ten of those projects during our August meeting. And so basically for project sponsorships, we generally follow what's been identified as a high priority within our metropolitan transportation plan. But we also coordinate that with KYTC District 7 and those folks. And we want to make sure that at least for sponsorships we're not sponsoring the same projects because we want to maximize the number of projects that are being considered or being evaluated. But then in July when we get the scores, we actually want to be boosting the same projects within our region because we each can apply a 10-point boost to the scores. And if it's for the same project, then it's a total of 20 points. And this is what the Transportation Cabinet will use to produce the recommended state highway plan in December. And then the Kentucky General Assembly adopts the official plan sometime next spring. And so we just wanted to make you aware that that process is starting. We're already having conversations with the District 7 staff on appropriate projects for sponsorship and be on the lookout for those next month or in April. Okay. Is that it? That is it. Unless there are any questions. Questions for Mr. Aviglia? All right. Seeing none, any general comments? Or if none, we'll entertain a motion for adjournment. First, Mr. Chair, just a reminder that the next meeting is Wednesday, April 23rd. Oh. Well, so the next meeting is April 23rd. There we are. But it is our Jessamine County meeting. And we will be meeting in the City of Nicholasville Police Conference Room at 717 North Main Street. And so if you come here, you will be by yourself. We welcome you guys to Nicholasville next meeting and hope everybody can make it. Any further questions or comments? All right. We'll entertain a motion for adjournment. I have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by raising your right hand. All right. Meeting is adjourned. What good is the dawn that grows into day? The sunset at night. Oh, I live in this place. For I am the warmth of the sun. Within me at night. The love of my life. She left me one day. I cried when she said, I don't feel the same way. Still I am the warmth of the sun. Within me tonight. I'll dream of her arms. And through them I'll breathe. Just like she's still there. The way that I feel. My love like the warmth of the sun. It won't ever die. Oh, oh, oh. Well, I play an old guitar from nine till a half past one. I'm just trying to make a living watching everybody else having fun. Well, I don't miss much if it happens on the dance hall floor. Mercy, look what just walked through that door. Well, hello, T-R-O-U-V-L-E. Tell me what in the world you're doing, L-O-N-E. Yeah, I say, hey, good L-O-V-E-L-L-O-K-I-N-G. Well, I smell T-R-O-U-V-L-E. I was a little gritty baby when my papa hit the skid. Mama had a time, time to raise nine kids. She told me not to stare, cause it was important life. She did the best she could to try to raise me right. But your mama never told me about nothing like a wild youth. But your mama must have been another good-looking, funny tooth. Yeah, I say, hey, good L-O-V-E-L-E. Tell me what in the world you're doing, L-O-V-E-L-E. Well, you're a sweet-talking, sexy-walking, honky-talking baby. The men are gonna love you and the women gonna hate you. Reminding them of everything they're never gonna be. Maybe the beginning of a World War III. Cause the world ain't ready for nothing like a wild youth. I bet your mama must have been another good-looking, mama tooth. Yeah, I say, hey, good L-O-V-E-L-E. Well, I smell T-R-O-U-B-L-E. I say, hey. I say, hey. I say, hey. I say, hey. I say, hey. Yeah, I smell T-R-O-U-B-L-E. Yeah. Woo. Woo. Girl, tell me only this. That I have your heart for always. And you want me by your side. Whispering the words, I'll always love you. And forever. I will be your lover. And I know if you really care, I will always be there. Forever. I need to tell you this. There's no other love like your love. And I, as long as I live, I'll give you all the joy of my heart. And soul can give. Let me hold you. I need to have you near me. And I feel with you in my arms. This love will last forever. Because I'm truly, truly in love with you, girl. I'm truly head over heels with your love. I'm you. And with your love, I'm free. And with your love, I'm free. And with me, you know you're all I need. I'm you. I'm you. And with your love, I'm free. And with me, you know you're all I need. I'm you. Alright. You guys feel funky tonight? Oh yeah. Oh yeah. This is an old Memphis song. Old Memphis song. I used to smoke five packs of cigarettes a day. It was the hardest thing to put them away. I drank four or five bottles of wine. I kept a glass in my hand all the time. Breaking those habits was hard to do. But nothing compared to the changes that you put me through. Trying to live my life without you, babe. It's the hardest thing I'll ever do. Hardest thing I'll ever do. Trying to forget the love we once shared, yeah. It's the hardest thing I'll ever find. Hardest thing I'll ever find. Alright. I stand. I had the worst reputation in town for chasing all the women around. I thought changing my way of living was hard to do. But it's nothing compared to the changes that you put me through. I've done everything I've tried to do. But it's going to take a miracle to get me over you. Trying to live my life without you, babe. It's the hardest thing I'll ever do. Hardest thing I'll ever do. Trying to forget the love we once shared, yeah. It's the hardest thing I'll ever find. Hardest thing I'll ever find. Say it one more time. Oh, yeah. Trying to live my life without you, babe. It's the hardest thing I'll ever do. Hardest thing I'll ever do. Trying to forget the love we once shared, yeah. It's the hardest thing I'll ever find. Hardest thing I'll ever find. Listen. Trying to live my life without you, babe. Hardest thing I'll ever do. Hardest thing I'll ever do. Trying to forget the love we shared. It's the hardest burden I'll ever bear. Hardest burden I'll ever bear. Hit me, babe. Oh, yeah. Trying to live my life without you, babe. It's the hardest thing I'll ever do. Hardest thing I'll ever do. Trying to forget the love we shared. It's the hardest burden I'll ever bear. Hardest burden I'll ever bear. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Won't you wear my ring up around your neck? To tell the world I'm yours by heck. Let them see you're there for me. And let them see by the ring. Oh, Nick. Won't you wear my ring up around your neck? To tell the world I'm yours by heck. Let them know I love you so. And let them know by the ring. Oh, Nick. Well, they say that going steady is not the proper thing. They say that we're too young to know the meaning of a ring. I only know I love, love you and that you love me too. Oh, darling, this is what I ask of you. Won't you wear my ring up around your neck? To tell the world I'm yours by heck. Let them see you're there for me. And let them see by the ring. Oh, Nick. Well, they say that going steady is not the proper thing. They say that we're too young to know the meaning of a ring. I only know I love, love you and that you love me too. Oh, darling, this is what I beg of you. Won't you wear my ring up around your neck? To tell the world I'm yours by heck. Let them know I love you so. And let them know by the ring. Oh, Nick. And let them know by the ring. Oh, Nick. And let them know by the ring around your neck. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I was cooking in the kitchen. And I forgot we own a radio. Me and dad were just like strangers. We never did see eye to eye. It came to blows one Sunday morning. So I packed my bags and I said goodbye. And when you leave that way, you can never go back. A train won't run on a torn up track. Sometimes I wish I'd never owned, oh, no. Because when you leave that way, you can never go home. Then I met a girl in Knoxville. Always said our wedding day. Left her standing at the altar. With a baby on the way. And when you leave that way, you can never go back. A train won't run on a torn up track. Sometimes I wish I'd never owned, oh, no. Because when you leave that way, you can never go home. Lord, I'd love to see my mom and daddy. And what I'd give to see my mom and daddy. Oh, that boring man. I'd get down on my knees and say I'm sorry. That I could only go back one more time. But I killed a man in Houston. When he caught me with his wife. And he told the preacher man to leave me alone. When he came to read my writings, he said, son. When you leave this way, you can never come back. A soul won't roll on a torn up track. All through eternity you'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me! You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me. You'll roll with me.