# Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) - August 26, 2026 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Committee · August 26, 2026 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/6863 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/6863?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2026-08-26 - **Body**: Committee - **Last revised**: August 26, 2026 - **Length**: 7,362 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** The transcript on this page is the Granicus stenographer's live closed-captioning track, captured at the time of broadcast (typos and broken sentences common). Speaker labels come from the same track. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Verbatim wording and speaker attribution may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Transportation Policy Committee met on August 26, 2026, under the presiding leadership of the Vice Mayor. The committee addressed two agenda items during the meeting, including one formal vote and one informational presentation. The committee approved Resolution 2026-7 and received an informational briefing on the Draft Lexington Area Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for Fiscal Year. One member of the public provided comments during the meeting. Overall, the committee took one motion to a vote and heard one public comment. ## Votes and Decisions **Resolution 2026-7: Approval of Proposed Amendment One to the Fiscal Year 2027 Unified Planning Work Program** [timestamp: 00:05:15] The Committee voted on Resolution 2026-7 regarding approval of proposed amendment one to the fiscal year 2027 unified planning work program. Mr. Combs moved the resolution, and Councilmember Baxter seconded the motion. The resolution passed by voice vote. ## Budget and Financial Actions The Committee approved the following financial action on August 26, 2026: **Transit Planning Appropriation** The Committee appropriated $6,600 to Lextran for the development of a long-range transit plan. This funding will support Lextran's efforts to create comprehensive planning for future transit services and infrastructure. ## Public Comment Chris King addressed the Committee regarding the Liberty Road Project [timestamp: 0:46:25]. He expressed concerns that the project would negatively impact residents' quality of life through two primary changes: an increase in pavement width and the removal of trees. King requested that the Committee reset the design process for the project to incorporate neighborhood input into future planning decisions. ## Contested Items The Committee meeting on August 26, 2026 addressed two contested matters: **Liberty Road Project** Community opposition emerged regarding the Liberty Road Project, with residents expressing concerns about the project's impact on their neighborhood. The primary issues raised included a lack of prior community input in the project planning process and potential negative effects on quality of life. The nature of the disagreement centered on community engagement and the project's local consequences. **House Bill 542** A heated discussion occurred regarding House Bill 542, specifically focusing on the bill's requirement for appraisals on all right-of-way acquisitions. Committee members and stakeholders debated the implications of this requirement, with concerns raised about increased costs associated with the appraisal mandate and resulting delays in project timelines. The discussion highlighted tensions between the appraisal requirement's intent and its practical impact on project implementation and budget management. ## Resolution 2026-7 **Summary** Resolution 2026-7 addressed the approval of an amendment to the fiscal year 2027 unified planning work program. The resolution focused on the development of a long-range transit plan by Lextran. **Key Participants** The discussion was led by the Vice Mayor and Mr. Combs. **Outcome** The resolution was approved. ## Draft Lexington Area Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for Fiscal Year The Committee reviewed the draft Lexington Area Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for fiscal years 2027-2030 [timestamp: 0:05:46]. The discussion covered various transportation projects and their associated funding sources across the four-year planning period. **Key Speakers and Presentation** James Mills and Director Burton led the discussion on the draft TIP, presenting the proposed projects and financial allocations for the upcoming fiscal years. **Topics Discussed** The Committee's review included examination of: - Transportation projects proposed for the 2027-2030 period - Funding sources and allocations for the planned improvements - The impact of House Bill 542 on project timelines and costs **Outcome** The agenda item was handled as informational, with the Committee receiving the draft TIP for review and discussion purposes. --- ## Decisions - **Resolution 2026-7** — passed (0-0): Approval of proposed amendment one to the fiscal year 2027 unified planning work program --- ## Full transcript that motion passes. Next up is resolution 2026-7, the approval of proposed amendment one to the fiscal year 2027 unified planning work program or upwp. I will turn it over to you. >> thank you, vice mayor. A reminder, the upwp, is effectively operating budget for the mpo and identifies the work task that the mpo intends to accomplish using our federal planning dollars. It also identifies the task that some of our transportation stakeholder partners intend to accomplish using federal planning dollars that they have available. As well. And so we have one change that we're moving forward with here and that is the development of a long-range transit plan that lextran intends to begin later this fiscal year. And this is the first such effort that they've undertaken. When we actually started this and released this for public comment, we also had to acknowledge the fact that there was a cost investment for mpo staff approved by council and normally we would ask for additional federal dollars as part of that. However the budget division did identify general fund dollars that could cover the amount which was only $6600. And so rather that go through the fairly extensive process, we would need to do to amend this document and go through the additional modifications to our agreements, we felt that was a better path forward since the dollars do exist. so let's go through the a little bit about the long-range transit plan and MR. Combs can give us an update for additional details. This is their version of our transportation plan and the idea is look 25 years into the future to identify what are some of the opportunities for expanding public transportation services within our region. What does future demand look like? And assessment of current services and see if there's any changes that would make sense. The estimated cost for that is The lion's share 80% would be coming from their share of fta section 5307 dollars which is the urbanized area program and lextran has identified the 20% nonfederal match for those dollars. And we do expect that this work will extend into the fiscal year So when we go through this exercise of adopting the next upwp you will be seeing this again. So just recap what we have as far as a study, studies identified in the work program. We still have the complete streets design standards although that work is substantively complete but there are punch lists checklist items that will be done between now and the end of this calendar year. We have the winchester road road study which I would estimate is approaching the halfway point at this stage. And we do anticipate that will be complete by the end of june of next year. And then the long-range transit plan would be new. And that would extend into fiscal year 28. If you put all that together it's about $1.3 million. Although the lion's share of the complete street design standards has previously been expended. As with all things that we do, we do conduct a public comment period. Minimum of 15 days for an amendment. We actually had ours go a little bit longer than that from AUGUST 7-24 and there were no official comments we received as part of that process. But as part of our public outreach process we do offer the opportunity for public comment during the policy committee meeting. So we will we are happy to move forward with that and then we'll see if the policy committee has any questions. >> thank you for that. I will open up the public hearing public comment section if there's any members of the public who would like to speak on this subject show your hands? Okay. Doesn't look like we have any and we will move on to consideration and action. Do I hear a motion? To approve? MR. Combs and councilmember baxter. Any -- reynolds, I think. >> all right. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor please say aye. Any opposed? all right that motion passes. Thank you. Next up is review and discussion regarding the draft lexington area transportation improvement program or tip for fiscal year And let's see tip document provided separately. >> all right. So the transportation improvement program for those that are watching and for those in the audience here this is the implementation part of the transportation planning process. These are projects project work phases for work phases identified for projects that have been previously identified in our metropolitan transportation plan. And just as a reminder, the plan's priorities the policy board our policy committee have approved. And then the next thing that is required is that we do need a commitment for the funding for those work phases from some source and we have a handful of concepts here that some are more typical and some are stretching us a little. But basically someone has to agree to pay for that source of funding and we have to be able to identify what that is. This tip will cover fist qual years 2027-2030. This overlaps by two years the tip as currently in effect. And the reason we do that is we one want to align this with the development of the state highway plan, the state highway plan often identifies different projects or sometimes identifies changes to projects. That were in the previous tip so we want to take those into account. But we also this also gives us an opportunity to reevaluate projects to make sure they are still moving forward and making reasonable progress. Still are within their cost estimate to identify anything that might change in terms of scope of work or maybe the project limits. Now, to be ready to move to a particular phase of work, there are sometimes prerequisites here. We do have planning studies which sometimes are funded through federal dollars and sometimes need to be included in this document. And we'll go through those in a second here. If it involves federal dollars, it has to be included in our work program. Sometimes we have studies that are funded through state dollars and while we would prefer for those to be identified in our work program, that's not a requirement. Design phase, you have to have something identified in our metropolitan transportation plan for that to be included in the tip. And we do have a few projects that were identified in state highway plan not in our ntp and what needs to take place for us to consider those into the future. Have a completed design or at least the preliminary design needs to be complete before you can move forward with that. Utility relocation, preferablely the right-of-way efforts have been completed and then construction really needs to have all of the previous work phases complete before we move forward with that. Transportation services such as transit, is a little bit different. You don't have a right-of-way or construction phase associated with those. So we're looking at those being identified in our mtp before those move forward. Mentioned a little bit about funding sources. Three of the more important ones are the ones that come to the mpo from the federal government, the suballocated dollars and these are dollars that are like item identified in federal authorization they are intended for mpo's to accomplish their priorities. We have three sources currently. The first one is sox that you are probably most familiar with. This is a subset of the surface transportation block group program. The next is the transportation alternatives program known as tap. We get a subset of that for our use. Not to be confused with the subset that the state has that they award competitively for projects and we're hoping to hear something shortly on the latest tap call that they had almost a year ago now. Right now, we also have the carbon reduction program. We pretty much allocated out those dollars and we are told do not expect that program to be continued past fiscal year 26. Now, one thing that the policy committee asked us to do if we are looking at a right-of-way, utility or construction phase for a project, to take a look at the design that has been developed for that project before we include that in the tip and provide a recommendation including in the tip. And the purpose behind this is three-fold. One we want to make sure that the final design is consistent with the concept that was identified in our metropolitan transportation plan. And if it has substantively changed that the policy committee are comfortable with that change. The next thing is we also want to review this for complete street design principles and also to make sure that the proposed design is helping us in the goal of getting to vision zero, which is eliminating fatal and serious injury crashes by 2050, at least that is our goal. So what we're going to be doing from this point forward and we'll go over next steps in more detail when we get to the other side of the review of projects is that for the right-of-way utility construction phases, staff will be doing a review of those disibs designs and making the recommendation to our technical committee who will then make a recommendation to you. Then we have to talk about house bill 542. This has moved projects around with the initial draft that we sent out to you earlier. And it has some subject stab active changes however one is going to be handling the right of way phase moving forward. previously, for small parcels or temporary easements, a formal appraisal was not necessary. And the way I understand it if you had the two parties were in agreement with what the compensation ought to be, then a formal appraisal was not necessary in those circumstances. That has changed. House bill 542 now requires an appraisal for every acquisition. And that will affect cost and timing. And the estimate that we've been told to anticipate is that this is probably about at least a 50% cost increase for the right-of-way phase. And probably add about another one to two years to that phase. And so we've been taking a look how that could potentially impact projects that are in this tip. And you will see some of that as we go through the individual projects. So that's the preliminary stuff. Now let's go into the stuff that you are truly interested in and what I've asked is for james mills my tip manager to go ahead and review these with you. >> good afternoon, y'all. First we're going to go through the various continuing programs. The first one is mpo operations. Which is just mpo staffing and daily operations this will be between 600 and 680,000 dollars. Additionally, its upgrades and traffic management activities will be about $650 $730,000 annually over the four years of the tip. The valley view ferry operations is to add 540,000 annually. Additionally we have some programs that are wrapping up that chris mentioned earlier and those include the complete streets design manual, the winchester road transportation and land use study and also we've set aside $350,000 for any future transportation corridor or multimodal studies. So it's important to know what projects rntsd's in the tip. And these are usually group or expedited projects. These are not line item identified within the tip. But rather through a tip modification when the project is ready to proceed. These include like bicycle and pedestrian facilities, highway preventative maintenance, bridge maintenance repair and rehabilitation, highway safety improvements, its projects, transportation enhancements, streetscaping, landscaping, traffic signal maintenance or installation and transit vehicle maintenance or rehabilitation. These projects are expedited to implement without delay. So getting into the meat of our sandwich here we have the review of the proposed roadway work all 21 local projects have all been carried over from the previous tip. 27 and we have 27kytc projects 13 are new and 14 projects have been carried over from the previous transportation improvement program. So we're going to go through project by project. I will try to be as expedited as possible for everyone. So our first one is fiscal year 2028 mason healey road. Which is a bike pad and safety project. in 2029 and these are all design phases we're going phase by phase for each project. Design phase local projects, 2028 mason healey road. 2029 alexandria drive from versailles road to lane allen a bike pad project. 2029, bryant trail liberty road and gap connection a bike pad project. 2029 campus to commons, leestown to versailles. Bike pad and safety. New circle road to eastlands parkway, bike pad and safety. 2030 campus to commons south broadway to south limestone. Georgetown road, and nina drive to spur road. Bike pad and 2030, russell cave 11 avenue to park place and these are the design phases for the projects. The right-of-way phases for local projects include 2027, armstrong mill bike pad improvements. 27, liberty road inside new circle. 27, west lawn streetscape and bike safety project we're starting to see those impacts from house bill 542. 2028 an added year for citation trail section 2, bike pad. And 2028 lane allen sidewalks you will see more impacts from that house bill in further slides. So the utility phases for local projects, 2029 plus two years for lane allen sidewalks which is a bike pad improvement. And then getting into our construction projects is where you see that impact. Construction phases local projects, 2027, for both east high shared use trail and west high shared use trail. 2028 for alumni trail shared use path. 2028 harrodsburg trail section one an additional year. And the same for west 11th streetscape a 2028 project. In 2029 projects each of these increased by two years which includes armstrong mill bike pad improvements, citation boulevard section 3b, lane allen sidewalks, and north limestone improvements whether it's to new circle and 2029 liberty road improvements inside new circle road. >> the date that is listed is it is that include the plus one year or is that plus a year? >> that includes that year being added to it. Originally wayne allen would be done in 2027 and now it's projected to get done in 2029. >> that helps a little. >> it's not adding additional because particularly if it was adding additional past that we pass this tip which would be It wouldn't be something we'd list in this document. Next we look at kytc projects because these are in the state highway plan, the years stay the same. This is what the state has listed. And we have not edited the years or anything. 2027, I64, pavement mile point 2027, red mile road 2.6 million which is reconstruction and bike pad project. And these are all design phases. The 202 thine improvements at nicholasville road new circle interchange, ky169 improvements. us68 to clear creek road. Versailles road and porter place to oliver lewis way and winchester road midland avenue All these are the pass forward And we had to break out how many bridge projecs there were. There was a significant number of bridge projects if I have it correctly there are approximately, I think, six and just individual bridge projects. So this includes for the design phase, 2028 I-75 over north broadway and north limestone. 2029 I-75 northbound and southbound bridge over relocating concern any road. 2029 U.S. 25 bridge over ramp a And then in 2030 we have two projects kentucky 57 bridge over I-75 and I64. And kentucky 330 -- 33067 bridge project at elk horn creek. And additionally we have our right-of-way phases for kytc projects these include new circle road, trade center drive north of palumbo and 2027 versailles to oxford circle. In 2028 new circle road development drive to brintd station which is our ss4a project. And it's been updated right-of-way phase for 2028. 2029 new circle road improvements, railroad bridge to wood hill drive. 2029, versailles road red mile road to porter place. Versailles road oxford circle red mile is also 2029 and the next projects are 2030. Improvements at new circle road, new nicholasville road new circle interchange. Ky169 improves from 68 to clear creek road. Versailles road porter place to oliver lewis way. >> I am going to keep asking this question at every meeting. Why would we need right-of-way phase from on versailles road? We need the other ones that are moved down further to complete the rest of the project but we already did an improvement project from wiley to oxford. >> this is what was outlined in the state highway plan so we carried that over. >> I keep asking this because it doesn't make sense. >> yes, I think that is an excellent question to forward to the transportation cabinet. >> and I have been told well they are just going to use the money for versailles what needs to be done on versailles and not worry about the parts that is done but when it's outlined like that I don't want to spend money on something we already did and not on something we need to do. >> if any money in a phase is not used it can be put into the next phases of the project. >> I'm not sure that is really the case. However the reason we go through this exercise is to make sure that you are comfortable with what's being identified here and if there's something you have a concern about you are not obligated to put a particular project or a particular work phase-in this document. And so if this is something that you feel is not something that makes sense, then that's why we go through this exercise. >> well, I will echo to my colleagues here that I feel like it's very important to put money towards improvements on versailles road. But from mason healey to oliver lewis wiley is further down, viely we did a project I would like to see the rest of the project that we put money towards the design moved up sooner instead of putting money from viely, MR. Burton. >> I think I can help here. When this project was setup this is how it was delineated. And getting that change literally takes an act of the state, which is not worth doing to be frank. So to save us time but still get the money it was left in these bins. The reality is we can move money amongst bins. And the reality is probably won't spend any right-of-way money on this section because we have to keep bins as they were assigned 30,000 years ago. This is where they are. Going forward realistically we have started the design of section from mason healey to porter place again a weird spot to stop but that is how it was set. It will be mason healey to the railroad bridge. >> can we use that money for the right-of-way phase where it says viely towards that new section? >> yes, and no. We're using design money that is in the design phase for that portion for the other portions. But there really won't be right-of-way money at that phase because we are not going to do anything in that section. >> what happens to the designated right-of-way money for 2027 for that section? It will go away and used for other things? >> yes, because there is no right-of-way acquisitions there won't be money assigned there. The money will be in the segments from versailles inbound. This is just a place keeper it doesn't mean anything. >> I will go ahead and speak to that. What doug is saying there is money identified from wiley road to oxford circle but we were just in the scoping phase in the design for this project. The good thing we're seeing here is we do have sections of versailles road into the future years. So once we get further into the design we will have better estimates what that right-of-way And the highway plan then we'll see those monies move forward hopefully. So as doug was saying, yeah, these sections have been identified a longtime ago so that is how it laid out as it But as far as the 2027 money the national highway dollars that are in there, likely wouldn't be authorized for those sections. It would just be put in for the next highway plan to be allocated for the future years for the next highway plan. >> I would like to ask my colleagues and others on this committee to please remember versailles road when I'm not here. And please help it move forward. Thank you. >> so our next set of phases are utility phases. Kytc projects in 2027 we have winchester road from polo club boulevard to kentucky 859 haley road. And we have 202 aid set for the utility phase for the safe streets for all project on new circle road from development drive to bryant station. In 2028 versailles road and viely road to oxford circle and 2029, new circle road improvements trade center to railroad bridge north palumbo drive. And 2029 we haver is vie road to red mile. And then these last three projects are 2023 improvements at nicholasville, new circle interchange, U.S. 68 to clear creek road and versailles red million road to porter place. And we also had to break out the construction phases for the years so these are 2027 to 29. This includes construct citation boulevard in fiscal year 27. The russell cave road to newtown pike extension. And georgetown road improvements concern any road to iron works road. 64, I-75 to paris pike to the southern split. I64 pavement rehab scott county wib to I-75 northern split. I-75 southbound bridge replaced In 28 we have four projects east nicholasville bypass at U.S. 27. Georgetown improvements spur road to concern any road. Liberty road grafton's mill to ky4 and north broadway rj core man bridge reconstruction and in 2029 we have our new circle road development drive to bryant station safe streets for all project. In 2030 we also have more projects all of there's six. So these include I64, I-75 common ground improvements. I64 northern split to newtown pike. New circle road, trade center drive to railroad bridge north of palumbo drive. Versailles road to acts forward circle. Oxford circle to red mile. And ky4. And winchester road polo club to haley road. I believe there's bridge projects as well that were broken out from this and this includes I-75 bridge improvements over north broadway and north limestone. And in 28, I-75 northbound and southbound bridge over relocated concern any road in 29. U.S. 25 bridge oversy. U.S. 25 bridge over ramp a of I-75 and I64. 2030 we have ky37 bridge. And ky3367 bridge project elk horn creek. So there were several projects from the state highway plan that were not included and mainly this was due to fiscal constraint issue within the funding category identified in the state highway plan. These projects are list over here these include access to management improvements along nicholasville road. Alumni drive edgewater to man o' war boulevard. Haley road major winding hamburg connector, various ky169 improvements. New circle road westbound on west creek road. And these continued on because a lot of projects were given this funding category designation. These include north third street, king road mobility and safety, access and safety. New circle several new circle road projects. New circle major winding. New circle sound barrier. And new interchange I64 U.S. 60, near the hamburg area. New four lane connector between U.S. 27 and I-75. Nicholasville road multimodal improvements. Old todds road reconstruction and madison county. Tates creek widening improvements and tates creek two projects fall into that. Lastly we have four projects not included because they were not identified in they were either not identified in the metropolitan transportation plan and they subsequent amendment to the mtp would be required for the projects eligible for the tip. And we're working with kytc to identify amendment timeline. These include new circle road major widening harrodsburg to new circle road. And versailles road tates creek to nicholasville road. 68 safety improvements and kentucky river bridge project U.S. 68 in jessamine county. Additionally, the tip goes over anticipated expenditures. The lextran include the following new vehicles to replace those beyond useful life benchmark and lextran long-range plan. And it includes the following which are operating expenditures. Additionally transit capital projects that were identified in the section include the new mobility operations and maintenance facility for ada paratransit and demand transited services the total estimated cost is around $28 million. And this includes side development, operations and maintenance buildings, vehicle storage, parking associated infrastructure improve operational sufficiency and support transit services and a portion might be used to construct a satellite service for fixed transit service. >> all right thanks, james. So question. When we're the when we talk about on the red mile from broadway to versailles road, where are we from the versailles road to old frankfort and that part? I know there was a couple phases going on there and we are doing that other phase first and by the quarry where are we on that? >> we do have slx dollars that you awarded for the design of those projects and we're currently working with the division of engineering to identify a schedule for those. I think those are requesting to be a little bit out just because of personnel shortages in the division of engineering at the moment. Red mile got accelerated a little bit. And that's because there is a line item put in state highway plan for that particular section of roadway. And the word we're getting from frankfort is that this is a high priority for the cabinet. And so they've made the request that we include the design phase sooner rather than later for that particular roadway. We don't know the exact scope of work at this point. I guess we'll have a much better idea as they get further along into a design phase. I think our perspective is as long as the recommendations of the campus to commons study are followed and adhered to, then that's what we would like to see implemented. But, yeah, this was a situation where the state kind of jumped ahead of us a little bit. >> question here. Can you provide any feedback why the 68 bridge over the kentucky river might not have been funded? Or included? >> it's not included because it's not currently identified in the metropolitan transportation plan and to be in the tip that is a core requirement of this process. And so we will have to have a conversation later about amending the mtp to decide if this is a project you the policy committee feels an appropriate long-term project for our region. And we'll be working with transportation cabinet to identify staff recommendations and then to vet that through this process. Once that is accomplished then we can consider incorporating those projects into the tip. All right. Next steps. So this is a draft document. And there's no action required today on this document here. But this is something that assuming there are no further changes we intend to release for public review on SEPTEMBER first. And since this is adoption of a new document we are required to have a minimum 30-day comment period here. So we will be carrying that public comment period well into OCTOBER. During that process, or during that public comment period, we will be conducting two public informational meetings for folks to see what is being proposed, to be able to offer their comments and we now have those scheduled so in fayette county on accepted 23, will be at the library and these will be afternoon meetings. Jessamine county OCTOBER first at the jessamine county public library. Now, this would not be the only way that folks can get information or be able to submit comments. We'll have this posted on our website and folks will be able to access an opportunity to be able to submit comments through that portal. And our policy is we will accept comments however we can get them. So e-mail, social media, passenger pigeon we are not particular. So during this process also, staff will be doing the design reviews for the phases that have a right-of-way utility or construction phase identified here. And so we will be reviewing those for consistency with the mtp complete street principles, vision zero concepts, and then we will be providing our recommendations to the technical committee which then gets us to the next steps for adoption and our technical committee will be asked to provide you a recommendation on whether we feel comfortable with those designs. And then we will present all that to you during your OCTOBER 28th meeting. And the final thing for the public is that there will be a formal opportunity during that meeting for folks to provide input. Although there is a limit to three minutes for that. So we do encourage folks to take advantage of our public comment period and those opportunities are afforded to them. Especially if they have more extensive comments that they'd like to share. All right. Councilmember baxter? >> so I'm assuming through up until you all bring us a recommendation for the OCTOBER 28th meeting you will be taking into consideration the house bill provisions with the right of way acquisition. Because I can see where some of our projects are going to get bumped just because of the increase in budget that we will have to apply to these projects. We are not going to have enough money to do them all. I guess what will be the review process for those that we think the right-of-way could increase Are we going to have to increase our budget numbers by 50% to allow for those? And then you know, I guess, when you bring us the recommendations and projects have had to roll off, I would like to see those separated out so we can see clearly what was bumped. And what the plan is for those projects going forward. I think would be really helpful. >> yes. Absolutely. >> thank you. >> also, I don't know if this is a political question, but are the folks that pass the house bill aware of how much money and time they are adding to these projects? And are they willing to provide some level of funding to help us with that? >> I will defer that question to director burton. >> so the good news is the folks at the state right-of-way who run the right-of-way are talking with the folks that passed this bill. The impacts what it did wasn't the intent of the bill it was passed late in the session there wasn't a lot of time for review. And it became effective immediately. So state folks had to stop everything they were doing and adapt to a new state law that impacted literally every project in the state. Because every project has a right-of-way listing. I don't know the legislators were aware the impact it caused I'm confident now they are. And we're hoping finger crossed they will makeup dates to that in the next session but that is not until next spring so right now that is state law. Those are the rules we are having to follow and go by. There's going to be a built-in 6-month delay because we are having to act under the new law. Fingers crossed again next spring we are having a different conversation we are back to the old way of doing things and we can cut a year or two off. Right now that is the state law and that is how we have to act. To your question of them giving us more money I would not hold my breath I would count on them changing the law. >> and I wonder, too, is there any possibility or any mechanism between now and the spring session for them to pause it or do anything to give us time? >> it is state law. I have dean loy, the director of right-of-way we are becoming besties if you look at the e-mails. I'm trying to figure out what can we do? You can't use mars because you can't get mars can we use mars for anything else? We're trying to think of creative ways to move this forward. But they are holding firm because they are held by the state law which we all are and that's applicable to all state and federal funding which is almost all the funding that we use. We have to follow those rules. We're just hoping and I'm reasonably confident it will get changed it's just not going to happen quickly. There's zero chance of emergency session called to fix this which means it won't get fixed until next APRIL. So we're that far out of having to follow the new rules which by definition will set us back considerable amount of time. >> it makes me think about when at least council is working on legislation that has those impacts we usually like to give folks a little bit of time to adjust. >> this became effective immediately when passed. That really didn't leave any wiggle room. >> all right. Thank you. >> I have one more. Is there a dedicated bank of appraisers that is utilized for these? >> yes, it's this big which makes it worse. >> we only have so many people that can do it. >> we have increased the number of appraisals by 10 fold but we have not increased the number of appraisers. And that is why during training we went to kytc training and he said at two to three years -- add two or three years to your projects if this stays around because of the appraisal flag. If you don't have the appraiser's license now is the time to get it. >> thank you for that. All right. So we don't have any particular action items for actions to take for this item? All right. Unless the policy committee has any suggestions about specific recommendations that we have not identified here. >> get our appraisal licenses that is the next step. any other discussion or questions on this item? All right thousand. Next up is call for general public comment if members of the public would like to give comment please raise your hand. Yes, sir. >> should he get on the mic. >> come up to the podium and state your name for the record. Thank you. >> MR. Vially do we have a time limit state capitol three minutes. >> you will have three minutes. >> I would ask for your indulgence for a minute or two more I'm representing a number of my neighbors who informed me they could not take off work today since the matter I'm addressing is not up for a vote today but something we need to inform you about. If you cut me off so be it. I hope. >> we'll see if we can get it done. I wrote it out so I was as close to what artificial intelligence will tell me. It will get me close to three minutes. >> do your best, thank you. >> I'm chris king my wife and I are residents and owners of 1707 liberty road here in lexington. Our total tenure at this location is over 25 years. The first five as renters from 1974 to 1979 and the past 21 years owners of the same property. We have a long investment in this corridor. Before I get into the meat of my comments, I would like to thank chris and jim duncan who have been graycious with their time to bring me up to speed with the process and how this is working these days. I thank them for that they have been helpful. I am here not surprisingly, to speak to the liberty road project that is proposed for funding in the current fiscal year in this tip. Specifically I'm requesting that you decision makers elected and appointed use what influence you have to assist us in removing this project from the current tip for at least the present time. The reason is that although this project has been officially in the works in some form or another, since at least 2019, and despite the searches I have over the years verbally and in writing there would be stakeholder meetings conducted to create informed design effort for this project this did not occur. Imagine in our neighbors surprise this MAY that our first encounter with the project occurred on JULY 28 at an open house conducted in our neighborhood. When a complete and fully realized design was unveiled to With no previous neighborhood input, the project presented a massive pavement centric improvement disrespects the residential character of this corridor. This is our modest inside the beltway and relatively affordable homes which it seems to me exactly the kind of neighborhood this government hopes to sustain and grow as part of the infill strategies. time allotted me today does not allow me to fully verbally present inherent problems with the design and I do have pictures print you had out. But I would like to say I believe the proposed design will severely degrade the quality of life for the residents in this corridor. By doubling the width of the paving from front of my home from 24 feet to 48 feet including an unnecessary third lane. Taking front yards and attempts to squeeze in traffic circles and bike paths within feet of residential bedrooms. In our case creating a potential additional flooding risk we do experience flooding on the property and structure in my home by having this additional paving. Destroying over 130 mature trees that provide our unique neighborhood character and shields us from heat, noise and visual impacts of the traffic moving through the neighborhood. Removing parking from one side forcing residents and guests to dash across lanes to access their residences. And in summary in my opinion ignoring established principles of green infrastructure and context sensitive design. We have filled out comment cards and sought answers to the question and why and how this design was developed without any input from what we believe are the primary stakeholders, the neighbors who live and spend all their time which in their homes in this consider door. Corridor. I can't believe this is what the mpo's adopted, citizen participation plan would add the cake. So far the response from our government it appears in the draft tip presented to you, that is immediate funding this fiscal year this time next year all would be gone. For finding of right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation and construction immediately following. This is has come to us within four weeks this is a shock. We are and always have been supportive of roadway improvements which create safer driving and biking conditions on this roadway. We live there. We want that. But we have to respect the character of the neighborhood when we do that. There are many alternative designs that could have been considered that had not been presented and considered to our knowledge. I know that you are not voting today our request is simply that you slow down this headlong rush, hit the reset button on the design and show due respect to the neighborhood by engaging us in a meaningful dialogue before moving ahead. We believe our neighborhood and all others in this community deserve no less. Thank you. >> thank you. All right. On to other business do we have any other tpc item, questions or comment are or new business. >> councilmember baxter. >> I was looking for a general update on the brandon road construction. There's lots of stuff happening I want to know where we are in the timeline or on schedule. >> so the residents have been telling us. A lot of work has been happening in that area. That is actually going to be a two-year project going through as you know there will be a three-lane section and overpassover the norfolk southern railroad. The work we will be seeing is going to be there at that overpass there's earth work we have to be doing. It will be continuous probably not so much action during the wintertime, of course. But I think we'll start seeing more of the grading work starting either late this year or early next. >> could you give me an update with what about king was saying about liberty road and where we stand on that? >> well, I can tell you director burton can give you the update as far as the design is concerned since the mpo is not designing or implementing agency. I can tell you from as far as the tip is concerned, liberty road will be juan of those one of those roadways we will be reviewing the design and providing a recommendation. We've seen it for the first time recently ourselves. With that I will hand it over to director burton. >> thank you. >> so we've taken the design to the public. It's what we've done is typical how we do all projects we develop a couple alternatives and take those toed public for feedback. For this project for mason healey there's tons of projects we have there is not a preliminary stakeholder not a corridor study involved. We don't do corridor studies for every project that we have. And ones like liberty road where the need is bike pad related and safety related, we didn't feel there is a need to do a two-year process or year-long process of planning study level event. What we did instead what we do on most projects is develop a preliminary design and take that to the public to get comment which is what we did back in JULY. Now we'll take those comments in and adapt and adjust as we can there will be instances where we had comments project shouldn't happen. Project shouldn't happen means we are not making aircraft and bike pad improvements to a locally owned corridors. That is probably not a viable option. We're going to go back and finish up the comment review period is up now so we're going to review those and send back a response to those who made it so we can inform the decision it is not made in a vacuum just inside engineering with our consulttant. It's made with public input why we do public meetings. >> what is the timeline? >> our goal was to try to get to the right-of-way complete because this design is fairly well restricted geometricly by existing corridor, the goal was to go ahead and move forward to final design and have that done by the end of the year. If the this body and the administration says we need to slow it down to add more public input we can. But slowing it down a lot means those timelines we had up there earlier that we know it will be slowed by the rate of way -- right-of-way process get further slowed, that is just the reality. >> thank you. Any other new business? Just reminder the next meeting will be wednesday OCTOBER 28th. It will be in the same location. And the primary item will be adoption of new tip. >> all right. That's the end of our agenda so without objection we are adjourned. Thank you, all.