Director. And then during item 10,

which was the Ash Street discussion, there's a

phrase, Major Report that should be Major Roadway

Plan,

and that's in the context of we were talking about

Stewart Road briefly. And then there's another

place under that same item where I used the phrase

Context Sensitive Design, and that was written

Context

Sense of that design, so it should be Context

Sensitive.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Can I get a motion for

amendment to the minutes?

MS. BUFFALOE: Yeah. I'll amend my motion to as

amended by -- corrected by Tim Teddy.

MR. CREECH: And I'll still second.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. All in favor?

(Unanimous voice vote of approval.)

MR. SEEWOOD: All in favor of the minutes approval?

MR. TEDDY: We have to do that again, right?

MS. BUFFALOE: I amended. I approved --

MR. TEDDY: All right. Perfect. Thank you.

V. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE FY 2025-2028

TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP)

Attachments: CATSO Amendment TIP Project for 5-22-2025 Public Hearing.xlsx

Proposed FY 2025-2028 TIP Amendment Memo PH 5-22-25.docx

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Next up is a public hearing. Proposed amendment for

FY '25-'28, Transportation Improvement Program.

MR. SKOV: Yes, Mr. Chair. GoCOMO Transit System was notified, I believe, in March

that ATA has some additional Section 5339 funds available for them. Those are funds that

are typically reserved for capital purchases, which is usually vehicles. The result is

there's a need for us to amend the current CATSO Fiscal Year 2025-2028 TIP to include

that additional funding as a new project. This project will be to acquire some new air

transit plans, likely there will be four, potentially five if the purchase cost will allow that

number. The total additional funding for the project here is a new project of $668,521. It's

an 85-15 federal-local split. Typically, it's more -- typically an 80-20 split, and this one is

actually better for the local side. The Section 5339 funds, the federal funds of $568,243

will be available. On the spreadsheet on the next slide provides the details for this.

Funding is all shown in Fiscal Year 2025, so they are intending to go ahead and actually

make this purchase in fiscal year 2025. The federal source agency there actually is

incorrect. It should be FTA, and there's no state money involved here. It's just the FTA

funding from the feds and the local match. Again, the local match is $100,278. Federal

section, $568,243. The Tech Committee did look at this item at the May 7th meeting.

They did pass a motion to recommend that the Coordinating Committee formally adopt

the proposed fiscal year 2025-2028 TIP Amendments. The Coordinating Committee

action, after holding a public hearing, passed the motion getting approval to adopt this

proposal. That's all.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Are there any questions from anyone from the Coordinating

Committee?

If not, I'll go ahead and open up the public hearing.

Are there any comments from the audience?

MS. BUFFALOE: On the proposed amendment.

MR. SEEWOOD: On the proposed --

MS. BUFFALOE: Yeah, Transportation Improvement Program.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Can I make a question?

MS. BUFFALOE: Come up to the podium, please.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It sounds like a great offer and a great improvement. I have a

question about whether there are funds available to hire more drivers because I know

there's a shortage already.

MS. BUFFALOE: Anyone else from the public would like to speak on this amendment?

If not, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing.

Any additional comments or questions from the board?

MS. BUFFALOE: Mitch, remind me, these funds are limited to capital purchases.

MR. SKOV: Right.

MS. BUFFALOE: They cannot be used for operating.

MR. SKOV: There might be an instance somewhere for a different provider where they've

used them for operating, but I never -- I'm not aware of that. City of Columbia is typically

only using those. That's what they're intended for by the ATA.

MS. BUFFALOE: Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Any additional comments or questions from the committee?

If not, can I get a motion?

MR. TEDDY: Move to approve the change to the TIP.

MS. BUFFALOE: I'll second.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Got a motion and a second. Any discussion on this motion?

If not, can we get a vote? All in favor.

(Unanimous voice vote of approval.)

MR. SEEWOOD: Any opposed? All right. Approved.

VI. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED CATSO MAJOR ROADWAY PLAN AMENDMENT TO

RECLASSIFY ASH STREET FROM MAJOR COLLECTOR TO NEIGHBORHOOD

COLLECTOR

Attachments: Ash 2025 Speed and Volume Summary.pdf

Ash Street Designation Local Motion.pdf

Jan 2025 West Ash CATSO doc.docx

Ward 1 City Council comments on West Ash Street.docx

Item 6 - CATSO MRP Potential Amendment PH 5-22-25.docx

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Next up. Public hearing of a proposed CATSO Major Roadway

Plan Amendment to reclassify Ash Street from a major collector to a neighborhood

collector.

MR. SKOV: Yes, Mr. Chair. I'm sure you're all aware the CATSO staff did previously

receive citizen request and consideration to reclassify Ash Street on the CATSO Major

Roadway Plan from a major collector to a neighborhood collector street. Specifically, it's

the section between Providence Road and Clinkscales Road. Again, the roadway plan

does currently classify Ash, extending all the way from 10th to Fairview, as a major

collector. Ash has been a collector on the planning board for more than 30 years. This is

just a look at -- of course Ash extends all the way to Fairview to 10th. The section we're

talking about here today is the section between Providence and Clinkscales. Just for

some background,

CATSO 2025 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, which was completed in December, finds

a major collector as a -- typically, two or four-lanes so there is 90 feet of right away.

That's more, I think, usually bigger city's standard. City of Columbia design standards did

not have a four-lane option, and they recommend 66 to 76 feet right away for a major

collector. They are designed for lower capacity than an arterial. They provide both local

street access and circulation to the arterial street network. One local example of a major

collector would be Fairview Road. West Boulevard is also classified that way. And Ash

Street is cited as an example of a major collector in the Columbia -- or Comp Plan, the

city's Comp Plan. As far as neighborhood collectors go, the Metropolitan Transportation

Plan does define them as typically two lanes, up to 66 feet of right-of-way. They're

low-volume, low-speed streets. They provide access to local residential traffic to the major

collector and arterial network. Two examples of neighborhood collectors would be Texas

Avenue and Stewart Road. Just for some more background, traffic counts for MoDOT, for

Ash Street for 2024 and '23, did show AADTs to be in the range of 800 to 4,990 a week.

Period of 2022, back to 2020, they were slightly higher, in the range of 5,000 up to just

under 10,000. Specifically, that data reflects a section of Ash Street just from 10th to

State. It does not include the section from West to State in Fairview. I'll have some

locations of traffic counts on the next slide from the City of Columbia Public Works

Department, but those counts were just done in March of 2025, and they show the

average AADT from the six count locations. Along the Ash Street corridor, it was 5,633.

That includes the section of West Clinkscales, but just the section of Ash Street between

Providence and Clinkscales, the average AADT found was 5,416 vehicles daily. That's five

count locations. This is just a map of those locations. Five of them are applicable to the

request for major collector, or major roadway plan reclassification. Number six, there on

the very left is beyond Clinkscales to the West. Again, those are the most recent traffic

counts that were done on March 13th of 2025. One other thing to mention is the surveys

that were done, which were pretty extensive, during the preparation of the CATSO 2025

Metropolitan Transportation Plan, there was, we had a summary of multiple responses

received. One of the, actually more than one of the responses received suggested that

West Ash Street be designated a neighborhood collector rather than a major collector.

Tech Committee did discuss this at the May 7th meeting. They discussed it more at

length at February 11th 2025 meeting. They did take no formal action on the item.

Suggested according to the action today, we need to hold a

public hearing. Obviously, you have the flexibility of either asking a motion to change it or

leaving it as it is, or it's inclined to take the action on the item. And there has been the

idea put forth of a potential corridor study where we look at the system streets between

Business Loop and Broadway. That would include Ash, Worley, North, West, and

Clinkscales that are all major collectors, as well as Providence, which is an arterial, and

Business Loop and Broadway, which are arterials. And the study would look at how the

roadways would interact and move both vehicle traffic and non-vehicle traffic to the area.

So if the Coordinating Committee agrees, you might consider directing staff to develop a

scope of services for consideration to hire consultants. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Any questions from the committee.

MS. BUFFALOE: So, Mitch, if we were to choose to still hold the public hearing today,

but the Coordinating Committee could choose to take no action and direct to do the

scope of services for a study and then wait to make any changes until after that?

MR. SKOV: Right, you could table your vote until after there's more work done on a

potential corridor study to look at this in more depth.

MS. BUFFALOE: Okay. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right, any additional questions from the committee?

MS. BUFFALOE: I'll just say that that will be my intent. We advertise with public

hearings, so I think hosting it is important.

MR. SEEWOOD: Yes, ma'am. All right, with that, we'll go ahead and open up the public

hearing for the public to talk about the reclassification of Ash street. Anyone from the

public want to speak?

MS. DOCKIN: I just have a little question. I was looking at the traffic volumes on the

MoDOT website recently, and at Pershing and Broadway, they had -- let me see here,

6,156 vehicles. At Pershing and Worley, they had 3,799. And at Ash and Pershing, they

had 1,585. And so I'm just questioning, it seems like the counts are higher at the

intersections, but when you're into the corridor, at least according to what the MoDOT

website has, it shows Ash with less traffic. So I just have a question about that. Also,

when I tried to look at this, when I saw it was on the agenda, the data didn't -- I wasn't

able to see the data on my phone anyway, but, all right, that's all. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Anyone from the public would like to speak. SULLIVAN: I will.

I just want to encourage you to do this, because I live on West Ash, and our traffic is

really -- it's awful. We've got people passing other cars, and it's very hard to get across

the street. What we really need is crosswalks. Ways for us to live there without living on

a highway. I call the police on a regular basis to try to do something for our traffic, and

they don't have enough people, really, to do that, they only have two. So I'm just almost

begging that we can be reclassified. I've lived there 20 years, and we need help.

MR. SEEWOOD: Ma'am, can you state your name for the record?

MS. SULLIVAN: Josie Sullivan, at 713 West Ash.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you, ma'am.

MS. SULLIVAN: Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Anyone else from the public would like to speak?

MS. GARDNER: Christine Gardner, 112 Anderson Avenue, which is just a few houses

from West Ash. I'm just wondering, whatever is decided today, how will that impact the

actual West Ash Improvement Project? Our understanding is that to get the traffic

calming and safety features that we would like, we really need this designation to go

down to Neighborhood Collector, that more higher volume collector does not allow for

safety and traffic calming. So whatever you decide today, if you could please, at the

conclusion of that, let us know what that means for this project. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right, thank you, ma'am.

MS. SULLIVAN: I'll go again.

MS. BUFFALOE: We let everyone speak once.

MS. SULLIVAN: Okay, okay. I'm sorry.

MS. O'HARA: Hi, I'm Doris O'Hara. I live at 715 West Ash Street, corner of Ash and

Anderson, the most popular intersection for dog walkers and kids. And we have a -- I

guess what you call it, a young kid's school, you know, the church has been taken over

and has a primary school, or we call it, but for the small kids, they walk them in big

strollers and all kinds of stuff around in our neighborhood. What I want to talk about is the

corridor situation. Because I look at those other streets, you know, kind of sit and watch

and see what's going on on it. They're not the walkers. I think that's a key thing about

Ash

Street. Even if you go over to West Worley, you don't see the walkers like they are up

and down Ash Street. They have their dogs, they have their kids, they have their strollers.

And it's much more higher pedestrian traffic than any of those other streets. There's a

significant difference if you go and just sit and watch. And I think that's why we're really

looking for this designation is people. And there are a lot of people that utilize it, much

more than those other corridor streets. So that's the point I wanted to get across. Okay,

thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you.

MS. WHITNEY: Hi, I'm Marlon Whitney, I live at 304 Anderson. So even though I don't live

on Ash, I am a pedestrian, a bicyclist, and a motorist. And I go by all those means on

Ash Street on a daily basis pretty much. And I think the City has designated Ash as

what is supposed to be the major bicycle route through that area. And I think what

differentiates Ash then in relationship to Worley and Broadway is that high speed, high

volume motorized traffic is not compatible with a safe bicycle corridor. And so I think that

makes it a different situation than Worley and Broadway, which could maybe bear more

traffic than Ash can and still be safe. And as I get older, and I'm in my 70s now, I find it

difficult to cross Ash because in the past I've just run across like a dog and hope I don't

get hit. And I'm getting to where I can't run and jump as well as I used to. And so I think

children, older people, and especially we have a lot of disabled people in the vicinity that

use that corridor with their wheelchairs or scooters. I think to keep things safe for them,

we need to slow and calm the traffic. And we've been told we can't do anything to calm

the traffic as long as we're designated a major collector. And so that's why I think it

needs to be downgraded. And I don't think that's incompatible with anything the City

wants. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you, ma'am.

MS. MITCHELL: My name is Laura Mitchell. I live at 209 Ridgewood, so not on Ash itself.

You may know, but I just want to say it again, that the corner of Ash and West Boulevard

is a very dangerous place. The Hobbit House, I've heard of, it's been hit.

People just go off and get hit. I think houses on every single corner have been hit, people

have been hit. And I do think somebody's going to die. But we can't qualify for any traffic

calming things at that corner, and we can't hold for somebody. So we're kind of just

waiting for something to happen. Thank you.

MS. ROGERS: I'm Carol Rogers. I live at 111 Anderson. My question is, I know I've

been talking to Allison Anderson up here about the timeline for the Ash Street

Improvement Project so that the community can kind of not be taken by surprise about

things. My question is, if this decision, or however, is postponed for the -- what's it called,

the study that would look at the arterial roads and then you're going to get a consultant,

et cetera, how would that affect the timetable for the Ash Street Improvement Project?

MS. PARTIAL: Thank you. I'm Jordan Partial. I'm at 121 Aldeah Avenue, so my address

is Aldeah, but it goes along Ash, the side of my house is along Ash. I don't necessarily

have a lot of specific things to add. Mostly just here to make sure that you see people

are taking off work and coming out here and making sure that opinions are shared

because the project and anything that might happen to Ash is really, really important to

our community. It's a pretty tight-knit community. It's kind of amazing how many people

know each other, wave, know each other's dogs and people know my kid and stuff like

that, and so creating a safe environment that's walkable, bikeable, also obviously drivable

because we are right in town, is really, really valuable to a lot of people. I'm hoping that it

can be downgraded, whether it's now or after a study is done because, as everybody's

stated, we've been told by the City that some of the measures for traffic calming can't

happen unless that happens. I know some of those things are available. I also know that

there are cities all over the country who do things maybe that are more creative than what

Columbia's done in the past, and I'd encourage, whether it's city or this group, to also

think creatively about how to create safe environments for everybody using the space, not

just the motor vehicles. Thank you.

MR. COX: Thanks for your work. George Cox, 912 West Ash. I'm just here to reiterate,

we want this downgraded or the classification changed because we don't want the Ash

program that's been proposed to go forward, and this is our way to get it down, so I'm

adding to our vote in case the managers count it, count it in people. This is another vote

for it, and this is completely off the subject, but it was mentioned in the engineering report

for the change that the calming that they wanted it would interfere with the emergency

response, and as a 20-year retired firefighter, I've heard everything except a police car

that you can go fast, and that won't bother us. Thank you for your time.

MS. LOCKHART: Hello, Lee Lockhart, 406 West Walnut. I've lived in West Ash for 30

years, and I think most everybody here is familiar with the West Ash Improvement Project

and what's

been proposed, but for some of you with Boone County that may not have seen the

citizen feedback, one of the things about the proposal is to widen Ash Street so much

that a lot of the homeowner's front yards would be evaporated, so my friend Josie, for

example, lives 30 feet her front yard from the street. That proposal would take 10 or 15

feet of her front yard, putting the sidewalk 10 feet from her living room, something like

that. Some people have even smaller postage stamp-sized yards, and I know we're not

talking about the West Ash Improvement Project, but the amount of eminent domain that

would happen taking people's yards with that project in addition to taking down 110

established trees that provide incredible canopy for those of us that do walk daily in the

neighborhood has our neighborhood, frankly, in a panic, which is why we see so many of

us are here today. And as many people have already mentioned, we've been told by the

City that we can't try to put forth the traffic calming measures that we so desperately

need, even simple things like crosswalks to improve safety in our neighborhood until the

reclassification happens. And it is a precious central city neighborhood. I can't tell you

how much I love my neighborhood and my neighbors, and how scared we are to lose,

what to us is, the value of it, which is the tree canopy, the safety, the sense of

neighborhood quality that we think would be changed if the West Ash Improvement

Project goes forward. So we're really -- we've got an online petition, in fact, that has 260

signatures of residents and concerned citizens that would encourage you all to strongly

consider the reclassification. And I understand there is a study that's happening that will

have some impact. And so if you were considering a vote today, we think it would give

more clarity to the situation once that study is completed. But if you do take a vote

today, we're really praying for a reclassification as a neighborhood route. Thank you.

MS. BUFFALOE: Thank you.

MR. LOWE: Hello, my name is Shane Lowe. I'm on 1133 Ashland Road, so not close to

West Ash. Ash Street is simply a place that I typically travel through. It's a place that I

love. I think it's beautiful. And I really want it to be a safe place to be able to get through

by all the means that I can get through the City, both biking and driving, and also walking

with my friends who live in the area. I would really like to see the ability for traffic calming

measures to be put in place, because I think design speed is far and above like the

on-sidewalks and all that. One of the single most important aspects for making the street

feel safe to transit. And that's true of being in a car, too. There's a lot of entrances and

exits,

driveways, and intersections along Ash. And I think looking at the recorded speeds, it

concerns me seeing those high speeds on that road and knowing how many entrances

and exits there are, how many vehicles to have a fatal accident at those speeds when

someone's coming in and out. And so I would really like to see this reclassification

happen. Appreciate your time.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you. Does anyone else from the public like to speak?

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes, well, I had plenty of opportunities to speak on the Ash

Improvement Project, and we've heard a lot of people connect those two. I actually want

to talk about other things related to the reclassification besides the Ash reclassification --

or besides the Ash Improvement Project and farther back. And what I want to cite here is

that the folks who live along Ash, they submitted a petition for traffic calming through our

city's traffic calming program. And the answer they got from the City was that they could

not be eligible for the traffic management program because of the major classification. I

did go to the MoDOT website, traffic volume website. You have a map with annual

average traffic volumes. I have 2024 data, which is not the same as yours -- what was

cited tonight. But what's on this map that was MoDOT published is 400 to 2,499 counts

for Ash, so it's green on your map, which maybe I should have sent ahead. I did send

ahead last time I came to you. That puts us in the same range as Stewart, Walnut,

William, part of Collins, and South of Garth, all of which are also minor collectors and not

major collectors during the portions that are also in the same range as Ash. And that's

something I consider to be significant. I know from serving on planning commissions, we

are able -- and our code does call to evaluate the street based on its surrounding built

environment as well as its traffic connectivity. And I think that's important. I'm glad that

our code calls for that flexibility. But what I think people are feeling when they ask to be

included in a program and can't because of the designation is that in actual practice, our

code doesn't have that flexibility in all of the ways that it's administered. And I think that's

why it's meaningful for people here to ask for a classification that meets what they

perceive the surrounding used to be. Thanks.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you. Anyone else from the audience would like to speak?

MS. COX: Hi, good afternoon. I'm Tara Cox. My residence is at 916 West Ash. I'm right

at the corner of West Boulevard and Ash. I like to spend a lot of time on my porch and

my deck at the house in the warmer weather. And I can tell you that it's nuts at that

intersection of the -- because the

way people leave any intersection or any corner, any direction is often just abhorrent.

They treat it like it's an on-ramp. And it's sad and it's scary because I think about people

out walking their dog or out with their kids and I just look at them and think, something

bad's going to happen. So I'm so grateful that you folks are considering this

reclassification because we do need traffic calming. And honestly, I can say that I've

been here -- you can hear the traffic on the business loop and Garth and they're all doing

the same thing. They're driving like it's a highway and it's scary. So I appreciate you guys

giving this a thought. It's really important to us that live on Ash and everything that

everybody else has said, I underscore. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you.

MR. LANKITIS: My name is David Lankitis. I live at 200 Alexander Avenue with the south

side of my property being on Ash Street. I only lived in the neighborhood for about a year,

but I just wanted to add my voice in support of everything that my neighbors have stated

and support their concerns and for my neighbors. So not much else to add except in

support of all their statements. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you.

MS. KITSON: Hello, Megan Kitson, 109 Greenwood Avenue. I've lived in the neighborhood

now for almost 20 years. I have a 13 year old right now who's walking home from school

alone and one of my biggest concerns -- of course I'm a parent, I'm always concerned,

one of my biggest concerns right now is that she has to cross Ash alone. And this is just

something that we do have to do in our neighborhood. I drive it daily, I walk it daily. And

all of the things that you've heard here are true. I just wanted to reiterate that and let you

know that we do live in this neighborhood. And so when it comes down to, is it a

neighborhood collector or a major collector, it is obviously very clear to all of us in this

room that we are a neighborhood and we would appreciate your help in treating it as

such. Thank you. MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you. Any else from the public would like to

speak? If not, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Open up for comments from the

committee.

MS. BUFFALOE: I mean, I have a couple of questions from the things I've heard. And

Shane, I think the main one is for you is for you. If we chose to pause on this until the

corridor study is completed, what would -- how would that work with the ongoing Ash

Street Improvement Project?

MR. CREECH: One of the things we wanted to do after we had the third interested

parties meeting was to, first off, gather the information we received there and from

BeHeard, and then also see what came out of this process. Once we know what those

things are, we have all that information together, really it's just a matter of coming back to

council with the information that we received. That could either be in the form of a council

report or I think what was asked for was a public hearing. We could either do a report that

leads to a public hearing or come back with a public hearing. That's a conversation once

we get through this that I wanted to have with the city manager to figure out how to best

come back. And so there's no -- in and of itself, no delay associated with what happens

here. It's just a matter of coming back and getting further direction on how to move

forward on the project.

MS. BUFFALOE: So if we were -- if it were to come back for council and report form,

council could direct to wait on any continuation for the project until the corridor study was

completed.

MR. CREECH: I think the corridor study, if that's what we do, would provide additional

information that we could use to determine what, if anything, we change associated with

the project.

MR. SEEWOOD: Any other questions from the committee?

Shane, what's usually the -- or Tim, what's usually the timeframe for a corridor study.

MR. TEDDY: Well, I don't want to contradict what I said. I think we had a brief discussion

at the end of a council meeting. I said 10 months, and that was including what, I'd call,

the ramp-up time to engage a consultant. We'd have to prepare an RFP and a scope that

we all agree on and that kind of thing, put that out. We're capable, I think, and we've seen

in the recent example of our Metropolitan Transportation Plan, once we have a

consultant, we can move pretty fast. And so maybe that part of it might just be a few

months. But I don't want to take for granted the part on the front end where we're just

getting organized and going through procurement. And as a procedural matter, too, we'd

want to amend our work program -- our CATSO work program, because we'd want to

access those funds for it. Anything we do, we need to -- isn't that correct.

MR. SKOV: Correct. We need to amend the current one, or we would need to include

this in our fiscal year '26 Unified Plan Work Program, which we will be approving in

August. On schedule, at least, it will be actually approved and updated in August.

MR. TEDDY: And we can be doing work up until that time. It's not as if we have to wait for

that --

MR. SKOV: September 30th is the end of the fiscal year for the current UPWP. And it's

going to carry over. We need to make sure that's in the budget for fiscal year 2026.

MR. SEEWOOD: Okay. Any additional comments, questions from the committee.

MS. BUFFALOE: I'll just say that it's -- in my intent, listening from both -- from staff's

perspective, our planners, both in the county and locally, and then also community

feedback, is that I think, designation or not, the conversation around this improvement

area is something that I think we need to continue to work on. And so, it would be my

recommendation, was to not -- because correct me if I'm wrong, Shane, but even if we

downgraded this to a neighborhood collector, how much would change from the potential

project?

MR. CREECH: I would tell you, I've heard a lot of folks say that we wouldn't allow any

traffic calming. In reality, what we're concerned about is vertical traffic calming. If you're --

when we do a lot of traffic-calming projects, the residential areas, usually what the

residents prefer is a speed hump. That's what we'd be concerned about. Some horizontal

traffic coming, bump-outs and things like that, especially around the crosswalk. Those

are things that we would look at, both in the current project, or in whatever may come

after the corridor study. But we have to be careful about that as it relates to what else

we're going to do with that project. Are we going to have a bike lane on the road? Are we

going -- you know, what's that going to look like? So, all that has to factor into that. And

so, I think one thing that factors into all this is what the other roads are going to do,

because we do have a vehicle component to all this, going east and west, regardless.

MS. BUFFALOE: Yeah, so I think that's why I'm inclined to not do -- not to vote on the

classification until the corridor study is complete. Because as you said, I mean, that's

kind of what you said. We got some requests to table that until the corridor study was

done, so that it actually influenced the decision and the design of what goes into that.

Other thoughts, though.

MR. SEEWOOD: Additional comments from the committee?

MR. SKOV: Well, if you're certain you'd want staff to pursue a corridor study, which we

could utilize the CATSO planning funds for, then you need to ask a motion to direct us to

do that, please.

MS. BUFFALOE: I'd like to make a motion to direct CATSO staff to develop a scope of

services to do a corridor study of the areas west of Providence -- I don't know how far we

want to go east,

I mean.

MR. SKOV: Well, we could go from Fairview to -- all the way to Stadium. I mean, I would

-- I would think.

MS. BUFFALOE: I think Clinkscales was our -- the one you talked about at the

beginning.

MR. SKOV: Yeah, west. It's Clinkscales and Providence, but.

MS. BUFFALOE: So, say a corridor study from Clinkscales to Providence, Broadway to

Worley?

MR. SKOV: Let's say, Broadway to Business Loop.

MS. BUFFALOE: Okay. To Business Loop.

MR. SKOV: Right, and then I -- you could go out to Fairview, I mean, it's up to the

committee, I mean.

MR. SEEWOOD: What works for you?

MR. SKOV: I don't know what we need to say specific to the request, or we want to go

further out?

MR. CREECH: I would have them propose something for the area that's necessary.

MS. BUFFALOE: So, I could make a motion for CATSO staff to develop a scope of

services to go out to do a corridor study in the area impacted by this project, but the

geographical boundaries to be decided by staff can approve by technical. Do I have a

second? Am I asking for a second?

MR. TEDDY: Yes. Second.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you for the second. Any additional discussions on this motion.

All right. All in favor?

(Unanimous voice vote of approval.)

MR. SEEWOOD: Any opposed? All right. Next, we need to still talk about the public

hearing, so can I get a motion to table?

MS. BUFFALOE: Yeah, so can we motion to table then -- or extend this public hearing

on the reclassification of Ash Street until upon the conclusion of the corridor study?

MR. SKOV: Okay.

MS. BUFFALOE: Do I need a second for that?

MR. SEEWOOD: Yeah, second. Okay. Got a motion and a second, all in favor.

(Unanimous voice vote of approval.)

VII. PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED 2025 UPDATE TO CATSO COORDINATED PUBLIC

TRANSIT HUMAN SERVICES TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Attachments: Item 7 Memo 5-22-2025.docx

Proposed CPTHSTP for 5-22-25 PH .docx

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Any opposed? All right. Next up is a public hearing proposed

for the 2025 update to the CATSO Coordinating Public Transit Human Service

Transportation Plan.

MR. SKOV: Yes, Mr. Chair, the 2025 Coordinating Public Transit Human Service

Transportation Plan is an updated version of the previous one we did in 2018. What this

plan does is document existing resources available to current needs for transit services in

the Columbia metropolitan planning area. Discusses different coordination between

agencies to improve transit services and liability. This is a reporting requirement. We have

to prepare this plan for local providers in order for them and the City to receive federal

transportation -- pardon me, Federal Transit Administration funding for operations of

capital purchases. This was reviewed by the Tech Committee at the May 7th, 2025

meeting. It was noted by the committee at that time that some of the analysis we have in

there is from the 2017 survey, which is based on a different route system that exists now.

GoCOMO route system. We did acknowledge this and noted that we wanted to do a

further update using data from GoCOMO transit as a plan done by older associates,

which is -- there's still some initial work going on with that, but we would plan to pick and

choose from that, utilize what survey data exists for the current route system, and do a

further update, which we have scheduled for August. As I anticipated, we would be at this

ready for August, potentially December, but I'm counting on it being August with this

additional data. The committee did pass a motion to recommend that the Coordinating

Committee adopt this updated plan. You could call it an interim updated plan, but again,

a further update to the plan will be presented at the August meeting consideration. That's

our schedule, anyway. So, suggested coordinating committee action today is to set for a

polling public hearing, asking the motion to give approval to this 2025 update of the

Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plan. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: Thank you, Mitch. Are there any questions or comments from the

committee? If not, we'll go ahead and open up this public hearing. Any comments from

the audience? With that, we'll go ahead and close this public hearing. Any comments or

additional comments from the committee? If not, can I go ahead and get a motion?

MR. CREECH: I'll move that we approve the plan, including the ability to update it when

the new information comes in.

MR. TEDDY: Second.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Got a motion and a second. All in favor?

(Unanimous voice vote of approval.)

VIII. OTHER BUSINESS

MR. SEEWOOD: Any opposed? No? All right. Other business?

MR. SKOV: We don't have any business, Mr. Chair.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Thank you.

MR. SKOV: Maybe someone else does.

IX. GENERAL COMMENTS BY PUBLIC, MEMBERS AND STAFF

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Time for general comments from the public and members of

the -- does anybody from the public have any comments? If not, we'll go ahead and open

up. Any comments from anybody from the committee? No? Any additional comments

from staff?

X. NEXT MEETING DATE

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Next meeting date.

MR. SKOV: That'll be August 28th, 2025, the usual location. The usual location here,

2:30 PM.

MS. BUFFALOE: Can I ask Mitch, what will we expect to be on that agenda?

MR. SKOV: We will have the new -- or the updated, 2026 Transportation Improvement

Program, this year's 2026 Unified Planning Work Program, the updated version of the

transit plan we just passed -- that we just passed, and potentially the TIP amendment.

Well, we wouldn't have any TIP amendments because we're going do a whole new TIP.

So those three things would be public hearings. Other than that, I'm not thinking of

anything at this time. But those three items for sure.

MS. BUFFALOE: Will we have the draft of a starter scope of services? Or, you know, for

the corridor?

MR. SKOV: If we do, we will present that as a discussion item.

MS. BUFFALOE: Okay. Thank you.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. Anything else?

XI. ADJOURNMENT

MR. SEEWOOD: If not, can I get a motion for adjournment?

MR. TEDDY: Move to adjourn.

MR. CREECH: Second.

MR. SEEWOOD: All right. All in favor?

(Unanimous voice vote of approval.)

Members of the public may attend any open meeting. For requests for accommodations related to

disability, please call 573-874-CITY (573-874-2489) or email CITY@CoMo.gov. In order to assist staff in

making the appropriate arrangements for your accommodation, please make your request as far in

advance of the posted meeting date as possible.

USB DRIVES PROHIBITED: Due to cybersecurity concerns, flash drives and other media devices

are no longer permitted for delivering files or presentation materials. A speaker who desires to

display a presentation must upload the presentation, in advance, to the city network using an

upload portal. To upload your files and learn more, visit CoMo.gov/upload. (Effective Jan. 1,

2023)