April 22, 2026 11:00 AM - 12:30 PM
It's really for the committee members. It's not an opportunity for the public to testify or really give comment, so just kind of keep that in mind. So we also have a lot of staff here as well from DOT and the Muni and Ammas if you guys have any questions. And with that, I'll turn it over to
Thank you. My name is Christine Langley. I am the data Modernization and innovation director for the department. And as part of that, I help sync up the data with our safety programs. And so today we're gonna go over our HSIP program and we're gonna talk about some of the changes that we're bringing to the table. This might look a little bit different than you've seen in the past from DOT. We're gonna talk about what that timeline looks like, how the funding for HSIP projects comes out and why it's different than a lot of the standard projects that you see from the department. And then we're gonna go through a lot of the data that we have been bringing to the table. Some of this you'll recognize, some of it's new, but it's an effort on the department's behalf to start saying, okay, we hear that inherent knowledge that all of us have on our transportation routes, what we see, what we hear from our neighbors and our friends. And then what does the data show us on top of that? And while none of these data sets is the absolute answer for us, it's a way for us to increase our institutional knowledge overall. And that I'm gonna turn it over to Pam Golden. Pam Golden is the head of our highway safety office in the department and our statewide traffic and safety engineer.
Hi. I think most of you know me or been in and around plenty of meetings. And I was here last year with Anna doing the same thing. So it's gonna work, right? I my notes thank you. There you we go Now it's really, thank you. So hold on, I gotta preview this. Sorry about that. Okay. Yeah, we're gonna talk about what's different as the highway safety office now than what you've maybe heard of the Highway Safety Office called going over the HSIP. This is all the things Aaron covered. You know, how we, the locations that screened, you will find that they look remarkably like the High Crash Network. That map that was here, we all know the roads we're gonna be talking about for sure. And then talk about some other resources before we get into discussions.
So the Highway Safety Office used to be what you think of as our behavioral safety side in this new budget. The Highway Safety Office is not only the behavioral safety side, which covers the NTA grants, but also our Highway Safety Improvement program, the traditional traffic and safety degrees like manual uniform traffic control devices, the Alaska Traffic Manual, as well as our SMO program, which is covers our INT intelligence transportation system stuff, our Avalanche program and 5 1 1 road weather, that sort of stuff. So the, you know, we were combined to really make sure we're getting all this information together, but also serving, improving our collaboration between these programs and with upper entities. No good safety presentation without highlighting the safe system approach. It's the foundation of our Strategic Highway safety plan. Our goal is zero by 20 50 0 fatalities and it's gonna take some work. I believe you must actually set your target at zero. Did you Correct. Or you set your target at zero at this last time, did you Correct
If anybody doesn't know the Highway Safety Improvement Program is, is targeted on reducing the fatal and serious injury crashes and the risk of fatal and serious injury crashes. So it's historically been quite reactive. We're trying to figure out ways to make it more proactive and that's what some of this new data might help us with. It's a data required to be a data driven program and we are the only program that is required to evaluate how we do on a cost effectiveness scale. So when we're looking at countermeasure, you'll hear us say, well that's a 29% crash reduction. And then three years after the project is complete, we go back and see how did we do? And then we have to report that in our annual report to Federal Highway. Our funding and, and I wanna cover this just because it gets a little tricky when we say penalty funds, what, what is sometimes thought of as penalty fund.
So we have the railroad safety money, which is a little over a million dollars a year. It's not much in Alaska. We have our highway safety Improvement program funds, which are, you know, spelled out in what Alaska gets. It's in the 45 million ish range. Then we have penalty, penalty funding is actually what is transferred to us from the Highway safety office because we do not have a repeat offender law or a open container law that matches what the federal government suggests. So our regular program is penalized. It's intended to go towards programs that, that seek to address that issue. That's a lot of money that would have to be spent on those programs. So the highway safety office, the behavioral side keeps a small amount of it that goes actually towards the drug impaired driving unit here in Anchorage. And then the rest of it to the tune of about 26 million is transferred over to be used for highway safety improvement program projects. I'm gonna turn it over to Nathan. Steven. Nathan is new to our office. He was a northern range in traffic and safety engineer, but he is now our road safety engineer and he, his primary responsibility actually is the Highway Safety Improvement program.
Yeah, and so just a little bit of background, I, I came to DOT in 2012, then came to traffic safety as H type coordinator in 2017 working under Pam when she was regional traffic and safety engineer then. And then like the last few years as regional traffic and safety engineer in Fairbank. So I've been involved in, done the screening process. Just a little bit of background. So I guess starting off with our selection process, kind of general overview for those of you who don't know, but it all starts out in early springtime. Your regional staff here, Anna and Dalton, they'll get the, they'll start screening through the crash data for central region. Once that gets screened down, they'll get a list and identify the eligible locations under our HSIP program, which again is data driven process. Locations are selected based on, you know, qualifiers such as you need one fatality or two fatals within a two mile segment. And then,
I'm sorry. Thank you. And so once those segments are identified, kind of go through and, and write some comments inside there on, you know, is, is this a location that we've known about? Is this a new location, you know, sometimes is it, or identifying it has it, is it later for construction? Is it in planning, has it been in design for years or is it a past or previous HSI pre project that is still going through the three years of post construction of data collection. So once that's established, you know, we're, we're here right now, we wanna pull the workshops with you, the MPOs and, and discuss these, these screening lists and see what your appetites are for looking at some of these segments and if they align with kind of your ideas of where you want to pursue projects. And then once we have those discussions, your regional staff, again, Anna and Dalton are gonna start working on those locations and identifying countermeasures to address those locations and crash types. And then once that's done, they'll nominate projects, send them to the highway safety office where again, then we review them for eligibility and ranking. So ranking based on crash cost per mile and eligibility, sorry, cost benefit. Yeah. Yeah. And reading, meeting the cost benefit. And then from there, create a funding plan and send for approval and signature.
Okay. And some things to point out, you know, we, we understand that there's many competing needs that buy for different project funding types through other programs. HIP funds, you know, are solely focused on reducing, preventing serious and fatal injuries throughout the state. And the project nominations selection process for, for this program is different than traditional DOT project selection and, and leads to leads to con controversy. So just to visualize kind of what each region is going through during this screening process. So here's just a snapshot of all the crashes in central region for 2020 through 2024. And, and again these are verified crashes that have been reported. So this is what the screening team will look like. Next step, since we're doing this for the regional MPOs for AM a, so we again scale this down, filter it to all crashes within the AM a s boundary, this is what it looks like.
And you can start visualizing or check in yes this kind of what we see or what we hear about are these, these locations that we're gonna be focusing on or we get comments on. But then if we run that through the HIP screening process, which again is too serious or one fatal, this is what it pairs down to. So this for the years 2020 through 2024, these are all the crashes within the MS boundary after it's gone through the screening process. And just to go in one further slide here, again, this is where all the serious and fatal crashes are and I put this next slide in here. I feel like I need to address this because we get a lot of questions on, well you know, if you went back a couple slides, there's a, like you might see a real heavy density of dots in another area, but I didn't see it show up in the site where you said your screening process showed and well that that's true but everything is weighted versus on your serious and fatal injuries. So if you normalize crash types, you know it takes a hundred property damage fender benders to equal a fatal injury or five minor injuries to equal fatal. So while those crash types still do play a factor in selecting cost benefits, it's really focused down to your serious injury and fatal injuries.
Okay, so one of the screening tools, I'm sure you're all familiar with this one, you know your high crash road network. So here just pulled off of one of your publications there for the corridors and the hotspot. And then once we used another tool here, this was from our traffic data team, which is showing trends. So I should go back. Alright, sorry. Our screening process is showing, you know, the last five years, 2020 through 2024. So that's snapshot in time here. You know, what's another thing we can look at? Well we're looking at trends. So the, the graph is showing vehicle miles traveled from 2014 to 2019 gradually increasing. Then we had the COVID, so that dropped. And then from 2021 through 2025, we see it gradually increasing back to almost levels where we started pre COVID. And then the map, the yellow vans are showing traffic that traffic that was lower than 20 post COVID is still lower than that.
Sorry, yeah. Post COVID that was lower, but then the blue is higher. So you know, another tool that your coordinator, your regional coordinators, executive coordinators are gonna be looking at, you know, layering or past data with these trends, trending data sets. And then also in rx, and I've heard that you're familiar with in enrich it's one of our more recent tools that we are utilizing to get more recent snapshots for real time data. And so this is risk scores that were pulled from four quarter and 2025. It's a sum of breaking and speeding. Yes. And so what what this is showing is the wider, the band is equivalent to a higher A DT and the hot pink is a higher risk score and the lower risk areas are is light blue. And what's interesting on the previous two NPO workshops we did was all the low risk score areas were identified as roundabouts. So again, this is taking data from connected vehicles and mobile telematics. Mobile telematics is your phone is an accelerometer. If you tied it into a Bluetooth system with a insurance app, it's tracking you that way. And this is not representative of all vehicles, it's just correct me if I'm right gm.
Yeah. Okay, thanks. So again, using all these data sets and data layers, you know, we begin to aggregate all these sources and start truthing out and say, well we see something in our screening process that shows there's an issue on Main Street, but if we go back three quarters it didn't show anything there. Kind of figure out what's going on there. I, I know from experience and tying it back to my time in northern region is we had University Avenue, which is a major north south corridor in Fairbanks and there was no crashes reported for two years on it. And if you didn't know any better it's because we closed the entire road down for bridge construction for two years. So that's kind of the stuff that you're, again, we're relying upon your Anna and Dalton or regional resources to, to have that knowledge to, to help dive through that in the data selection process. Okay. So talk
Real quick. I think this is another one Nathan alluded to before is, sorry, maybe Pam did we wanna become proactive instead of reactive? Right? So this is real time data and again, it's not a complete picture, but it might be part of how we get to a place where we're using this information to say, well we might not have seen a fatality in this area, or we might not have seen serious injuries in this area. We can see that traffic volumes are increasing. We can see that the risk factor is going up and so it's time to start paying attention before that fatality occurs. And this is one of the tools that we think will help us get to place.
The other thing I'll share about Enri, sorry no, here in Anchorage actually we have better data than we have in the rest of the state because it's just more, more drivers, more more newer vehicles on the road to the sample from, we don't have it in here because the numbers are fairly limited, but you can and, and folks who using rx, you can go in there and you can, you can filter down even to like pedestrian automatic braking and you can see one on Northern Lights by the cars, like somebody's car stop them from hitting a pedestrian there. So while, while we're out here on the infrastructure side, isn't it great but the vehicle side is, is working on these problems as well. So you can dial into that data. It's pretty limited, which is why we didn't put it into the risk score. But that data is out there. If you put on hard braking, you'll get every intersection because everybody's coming up to the traffic lane. We had one when we first started looking up this of big red flag, oh my word, we've got to dial in what is going wrong in this neighborhood. And we finally figured out that's odd. It's not next to the grocery store, it's not next to a school, it's in a parking lot and it's a break repair shop. And so they do a lot of hard braking as they check breaks over and over. And so that's where, well these are wonderful tools. They're something that it takes some local knowledge and nuance to work. You know, we've gotta work through them and just use them as part of our tooling. Alright, thank you for letting us.
Great. No, appreciate it. Okay, so timeline, this is where we're at right now. We've, again, the regions have done their preliminary screening. We're here now, as I mentioned, we met with the other two MPOs the last couple weeks. So we're here to have these discussions again, HIP program and the nominations or the state's burden and are looking for MPOs input on what we can do and on segments that you have interest in, have, have identified
Some resources here for you to consider the HSIP. So if you wanted website, if you wanted to go in, you could read our HSIP handbook or download the worksheets that we calculate for the screening process. Also the Alaska Strategic Highway Safety Plan, that's a requirement of the HSIP. So all HSIP projects will align for more SHSP strategies. We will note that in our nominations, which strategy they, they coincide with partners and safety. This is another website where we're not, we, we recognize that we're not collecting all problematic issues. Like I said, if it's gotta be, if it's an HSIP or crash data, it's you know, either reported by a law enforcement officer traffic report or a self report. Partners in safety is geared towards a safety concern reporter app. So if you see something you can go in here, geo locate it, tag it, write us a comment on on what you see.
Is there guardrails town, are there signs missing? Is there bad retro reflectivity? Is the signal out of sync? Stuff like that. Also, nsa, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, right now the behavioral grants window is open. That's another avenue that you could current pursue for funding opportunities. And then the Alaska DOT Public Crash portal, if you're not familiar with it right now, you can go over there, log on and sort crashes by type injury. It's pretty limited but we're in the process of transitioning over to ASTO Wear Safety, which is a project product put out by New Metric. And so at some point we hope to get that up and running and once that does occur we'll like to share it with our local government partners. So we would be more than welcome to have access to that as well. So that was all I had for the presentation. Is there anything that,
You know, some of you have access to in INRIX? Is there anyone else who needs, we can share that with our, with our partners. That's something that any of you need information on that? No thanks, we're not interested or we've got it. There's a lot of people in this room who already have it. I think everybody good? Okay. Alright. And then how about Pam, would you like to talk a little bit about kind of some of those controversial aspects to HSIP and maybe how, what the plans are going forward on how we would like to avoid those? How we'd like us to transition our choices to quick wins and being able to react to what we see today instead of making a today reaction six years down the road when we finally get things up and running. Yeah, so obviously we have some controversial HCP projects in this area.
Like we, we, we, we all know that. And what I really wanna see for the focus for this domination, quick, quick wins. What we found, and Erin I hope will not have had, as I say this is pairing up an HSIP project on HSIP project can see the death of both projects as far as delivery. So while it's, it's a really great idea in concept, it has slowed some things down. We all are aware in this area of the pedestrian fatality issue and, and the strong and much hard or hard, but the strong desire and and to to, to address this issue. It's not something we wanna see a project that's six, seven years down the road. So trying to figure out what we can do that limits our need to buy right of away limits, our needs to move utilities. These things take time, particularly in urban environments.
Utilities can be its own issue altogether. So as we, as we progress this year, it would be great to have a series of projects that aren't such, you know, down the road things and we can find some stuff that's easier to do. For example, Brad and Zach and Anna and I talked last week, maybe week before at this point. And we're gonna put together a project to deal with to look at pedestrian conflicts that are signaling intersections with what we can do with signal timings or not signal signal timing. Sure. But more of the, the auto audible pedestrian signals and maybe some leading pedestrian intervals and then identifying those that might need a little bit more work. But at least we could package it into two deliveries of, this is the quick stuff that we could do right now and these are the things that might take a little more effort with when we have combined through and turn lanes to see what sort of conflicts we could have removed.
So that's a nomination that C and COT are working on together. We met with people mover, I think that one was lasting for sure about looking at some of their it's routes. 10, 20 and 25. Does that sound right Anna? I think it's maybe 35. But yeah, the crosstown three highest, highest ridership routes and stops on those routes to see, to interview bus drivers as one idea. Like what are they seeing as people get on and off the bus, you know, what kind of behaviors, what, you know, are there things we can do at some of these bus stops to improve safety because every bus stop is pedestrian the, and and they're not located at crosswalks for the most part. So what can we do to improve that? Anna's gonna work on that, not as an HSIP project, but under the umbrella program to then complete projects. So, you know, we wanna think a little bit, it's not even really outside the box, but a little differently. Like what, what can we do to have this compliment of things that we can show action that we are delivering things that make Anchorage safer, don't require 6, 7, 8 years of utility work and, and figuring all this out. So that is my challenge to this group of, of what can we do faster. But Aaron, you said you had, you wanted to go over the stuff you have.
So about 30% of our funding historically and this year is here, which is about 30% of the crashes of that. So the qualifying segments it it's 30 30, 30. It's like 30% of the population. 30 it might be 35, but it, it breaks down actually pretty well with the population. We didn't know that. And then we looked at that because we were furious too and it was like, oh look at this. I mean it just sort of worked out that thing.
Maybe. And I say that only because there's a new retro reflectivity requirements for long line stripes and we can use M-U-P-C-D compliance as a justification for an HSAP project. And I know durable markings have their ups and downs, you know, that would be one reason to say you're improving the marking. And so we, we can chat you, me and Anna, we can chat about what,
Quickly crossing into the high controversy long term. So, but I do think that Pam, there's some nuance in what Pam's saying, right? And that's that concept of improvement to meet the MUTCD versus maintenance and operations of what we have today and, and just a constant repeat of that. So one of those is eligible and one is done correct them. What to remind me please, what does MUTCD stand for? Sorry, sorry. I have, I'm an acronym put a dollar in the jar. Manual Uniform Traffic Control Devices. So it on uniform traffic control device. We just adopted the 11th edition through the adoption of our Alaska traffic manual. And there are, there are changes, you know the last one was 2009. So there's just changes that that come into play over time. You'll see, I don't know that it'll affect any of the MPOs much, but we have a, we have issues with post bridges that are overweight or on restricted and there's some new requirements that, that we'll have a statewide project addressing the bridges that have to be addressed because there's a compliance state for not hs.
There's, so how does that interact with HSIP projects now? So it, it's a tool we can use to do some things that are, you know, maybe not often done. And it's, it's just because there's a new requirement on how retro reflective our stripes are and how we maintain that over time. So while a normal year striping program wouldn't be in that, if we were saying, okay, we're gonna go from paint to a durable marking because we expect it to have better retro reflectivity over time, then then that's a potential way to use it I guess more creatively. It's certainly within the balance of what's required, but it's a little more creative than what some of our other stuff has. But I wanna address your land drop question because there was a federal Sean Duffy issued a, what's it called? Shannon, but it's what just came out from a new, essentially a new memo. Yeah, yeah. Memo came out from Sean Duffy about freedom to drive. So you can Google freedom to drive,
And again, we, we haven't had much time to look at this, we don't know, but Yep. But back to your, where, where can we go? That is a way to respond very short term to the data and the environment we see today without maybe running up against some other one is what we're, we're hoping that we can come up with some creative ideas together that can do that and things like using the M-U-T-C-D compliance requirements to then handle striking is one of those creative. I just wanna put a slightly fine point on that. So am I understanding correctly that based on this memo coupled with the guidance from Alaska DOT, it's highly unlikely that anything that reallocates a lane is going to be approvable or workable in the near future? I don't think we can say that because we don't really understand, you know, we've received this as an email, we still have the policies of DOT in place today that we had yesterday. So we have to do some research on our side, but I wouldn't say that there's any likely assumed and I wouldn't worry about any of that until we all know what it actually says, what it means and what we're directed to do and if it changes any our existing requirements, regulations or calls. That said, I didn't wanna be disingenuous and not mention that that had just come out. Okay.
Okay. Any other questions? There was a question that was put in the chat from a committee member. Is this presentation available for reference? Can I send it out to the committee members after the meeting so they have it? Okay, great. Okay. Unless there are any other questions from committee members? Yeah, so I would like to highlight the question from Brendon Telford, who in a way is kind of acting for Melinda. (Aaron) No, he is not. (Coy) Can I make the point then? (Aaron) yes if you would like to, but Melinda did not indicate anybody was acting for her while she was out. So we can't assume that. Sorry. (Coy) Right. So I'd like to elevate that for a quick question. (Aaron) Which one would you like? There's two one about the HSIP program to better alignment with safe systems approach or the May 1st deadline? (Coy) the self systems approach. (Aaron) Okay, there is a comment in the chat. Can the HSIP program be updated for better alignment with the safe systems approach? Current project selection considers crash reduction versus costs. Safe system approach moves beyond reducing crashes to reducing speeds and forces involved in crash level or crashes to levels that are tolerable to the human body. The commenter's understanding is the HSIP program is set up by DOT, with FHWA oversight, good DOT proposed a process is better aligned with the safe systems approach. B
Okay, so our current handbook is in place through the end of IIJA. So when the, which is the, I know the federal highway funding bill, so that is expiring this year, right? So whether we're under an extension or there's a new bill that comes out, we don't know that is when we will open the handbook again and have those discussions with Federal highways. It's not necessarily off the table, but we are, there is a requirement to, even from the federal level to maximize life saved per dollar spent. So cost is always going to be a factor in that, but we haven't, we can reopen how we score beyond just cost. Cost is, but one factor when we, when we rank projects for funding.
Yeah, so we do have what we call non ranked projects. Some of those are just compliance issues. Some of those are, we're trying something new because we feel confident that this is a safety improvement, but there's not a, there's not a published countermeasure for that. What the, what would get you kicked out of the program, I suppose, or kicked out of eligibility is if you wanted to say you wanted to use a countermeasure, it said it said you'd have a 29% reduction and then you can't meet our benefit cost thresholds. So if a project is over $5 million, you have to have at least a half to one benefit cost. If it's less than that, it's a 0.2 to one, which is really flexible compared to some other states.
The, so when we, when we rank projects for funding, again the ranks projects typically fall above the non ranked project rank just means we have a benefit cost calculated for it. There does come a point where it's like, oh, okay, that last project and then the next ranked project is too expensive. So we'll fill in with maybe some non ranked projects that are lowering cost, but things like road safety audits are always going to be unright. There's not a cost benefit published for that. They are super important in, you know, identifying needs and figuring out the right solutions. Which reminds me, the other thing I wanted to mention and didn't have a good spot for, we try to be careful about nominating HSIP projects in advance of a planning study completing. Now if it's well along its way and like we all sort of know what the outcome is, that's different.
But if we're nominating an HSIP project at the same time planning study is initiating on a project, and I'm not saying an example here, but we did have an example in Fairbanks where we, we agreed with the MPO, like let's pause on doing anything here because that study is kicking off. Let that sort of drive where it needs to go. So there, there are, you wanna be cautious about choosing a solution that maybe doesn't align with what the real solution is. On the flip side to that HSIP is an excellent bandaid to get to a longer, bigger project.
The question, so I, pardon my, pardon my ignorance. So I, I'm, I would love to understand what a suite of options actually looks like when we're talking about things that are, you know, the short term wins, quickly deliverable, don't involve this long runway, you know, 5, 6, 7 years to implement. What does that actually mean in the real world? Like what are the things that could be possible? I, I don't, I am not an engineer, I don't know what that even looks like and what the edges of the creative envelope are. And so I think it would help me to hear what that means to someone who knows this system and far more comprehensively than I do.
So that's a great question, especially since we're kind of struggling that with within ourselves for a little, you know, for certain amount, you know, it mentioned signal, signal work that's, that's, you know, something that could be done. Anna has been talking about making the crosswalks all high visibility crosswalks, which means you have both the, the long lines and the, you know, the, they're called transverse and longitudinal, but, but you have, you think of it as a ladder, you have the sidebars and all the rugs so you know, making crosswalk high visibility, some of the projects to install pedestrian things like the rapid rectangular rapid slash beep or you know, that just don't need quite the, the right of way. You know, yes there's still some issues with those getting those in, but that's still a much quicker thing. Speed feedback signs.
Okay Anna? So yeah, if I, if I may, Dalton and I have been looking at some of these low cost treatments for consideration as it relates to overlaying some of the data sets that Christine and Pam showed. So speeds heartbreaking. Also angle crashes. So we are looking at always stop control changing from where you have a two-way stop control on the side street to Anway stop control. Those tend to be locations that maybe in the future would be a roundabout, but it could be a really low cost quick treatment. There's one on Huffman Road for instance that we're looking at. There's a, you know, some others in the, in the matsu. There's also some locations potentially in South Anchorage. So those are some things like Pam mentioned, we have over 300 signalize intersections and to just highlight those crosswalk existing crosswalks and making yield compliance better there.
We have an existing example at at Elmore and Tutor. So when you're leaving the office here, you can see that there. And anecdotally, I know that Zach has told me that when he crosses there, he, he feels more comfortable, more confident that people are yielding to him, that they know he's in the right spot and, and gets better compliance. Especially as Greg turns on red. That's another, you know, potential low cost mitigation is to evaluate where locations that maybe we need to change to know right on red and have enhanced signalize kind of ITS solutions where you have a blank out, sorry, intelligent traffic application system system and, and essentially something to do with the signalize intersection. But basically having, if somebody were to push a button, you know, a pedestrian's there, a sign would come up, no right on red when the pedestrian or bicyclist is there and they push the button. I've seen it in action in California and it's pretty effective. Other things could be adding green paint to existing bike lanes. That's a new feature that's part of the M-U-T-C-D. So just enhancing those existing facilities. And then more things like with transit that we talked about after we get this road safety audit. So that might lead to specific projects there, crossing treatments, maybe more lighting, enhancing existing lighting locations. So those are kind of our short list of things that might be less controversial quicker to deliver.
The other piece here is that, you know, we, that doesn't mean that's the whole list, right? And if somebody is traveling and sees something that they think would work in Alaska, if we see something new from vendor, all of those are on the table at this point. Just as a way to, you know, we, we don't want to use everything we've already used in the past that doesn't seem to be getting us where we wanna go. So alright, we're, we're open to new things even if we don't know what they are yet. So how, how much, how much flexibility within the HS I-P-H-S-I-P funding bucket is there to address like seasonal safety challenges?
We do our best to make it as flexible as we can. Like I, I am not shy about calling if it's on the, if it's on the edge, I, I will call Federal Highway as we go. Here's why I think this will work. To get their buy-in. We, we do our best to be as creative and flexible within this program as we can and still be within the, as long as what we're proposing supports the strategic highway safety plan, we're good to go. Here's the trick we put in the strategic highway safety plan. Anything eligible for highway safety improvement program funding is, is included. So we have a catchall in the strategic highway safety plan. We certainly have our focus areas based on the safe system approach in the strategic highway safety plan, but we, we have a catchall in there to, to make sure we weren't excluding ourselves from doing something seasonal. Stuff gets hard, right? Like there's no lie, like it's all across the state, it's different in each major city, but it's, it's all there. We have been asked about seasonal bike lanes in places and that's another one really dicey with federal highways. Once it's a lane, it's always a lane so you can't just dump snow in it in all winter and walk away. So if you have ideas gets into to Anna and Dalton to think about like, I'm willing to pursue many things, it's just making sure that Federal Highway says yes, this is eligible. That's, that's where we sort of go with that.
What about, what about equipment? I know that DOT in particular is challenged by the equipment that they use for, for sidewalks in Anchorage. We, we, the municipality has benefit a bit of having had AEDs grant to buy all trackless machines. I think DOT is more challenged, can we buy equipment? But that,
I think also it's important that we kind of get back to that piece where was mentioned at the beginning is there, there's all sorts of funding needs, there's various methods that DOT funds, equipment maintenance, operations, all these pieces. And so on one hand in no way are we saying that isn't a need or it shouldn't be considered, but this specific program and this specific funding has a defined data-driven, you know, these regulations, these requirements and, and we want to use that, right? Because the flexibility allows us to address safety. Not that that doesn't affect safety, but this is one targeted approach.
One last question. You've mentioned that because we don't have some of the laws in place that some of the MS funding, the HSIP funding rather goes to the penalty, whatever penalty funding. Is there an opportunity to focus more of that towards a PD and their ability to do enforcement in some of these high crash corridors?
So, so a great question. So the, we fund about $2 million of a PV every year through the safety office behavioral grant fee. Within the HSIP side, there is a specific call out for what's called specified safety project special rules, which allows us to do a handful of things. And one of those is facilitates the enforcement of traffic laws. So actually tomorrow I am talking to a PD, right? So we can see if there's anything we can do on that side on top of the grants they already apply for and get, so actually it might be 4 million, I think it's 2 million in, in, in the impaired driving and about 2 million in other stuff. So they have a pedestrian safety program. They have, they do high visibility enforcement for speeding. They do remember them all, but they they do, we've got them new vehicles for their Yep.
Just a comment, the one reason I brought this up is that former assembly member in particular was interested in, in making Tudor Road a section two road a a, I forget the term Urban safety. Yeah, an urban safety corridor. And one of the challenges there was, you know, you can put all the signs up you want, you have e enforcements that, that's not a question, just a commentary of the discussions we've had in the past.
Current assembly member Erin Baldwin Day is also interested in that projection. A follow on. I think she, something to add to that. I was just gonna add also one thing that is HSIP eligible is safety cameras. So red light running cameras, speed enforcement cameras. So those are eligible and you know, I think only maybe allowed currently outside of Anchorage, there's no prohibition in state code to it. So, you know, that is something that's also an eligible. So if you're talking about, you know, trying to have enforcement more strategically in locations, we've seen it have be successful in other locations. When you have it very specifically clear to the public why you're doing it, what it's gonna be intended for, and that it maybe is not a long-term solution, that it's an interim solution until you can reconstruct or address some other thing that's going on in the corridor. So school zones have been successful, work zones have been successful and then I think having maybe a fall on capital project would also be an opportunity to be successful in a targeted manner.
You just answered my question. I I I do, I do want to, to voice what I think is a, a challenge for the public to understand and, and this is, this is a comment and certainly not intended to come across as, you know, accusatory or anything like that. I, I just think it's, I think it's really difficult when the public hears about highway safety improvement funding for it, it, it's difficult to communicate why when so many of our, our safety challenges are seasonal and do do stem from challenges with maintenance, particularly on sidewalks and everyone in Anchorage watches people walk in the road because sidewalks are impossible. It's really hard to explain why something that has a name like Highway Safety Improvement Program cannot be leveraged to fill what is very clearly a systemic gap because of what feels like some pretty arbitrary guardrails, some arbitrary standards for what constitutes a a safety improvement safety.
And for a member of the public who's listening or who's paying attention to these conversations, it's very difficult for me to explain that even though purchasing, for example, some checklist equipment for the central region to use an anchorage on our sidewalks is an extremely low cost on the whole, like extremely low cost high yield intervention that would absolutely make a dramatic difference in the safety of our roadways in the wintertime. But that is not an eligible expenditure. So I guess one of the questions that's embedded in my comment is what recourse do we have as a, as a city or as a state that has this very specific climate challenge that isn't reflected really like many other places in the lower 48, what advocacy opportunities are there for a policymaker or for a group of policy makers to ban together, can actually communicate directly with federal highways about this particular issue and to ask for like some kind of concession or change or something that appreciates that our context is extremely different than Phoenix or LA or Seattle or any of these other places.
And to ask for something that allows us to do what we all know, like everybody in this room knows, like this is something that needs to be addressed and it's needed to be addressed for a long time. What's the lever that we have to engage and to move the needle on this in some way that actually benefits our community? So that is that is, that is a Lisa Murkowski, Dan Sullivan Nick Begich ask. Our, our restrictions are codified in 23 CFR 1 48. There's a list of 28 things I think we can spend our money on. And so that's where we can try to get as flexible as we can. But, but the HSIP law basically would have to be opened up to include that 23 CFR 1 48 3 CFR 1 48. Great. Yeah, it goes more specific than that. I just don't remember it beyond that. But I don't mind taking around a federal set. It'll get you there. Awesome, thank
Shannon can also help us here. Yeah, there have been some tweaks to the federal law as a result of the authorization, exactly what you're saying. And most recently if you looked at the, the Marine highway funding, it allows, well the law was written in such a way that it benefited states that have long marine routes that we could use federal funding for operations. So there has, there has been a precedent, there are some tweaks that are unique to Alaska that have been allowed in the reauthorization bills and, and as I mentioned that specified safety that was added as the last highway bill. So I mean the time is right. I suppose if you wanted to do that, there are, there are some things I'm willing to go to the map for and this is one of them so thank you. That's helpful. I just wanted to add one more thing if I could just to mention that central region has actually taken a lot of efforts to diversify their sidewalk equipment this last year.
So by the end of the season we actually had eight pieces of equipment when traditionally we've had three to four and then they also, because sidewalk plows are, you know, kind of notorious for you know, pulling in a dog leash and breaking. So they've also started to diversify the type of equipment so that they can have more flexibility into so many larger storms or back to back just to transition some of their equipment as well to being multi-season what used to be only winter or only summer. And then of course, you know, half as much equipment when it goes down it's more of a problem. And so they've been working hard to make sure that what they do have, we're using year round, which also goes to benefits and funding.
Love it. Okay, sorry to, let's go ahead and move to our next set 'cause we only have about 30 minutes left. We'll have more time for questions after. I wanted to turn it over to Emily real quick, just a second Emily. So we staff put together some stuff for you. Really, really quick review. I asked Emily to put it together yesterday. So this is a very brief look, I apologize, but we were stressed and a lot of stuff going on. I did wanna point out a couple of things for you guys though. 20, 20 24 is when we had our first kind of nomination process as part of it. And I wanted to point out we had two projects that were nominated from amax. There was the Debar nomination and there was the Mountain View Drive nomination. Mountain View Drive is currently an HSIP project that is underway and debar I believe is having a road safety audit done.
And then in 2025 we had two nominations that we submitted or three really Dale McInnis and Wright. So Dale and Wright were packaged together, is part of the tutor one that's gonna be looked at as part of the tutor pavement project. And then we have the McInnis one, which did not go forward. The reason I pointed out is it's been a really good effort so far for these HSIP nominations for AM amens. And I want to extend a thank you to central region staff and headquarters staff for their work on this because it really shows there's need and there's a willingness to cooperate, coordinate together. And so I I, you know, regardless of what comments or questions we get, I want everybody to understand we're in this together, we're trying to make it happen and I really appreciate everybody's effort. I think there are some challenges we have and we're working towards that. So that said, I wanna turn it over to Emily 'cause she did some work for you all. Thank you.
Okay, so I'm gonna share something that is also printed out as committee members didn't get that. So there's a page back there with table, the table and map. And I did also print out our high crash network just for reference. We already saw that on one of DOT slides. But what we wanted to bring today was just some ideas to start with ate on what locations we may not be project the table that we're pulling is built from crash data. It does not follow specifically the HSIP screening process that we just heard a little bit about. But all these locations would qualify in terms of the one fatality or two series.
And the goal for today was to really narrow it down. So if you've seen our high crash network map, it includes quite a lot and it's really hard to focus in on where priorities might be. So for today we were looking at as, I think it might have been, Pam mentioned there's, there's some motivation for quick wins. So we were looking at the hotspots rather than the corridor. So instead of saying let's do all of 36th Avenue, you know, what are, what are some really specific locations where we could look at what might be helpful there.
So the table is showing the top eight locations just because they were all pretty bad. And then there was kind of a break where the ones after that were, they had lower crash rates and then the map is showing out of those eight locations. Some of those already have projects in process. And so those, the ones with projects existing were coming up are not showing on the map. So the map windows down the table is even a little bit, I think today we're hoping for some discussion on whether you'd like to pursue any of these. If, if you'd like us to flesh out kind of what we have for these locations, if you all have other locations in mind that you think we should be, should be looking at, we can LY do that as well and go back to the data and break stuff for the main meeting.
But yeah, so these are, these are just the starting point for the first one. Looking at the crash rate per fatal serious crashes per mile, the top one that comes out is third Avenue and it's just this little section between ENG RA and lato. The second one is C Street between 32nd and 36th. Scroll down to that on the map, that's section in midtown. The third one is Tudor and C Street. And I did make a note there that that I believe had a recent HSIP project and so it's possible, I don't remember specifically the firm cutoff for, it's not eligible again yet. There's also the fact that data would've been from before that project happened. And so it may not be clear yet that area is still a problem or if that's just kind of a holdover from before that project Briga is on there.
Of course we have the safe streets for all grant in, in progress on briga. So that may not be one that we wanna consider this year, but I did include it just for context, Muldoon from six two to bar. So this is one that might be worse than discussion because we do have a multi corridor study coming up. It's not scheduled to start for a couple more years. And then I don't know how that corridor study is, you know, it might identify things that could then be programmed for funding, which then might take five to 10 years to actually be built. So I'm not sure if that could be an opportunity to say yes things are coming up, but if we could identify kind of the bandaid in the meantime, maybe that's still worth considering.
And then we get down to the Gamble and ingra area, which are not on the map because they do have projects in progress through the T and PEL. So those are, you know, maybe another opportunity to talk about how long is that going to take and is there a quick bandaid that we could think about for the near term, if that's of interest. And then fifth Avenue from med fraud to Sitka is on there and I believe that's where there is a pedestrian project in progress towards the Car Luck area in that, in that area as well.
So these are here to maybe start a conversation on what you all might like to pursue for nominations with an eye toward your main meeting where you will be making a decision on what you'd like to pursue for a nomination. Did you open it up to any questions first or map or anything related? I did have a question and I think Brandon actually is speaking to it in the chat. I thought there was a project on third in that area and maybe I can ask him to, to clarify what PME is up to and that additional,
Yeah, yeah. So we submitted a CDS request, which I believe stands for Congressional Discretionary Spending. Does the office for two corridors from section A third. The other one is a section of the 15th that's actually to the west of Campbell Street. And that's a roughly $5 million request. They asked if out of those two projects only one of them could proceed, which, which would be kind of the most economical one to proceed with. And we told them it would be the third Avenue one, but we haven't heard back on any decision on that request.
Okay. And then several years ago the municipality had a project to look at the pedestrian vehicle interactions along the section from Post Up the Hill to Carlock I think. And that one it, it ended 'cause there was not a reasonable solution available at the time for the amount of money they had there. That was when the Dean's Cafe and Brother Francis were in a different model than they're now. But I know there's still concerns there.
What is contemplated in that section? Us? So we have not gotten that far yet. It would be a matter of, if you guys are generally interested in pursuing those locations, then we'll come back in May with some our in depth look at what, you know in the table we have kind of what the most common crash types are and that can give us a place to start. But you know, we'd wanna do some work on kind of what the problems are and what the interventions might be. 'cause then that comes back to the question of do we have to move utilities and how expensive is it going to get and how quick is it? And that could certainly affect what we have to, right.
On that note, that funding for HSIP this year to we, I, I've heard different amounts thrown around and I'm just curious where we're at with the funding for this next next cycle, if anyone knows. So, as in how much or, gosh, be safe. The Be Safe website. Sorry, we can bring it up.gov/bc Oh, he's not on the wifi. Everybody on wifi. It's really easy to find. Okay. Who say.dot alaska.gov/be safe. Oh, okay. Or you'll find, okay ask.be Safe that the partners at Safety. Yes. Okay. And there's one that's like plans in action on the top. Plans in action plan. It's just IP funding plan, approval letter. Okay. Funding plan is there down and get to second or, okay, great. Is this is for the 26th cycle? This is current cycle, yeah.
And we have that in the two. Were you asking for the next, like is that what your question was? The projects that we're nominating Oh, where we're going tomorrow? Yeah. Oh it, we don't know. Like, I mean like this year there's 19, no there's $28 million projects that could be in AMA if they all deliver on time. So each year it's sort of a, we, we kind of draw the line and start over and with what got, what needed to delivery and what didn't. And I think it's important. And we've had, which is also been a, you know, conversation that's happened in the past is that drawing the line just means, you know, it's a rolling project all the time. And so it doesn't mean, and we throw everything else away. It means here's where that line falls this year. And then we move forward and then we're always, as Pam is mentioning, working on what can deliver, what can't deliver, what's slipped. Okay then slide this in, move that around, you know, ran into a utility problem. Okay, we're gonna shuffle this project in while we wait for that to happen. So it, there's a lot of move pieces to this program, which is a long way to say sorry, we can't tell you. I could have made that shorter.
So I'm, I'm, I am definitely interested in the C Street 32nd to 36th Avenue suggestion. And would, would love to see if we have updated data on the C Street intersection that could inform, you know, whether the recent project maybe is or is not having that in that space. I was be very interested that another thing that maybe we have and I'm just not aware of it, I, I would love to know where we actually have unmarked crosswalks along Tudor and Mul. I believe that we have so everywhere and I don't mean that to be flipped. Every intersection is crosswalk that state. Every intersection is crosswalk. So that's just sign that says no cross. Yeah.
So those are all like yeah legal places are. So in that case I think that the mold six to Debar is pretty ripe for particularly pedestrian. Whether, whether that's like striping or something. I think I'll walk that stretch. That feels like a really important place to do some work. And you guys are gonna get really tired of hearing me talk about Tutor, but, and I know we already have like McInnis and Wright and they all have like lots of things going on on Tutor, but there's, I don't know if HSIP funds can be used for like public education but the fact that the public only seems to think that crosswalks exist where there are stripes on the ground I think is a safety concern all along behind Crash Network. So we had a quick note on one of those slides that the NIP behavioral grant period is open right now. And not, not to segue up, but that is something that that various groups within this room can apply for and work on that. It also is a data driven program. And so there's some requirements on how we show that that's an educational leader, a behavioral change that's needed in the public. Yeah.
Regarding that. So Pam and I have been talking actually about the NSA thing because currently a MS is funding a non-motorized safety campaign and has been for a number of years. It's done through the center for Safe and Alaskans headed up by traffic at the Muni. I met with Kim who heads up here at the Muni and talk with her. We need to meet with Pam and talk through a couple things. 'cause the Center for Safe Alaskans has a lot on their plate already and so we're not sure they have the capacity to be able to add more to it, but we're looking at seeing if there's other options to take advantage of some of the NITZA funding and see what we can do with it. So I have to schedule a meeting with Pam soon.
Well I have a question on, we've talked about HSIP projects in the past different ones and some are funded, some I'm not sure about some I think didn't make it in, in this conversation. Are those just assumed to be going forward or do we need to specify, hey, that McKen tutor project, like where is that, that should be a priority too, sort of sort of thing. Like what, what's helpful for those conversations?
Is that signal warrants were were not met. And that is something that's in the M-E-T-C-D. The other aspect was it, we had staff go out and take light levels in the area and although on all of Tudor and Muldoon and the light levels, although they meet the minimum criteria, they were the lowest for all those corridors. All from the entire corridor of Tudor and the entire corridor of Muldoon. That section in McInnis was the lowest level of light that still met the minimum, but it was the lowest level. And it's challenging because there's a utilidor on the south side that is limiting the ability to put in additional lighting on that side. So we really are restricted to the north side, which has, you know, curb adjacent sidewalk for a good chunk of it. It also is just a wide corridor at five lanes. That light is gonna be less able to capture everything throughout it.
So we looked at it from the, the five years of crash data for last corridor last year's cycle. We can look at it again and see if the crash warrants were met. We looked at, there's some additional crash warrants and the CCD didn't meet any of those either. So it's just one of those things that we'll continue to try. But we do have some other projects in the area. Galen has the, the tutor interchange project and I know he's looking at seeing what that we can do east of the interchange to maybe capture McInnis there. So I'm not familiar with where he's at in terms of a timeline for that project.
Okay. They, they got to a point where they're decided on the interchange type there, so they're advancing that design. But I, I know I've had conversations with them up again too and expanded the scope there to the east. And so we'll continue to have those conversations as that project develops. We've also got the David preservation project on Tudor. There's a corridor plan to RFP is my understanding on a corridor plan for tutor. So a We're, we're, we're aware of Tudor
Continuing kind of in that same corridor there to Muldoon talked a little bit about the corridor plan. I don't know where that fits plannings priorities on when that one would go out to RFP, but I know that one is a high priority, we've got a preservation on as well. So I think information provided here appreciate all the, all the work that like to see what recommendations might be covering from that. And if that's something we could fit within a PM project that would necessarily under HSIP. But wherever we can get these improvements in, I'll continue to have this discussion.
And, and Muldoon is another corridor that's challenged with utilities on the west side of it. And so each intersection is lacking lighting because there's no nowhere to put those poles and you can't have the, the lights over the utility and within a certain proximity of the electrical lines over it. So it's a, it is a challenging corridor. I will say that we staff, Dalton and I have looked at putting together a draft HSIP nomination for Muldoon. However, a lot of the lower cost treatments would require a lower speed limit. So trying to have maybe rf bs, rectangular rapid slashing beacon, you know, would need a lower, right now it's 40 miles an hour with high volumes. So to get good yield compliance, we're really needing it down below 35 if we want just some of those lower cost treatment interventions to compliance. Another thing would be to put in a full signal, but then, you know, then you're talking of major investments and years.
So there's some trade-offs there and our RFB one, the devices that like you push a button and it lights and it lights up like, like a signal to driver's. Like, hey, someone is about to cross. Do you have any Yeah, we have 'em at, at dowling roundabout. So we only have 'em in one location. We do have 'em in the other region, but so if you were to drive through dialing roundabout, they are there for crossing, dialing not, but when you're going east west, but when you're going north south as a pedestrian crossing at a couple locations, at that roundabout we do have an active research project with UAA to evaluate how effective they are there for yield compliance. I, I will say that the design speed of that roundabout is 35 miles an hour. And so with the double lane roundabout, my personal experience out there with high vis vest people were still not yielding even with the RRFB.
So I think we have to, we have to pair these devices with the right geometry and the right operational speeds to make them effective for telling the signal to the driver, giving them time to react with a lower speed. And yeah, I think your question was about whether it requires pedestrian participation to hit the button, correct. Yeah, I was just wanting to assume to understand like how is this different than a, like a, I know it's not technically called a hexagonal, it's something else and I pH okay. The, whatever that thing is. I trying to, trying to just understand what the, what the difference is between those two. It's a warning sign, literally a rectangular flashing beacon. That's why it's a rectangular rapid flash beacon. So it goes, it bounces back and forth in a rectangle, like a bouncing fall top and bottom or something.
You know, it's, they both require user pedestrian participation. The, the hope is that the, the rapid flash pattern catches your eye better than is there have, is there, has there been any conversation about the devices that actually illuminate the crossing area? Yes, actually I just made a ask Luke about the stop it lights because yeah, the, what, what are they called? Soffit is one of the name, right? It's the one that like follows you across the crosswalk so it illuminates your path. Yes. Is that what you're asking? If that's exactly, yes I have, I have a list from Graham of some potential locations. Anna has made some comments on it and I think where it sits right now is we need somebody in the region to sort of pick it up and make it happen.
What is the order? 37,000 per unit? $7,000. And that's for a version that's made cold weather and cold weather in Alaska has range. Right? So we've seen it function in Kodiak. They have their own unique conditions compared to Anchorage. And again, different conditions but I believe our intents, our goal is to put in two or three three in central origin. Let's have a conversation there. I'm
Not yet. Alright. This particular vendor also is willing to train us on how to do it while they came to Kodiak and participated. There is some continual, I don't wanna make that sound like a lot of maintenance and operations, but you have to dial into the crosswalk question. You have to consider what's outside of that boundary. You know, in Kodiak there was a staircase that came up from the dock. There's some other things to do and they're willing to train us, which we could when they come up could certainly share. So I, I guess I'm curious about then the order of operations because I, I really appreciate what Ms. Rosen just said about the fact that pairing the device with the geometry and the appropriate speed is kind of like the magic trifecta of actually changing people's behavior. So what does that order of operations look like? And then in a location where we would like to deploy some of these cool tools but the geometry of the road and speed don't allow us to do that. Like how do we get a quick, how do we get a quick win when two of the three elements are not immediately or maybe they are immediately controllable but there's a a lot of like other layers of implementing those changes to make the quick thing possible. How do we do that? Figure that out. Let me know.
The second we start moving curve the second and we're impacting utilities, we're usually acquiring right away. And all those are along the items. So the infrastructure changes that go along with some geometry changes unless we have excess geometry in those locations and utilities are on the outskirts of the, the right of way. We're, we're in long lane items. There's some, and unfortunately in an urban setting like Anchorage, we don't have a lot of RightWay, we don't have utility utility poles are sidewalks, right? Utilities are, or it's a,
Do we have a challenging environment? Do we have the option of like temporarily say narrowing lanes to bring speeds down or like doing other things that temporarily change the roadway configuration and call it a pilot project, right? Like is there a way to do that that sort of socializes the community into, you know, driving slower on a muldoon that then also allows us to implement some of, you know, like text notes soffit lights or our RF Bs or hawk signals. I mean is there a way to do temporary adjustments? It doesn't require us to go digging around
We, we pursued those, right? I mean Elmore right here is a good example where we narrow plane split pain project. I think the signal head work, the retro reflectivity, a lot of that work that we can do on existing signals is, you know, stuff that can do. So yeah that's absolutely things we wanna be pursuing here.
I think you're on the right path there instead of, you know, square peg, round hole operation, right? Where we know ultimately if we had all of our choices, all the right of way, all the utilities in our spot, we would do this. Okay, well we don't. So I think that's where, you know, AMS and the community identifies their locations. You reach out to your regional contact Anna and you know the her team are here to help say okay, given this set of parameters that we're in that this location, here's the counter measure that we believe work or here's this an idea that we think is worth pursuing. And then through her team those nominations come up and I think, you know, we're always open to great ideas but it's, we may not achieve everything we possibly want. So I think what we do is we start looking for, okay, given our constraints, what's left?
So I will say I, we have an example of some sort of a quick build area that's happening on Debar Road right now at Bragaw, where we have flex posts that have delineated out a turn pocket for three going on four winters now and it just had flex posts. So yeah, I'm just saying, I'm just saying it, it may not be the ideal situation but that is an interim solution until we can fix the degrading sinkhole below it or whatever that's happening structurally and it's operated. Okay, it's a low cost intervention that is doing its job right now. So if we keep that kind of mindset but put it towards safety instead of the infrastructure structure, you know, maybe there's opportunities to do temporary bulb outs at intersections. Maybe there's some ideas of taking some turn pockets and narrowing the intersection a little bit and tightening those radii so that people slow when they take a take a right and, and so those, those could be interim solutions but we would have to address the maintenance and understand that those areas are not gonna be, you know, look that great.
Maybe during the summertime they might collect some, you know, stuff in there and it might cause a little bit of for maintenance to take them out temporarily to do their sweeping and put 'em back and then they might also be a great opportunity to have snow store in it for the winter and then you have a place for that sidewalk snow to go. So I'm, I'm open to considering those locations and trying those, especially in places where we have a corridor study that maybe we need a little bit more information and, but we don't wanna wait 10 years.
This came up on a nomination two years ago. Maybe our problem, if you wanna see it as a problem is if we use HSIP money to do the temporary fix and the permanent fix is basically the same thing. We can't use HSIP money twice solve the same problem. So if we use HSIP as the, the quick build piece, a capital project has a non HSIP capital project has to come behind to take the the temporary solution out because we've already addressed safety problems. So just eyes wide open going into that that you know that that's the, the downside of it but it's also the positive of getting something in quick.
Okay. Real quick, we are out of time. I know there's been a lot of questions. I see there's one more question but I have to ask something really quickly before you guys go. Our schedule is to get this before the committees in May for approval of the nominations submit to you. Looking at the schedule that you guys posted online, it looks like we may be outta sync there. So are we gonna miss our opportunity because we were late in getting this work session.
May one is really when we're just asking to read. Okay we're if you like, that was really to sort of make sure we're progressing full nominations are really due later. This was like, alright get us your concepts. We're not gonna say we can't consider this three or four projects that AMS wants to consider because they want So don't, don't worry about that. I do want to discuss though really quickly because words matter nominations tone from the region. Yeah. From which, yeah, from, from what I'm hearing you saying is that Amex is going to set us a nomination.
That's fine. Again, yeah, have definition on our side would be different. Yep. But by all means, Anna is your contact and then you send those ideas, needs concerns to Anna. She works on finding a countermeasure that works and then she subsequently writes that nomination or works with the team to write that nomination and up it up it goes through the chain to work through all the make across the keys, the eyes, make sure all the eligibility is
Well it's more of, I think the goal of this work session was to sort of to provide you all with a little bit of guidance on these, these areas that you've proposed. And hearing that there aren't a lot of questions about these specific projects that you are proposing here. It seems like in general we're probably all in agreement that these do seem like the appropriate places to focus our attention. I don't know if anyone wants to disagree with me on that, but I would also ask that maybe the team look at the 15th and gamble and area and see if there's anything temporary that we can't do in that area while the sewer to Glenn study and project is that's,
Yeah so as we have it, as I have it in my notes, correct me if I'm wrong but C the 32nd, 36th we'll look at Muldoon sixth to debar. We'll look at the 15th gamble and area, see if there's anything. We'll have to look at the data and see what that shows for HSI for
Okay. So a temporary one to help with. Okay, great. Tudor and C Street, the thing was to look at the data to see if we have updated info to see if it's still an area of concern or not. And then the third avenue, Ingrid to Lato, that's the one I'm unclear on. It looks like there's a congressionally designated request in, do you still want us to submit it as a nomination for HSIP?
I think last year we were talking about a longer stretch of 36 for each of these. I will go back and look at the specific locations of the crashes to make sure that, you know, some of these lines may not totally encompass the whole problem area to make sure that if it's the intersection versus block the road.
So I guess maybe my request is if you can list out here's what we've talked about in the past, here's the status of this, like Northern Lights, you know, where is that project Mountain View Drive, where is that one? You know, the ones on 36 or on, on Tudor. You know, because I forgot about McKenna about the the, but anyway, just being on the list. Here's what we talked about in the past, here's the status of it. That would be helpful. 'cause I, I remember 36 being talked about and I don't remember that with that and I don't need the answer right now, just, I'm just saying for the tax.
Okay. I think with 30 seconds, 36 C street. But like really, if I'm remembering correctly, correctly like a couplet, like it's both A and C that are sticky in that area. So it would be interesting to maybe think about what's happening both of those if we're, if we were going to address like that block almost it, it was the, just the red line that showed up as the real hotspot in the data. But since we're there, yes it's worth kind of looking at that section of the system trying to scope through too much. No, no, no. Let's not do that.
Okay. Any other comments, questions, concerns? Thank you all very much for attending today. We really appreciate it. Thank you very much for DOT for coming out and giving the presentation and having this awesome conversation. And we look forward to the main meetings where we bring stuff forward to you all. Thank you all
This is hidden text that lets us know when google translate runs.