TRANSPORTATION POLICY BOARD MEETING Monday, January 9, 2017 Room 3.102, Joe C

TRANSPORTATION POLICY BOARD MEETING Monday, January 9, 2017 Room 3.102, Joe C. Thompson Center, University of Texas Campus Red River and Dean Keeton Streets, Austin, Texas 6:00 p.m. AGENDA WATCH CAMPO LIVE: www.campotexas.org/livestream

1. Certification of Quorum – Quorum requirement is 11 members……….....……...Chairman Conley

2. Public Comments Comments are limited to topics not on the agenda but may directly or indirectly affect transportation in the CAMPO geographic area. Up to 10 individuals may sign up to speak – each of whom must contact the CAMPO office by 4:30 p.m., Monday, January 9, 2017.

3. Chair Announcements…………………………………..…………....…………...Chairman Conley

4. Report from the Technical Advisory Committee Chair…..….Mr. Todd Hemingson, Capital Metro Mr. Hemingson will provide an overview of Technical Advisory Committee discussion items and recommendations to the Transportation Policy Board.

ACTION: THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO COMMENT ON ITEMS 5 - 8 IN THE SECTION BELOW

5. Discussion and Approval of the December 12, 2016 Meeting Summary …………………………………………………………...…………Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO Mr. Johnson will present the December 12, 2016 meeting summary and request Transportation Policy Board approval

6. Discussion and Approval of the CAMPO Procurement Policy…….Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO Mr. Johnson will present the CAMPO Procurement Policy and request Transportation Policy Board approval.

7. Discussion and Approval of STP-MM Funding for Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor (Kenny Fort Boulevard Extension) in Round Rock ………………………..Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO Mr. Johnson will present the status of on-going activities for segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor (Kenny Fort Boulevard Extension) in Round Rock and request Transportation Policy Board approval of funding to support project implementation.

TPB Agenda – January 9, 2016 Page 2

8. Discussion and Approval of the Memorandum of Agreement for the Park and Ride Study ………………………….…………………………………………..Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO Mr. Johnson will present the Memorandum of Agreement for the Park and Ride Initiative between CAMPO, CTRMA, CARTS, TxDOT-Austin District and Capital Metro and request Transportation Policy Board approval.

INFORMATION:

9. Presentation of the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program Report ………………………………………………………………………....Ms. Doise Miers, CAMPO Ms. Miers will brief the Transportation Policy Board on the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach program.

10. Presentation and Update on the 2045 Regional Active Transportation Plan ………………………………………………………………………....Mr. Kelly Porter, CAMPO Mr. Porter will brief the Transportation Policy Board on the 2045 Regional Active Transportation Plan.

11. Presentation of the Bastrop County Transportation Plan …………………………………………………Mr. Jim Harvey, Alliance Transportation Group Mr. Harvey will brief the Transportation Policy Board on the Bastrop County Transportation Plan.

12. Report on Transportation Planning Activities a. Upcoming Major Planning Activities for 2017

13. Announcements a. TAC Meeting – January 23, 2017 b. Next TPB Meeting – February 13, 2017

14. Adjournment

Presenters with audiovisual needs are requested to contact CAMPO at (512) 215-8225 at least two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Persons with disabilities who may need auxiliary aids or services, such as interpreters for persons who are deaf or hearing impaired, readers of large print or Braille, or those who may need a translator for the Spanish language are requested to contact CAMPO staff at least two working days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Certification

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Commissioner Will Conley, Chairman Agenda Item: 1 Subject: Certification of Quorum

RECOMMENDATION Certification of a quorum, whereas the Transportation Policy Board requirement is 11 members present.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A quorum is the minimum number of members who must be present at the Transportation Policy Board meeting for business to be legally transacted. Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Information

To: Transportation Policy Board From: CAMPO Staff Agenda Item: 2 Subject: Public Comments

RECOMMENDATION None. This item is for informational purposes only.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item is reserved for those members of the public wishing to address the Transportation Policy Board and provide official comment. Comments are limited to topics not on the agenda but may directly or indirectly affect transportation in the CAMPO geographic area. Up to 10 individuals may sign up to speak – each of whom must contact the CAMPO office by 4:30 p.m., Monday, January 9, 2016. Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Information

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Commissioner Will Conley, Chairman Agenda Item: 3 Subject: Announcements

RECOMMENDATION None. This item is for informational purposes only.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This time is reserved for official announcements from the chairman of the Transportation Policy Board. Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Information

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Todd Hemingson, TAC Chairperson Agenda Item: 4 Subject: Report from the Technical Advisory Committee Chair

RECOMMENDATION None. This item is for informational purposes only.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The chairman of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will provide an overview of the discussion items and official recommendations from the TAC to the Transportation Policy Board.

Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Approval

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Ashby Johnson, Executive Director Agenda Item: 5 Subject: Approval of the December 12, 2016 Meeting Summary

RECOMMENDATION CAMPO recommends that the Transportation Policy Board approve the December 12, 2016 Meeting Summary.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this action is to approve the summary of the previous meeting held by the Transportation Policy Board. This summary is the official record of actions having taking place during the meeting.

Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Policy Board Meeting Summary December 12, 2016

1. Certification of Quorum – Quorum requirement is 11 members ………………………………..Chairman Conley

Member Alternate Member Representing Attending Attending 1 Will Conley, Chair Commissioner, Hays County Y Clara Beckett, Vice- 2 Commissioner, Bastrop County Y Chair 3 Steve Adler Mayor, City of Austin Y Travis County Representative; Mayor, City of 4 Joe Bain Y Lakeway 5 Jeff Coleman Mayor, City of Pflugerville Y

6 Gerald Daugherty Commissioner, Travis County N Bain

7 Sarah Eckhardt Judge, Travis County Y

8 Sheri Gallo City of Austin, District 10 Y

9 Delia Garza City of Austin, District 2 N Kitchen

10 Daniel Guerrero Mayor, City of San Marcos Y

11 Ann Kitchen City of Austin, District 5 Y

12 Cynthia Long Commissioner, Williamson County Y

13 Terry McCoy, P.E. TxDOT-Austin District Y

14 Terry Mitchell Capital Metro Board Member Y

15 Craig Morgan Council Member, City of Round Rock Y

16 Alfredo Muñoz Commissioner, Caldwell County Y

17 James Oakley Judge, Burnet County Y

18 Matt Powell Mayor, City of Cedar Park N Long

19 Dale Ross Mayor, City of Georgetown Y

20 Brigid Shea Commissioner, Travis County Y

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/2/

1 For agenda material and meeting video visit www.campotexas.org/meeting-agendas/

2. Public Comments

The Chair recognized Roger Baker who addressed the Board.

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/3/

3. Chair Announcements………………………………………………………....…………...... Chairman Conley

The Chair made no announcements and welcomed Mayor Victor Gonzales to the board.

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/4/

4. Report from the Technical Advisory Committee Chair…..………………….Mr. Todd Hemingson, Capital Metro

The Chair recognized Mr. Hemingson who presented the results of the Technical Advisory Committee’s October meeting.

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/5/

5. Discussion and Approval of the October 17, 2016 Meeting Summary………………Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Johnson who presented the October 17, 2016 meeting summary.

Mr. Johnson recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve the meeting summary.

Oakley moved to approve the meeting summary.

Eckhardt seconded the motion.

Ayes: Chair Conley; Vice-Chair Beckett; Adler; Bain; Coleman; Daugherty (Proxy: Bain); Eckhardt; Guerrero; Garza (Proxy: Kitchen); Gonzales; Kitchen; Long; McCoy; Mitchell; Morgan; Muñoz; Oakley; Powell; Ross (Proxy: Long); Shea

Nays: None

Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/6/

6. Discussion and Approval of the FY 2016 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities (FTA 5310) Project Awards………………………………………………………..…….…….....….Mr. Kelly Porter, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Porter who presented project awards for the FY 2016 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities (FTA 5310) project call.

Mr. Porter recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve the project awards.

Oakley moved to approve the project awards.

2 For agenda material and meeting video visit www.campotexas.org/meeting-agendas/ Morgan seconded the motion.

Nays: None

Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/8/

7. Discussion and Approval of Requested Transportation Development Credits ...... Mr. Kelly Porter, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Porter who presented the requested Transportation Development Credits related to the FY 2016 5310 project awards.

Mr. Porter recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve the requested Transportation Development Credits.

Oakley moved to approve the requested Transportation Development Credits

Bain seconded the motion.

Nays: None

Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/9/

8. Discussion and Approval of the Williamson County Purchasing Cooperative Interlocal Agreement ……………………….…………………………………………………………….…….…..Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Johnson who presented the Williamson County Purchasing Cooperative Interlocal Agreement.

Mr. Johnson recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve the agreement.

Morgan moved to approve the agreement.

Bain seconded the motion.

Nays: None

3 For agenda material and meeting video visit www.campotexas.org/meeting-agendas/ Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/10/

9. Discussion and Approval of Amendment Four for the FY 2016 and 2017 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP)…...…………………………………………………….……………………….…..Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Johnson who presented Amendment Four for the FY 2016 and 2017 Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP).

Mr. Johnson recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve Amendment Four.

Oakley moved to approve Amendment Four.

Morgan seconded the motion.

Nays: None

Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/11/

10. Discussion and Approval of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program ……….……………………………………………………………....Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Johnson who presented the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program.

Mr. Johnson recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program.

Oakley moved to approve the MOU.

Eckhardt seconded the motion.

Nays: None

Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/12/

4 For agenda material and meeting video visit www.campotexas.org/meeting-agendas/

11. Discussion and Approval of Selected Projects Eligible for Category 2, 4, and 12 Funding ……………………………………………………………………………………………………...TxDOT Austin District

The Chair recognized Lorena Echeverria De Misi, P.E. who presented the selected projects eligible for Category 2, 4, and 12 funding.

Ms. De Misi recommended the Transportation Policy Board approve the selected projects.

Long moved to approve the selected projects.

Morgan seconded the motion.

Nays: None

Abstain: None

Absent: None

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/7/

12. Discussion on Mokan Corridor…………………………………………………….….Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Johnson who briefed the Transportation Policy Board on the Mokan Corridor.

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/13/

13. Presentation of 2017 Transportation Policy Board Meeting Dates…………………Mr. Ashby Johnson, CAMPO

The Chair recognized Mr. Johnson who presented the 2017 Transportation Policy Board meeting dates.

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/14/

14. Report on Transportation Planning Activities

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/15/

15. Announcements

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/15/

16. Adjournment

The Transportation Policy Board adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

Video of this item can be viewed at http://austintx.swagit.com/play/12132016-1062/15/

5 For agenda material and meeting video visit www.campotexas.org/meeting-agendas/ Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Approval

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Ashby Johnson, Executive Director Agenda Item: 6 Subject: Discussion and Approval of the CAMPO Procurement Policy

RECOMMENDATION CAMPO staff recommends that the Transportation Policy Board approve the CAMPO Procurement Policy.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Per the Planning Agreement between TxDOT and CAMPO, CAMPO shall maintain approved written procurement procedures that meet or exceed the requirements of 49 CFR Part 18, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments,” and the state’s UGMS as either may be revised or superseded.

FINANCIAL IMPACT None.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION In January 2017, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) approved CAMPO’s Procurement Policy.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachment A: CAMPO Procurement Policy Attachment B: Draft Resolution Attachment A CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION PROCUREMENT POLICY

INTRODUCTION

These procedures establish standards and guidelines for the procurement of services through Third Party Contracts. The 2 CFR 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, provides for waiving certain reviews by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) if the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) has a procurement system that has been certified by those agencies. These procedures were developed to satisfy those certification requirements and to ensure that a qualified contractor is obtained through an equitable selection process, and that work is properly accomplished in a timely manner at a just and reasonable cost.

RESPONSIBILITY

The MPO is responsible, in accordance with good administrative practices and sound business judgement, for the settlement of all contractual and administrative issues arising out of procurements for services. These include, but are not limited to, evaluation of proposals, protest, disputes, and claims.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No member, officer, employee or agent of the MPO, a subgrantee, or other entity shall participate in selection, or in the award or administration of a contract supported by Federal or State funds if a conflict of interest, real or perceived, would be involved. Such a conflict would be deemed to arise when:

• the member, officer, employee or agent,

• any member of his or her immediate family (within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity),

• his or her partner,

• or an organization which employs, or is about to employ any of the above or has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for the award.

MPO members, officers, employees, or agents will neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, subcontractors, parties or potential parties to agreements or subagreements or other suppliers of goods or services. An exception exists where the financial interest is incidental and not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal intrinsic value.

Should such a conflict of interest be found to exist, the affected contract may be voided at the discretion of the Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Policy Board. Any violation of the Conflict of Interest policy may be cause for disciplinary action including removal from his or her office or position at the discretion of the Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Policy Board.

PRINCIPLES OF PROCUREMENT

Effective procurement procedures require an understanding and implementation of the fundamental principles of basic procurement. These principles insure that the organization enters into the selection process, the procurement, and the contracting agreement in an efficient, effective manner, in accordance with applicable Federal and State laws.

The first of these principles requires the MPO to treat all prospective contractors in an equal and equitable manner. All potential contractors should be given same treatment in the award and administration of contracts. PROCUREMENT MPO 1

The second principle requires the MPO to maximize open and free competition. The MPO will not restrict competition by utilizing exclusionary or discriminatory specifications such as:

• Placing unreasonable requirements on contractors in order for them to qualify to do business;

• Allowing noncompetitive practices including collusion and price fixing;

• Allowing conflicts of interest; and

• Requiring unnecessary experience.

The third principle requires that the MPO and the contractor establish and maintain an "arm's length relationship." The rights of both parties must be clearly established in a contract; there must be a formal offer and acceptance; the parties involved must possess the requisite authority to contract; and there must be adequate consideration for both parties. An "arm's length relationship" prohibits collusion or gratuitous relationships between the MPO and the contractor which result in unwarranted benefit or gain to either party.

The fourth principle in sound procurement is that the parties to the agreement must have an opportunity for remedy if either party is harmed in any manner during the contractual relationship.

METHODS OF PROCUREMENT

The MPO retains consultant services through two methods of procurement - competitive negotiation and noncompetitive. Competitive negotiation procurement is the preferred method of procurement by the MPO. Noncompetitive procurement is only used in the following limited situations:

1. The item is available only from a single source. 2. Public exigency or emergency when the urgency for the requirement will not permit a delay incident to competitive solicitation. 3. The Federal grantor agency authorizes noncompetitive procurement. 4. After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined to be inadequate.

The MPO retains consultant services for transportation planning studies, public involvement assistance, and auditing services. Consequently, the majority of the contractors retained by the MPO are architectural, engineering, or accounting firms. Under Texas State law, the MPO must engage such firms based on their qualifications and experience, with fees being determined through negotiations following selection. Accordingly, the MPO solicits proposals from a number of sources through the issuance of a Request for Proposal (RFP). Contained in the RFP is a conceptual Scope of Work to which prospective contractors must respond. At the time the conceptual Scope of Work is developed, a project budget is established. The project budget is published as a part of the RFP. Upon receipt of solicited proposals, contractors are evaluated based on the qualifications of the prospective contractor, the prospective contractor's understanding of the scope of work, knowledge of the study area, the firm's previous related work experience, and the proposed management plan. Proposers are ranked and authorization from the MPO Policy Board to initiate contract negotiations with the firms in rank order is obtained.

SCOPE OF WORK

A Scope of Work shall be developed for any Third Party Contract based on the primary objective and tasks as outlined in the latest approved Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). The Scope of Work should be sufficiently definite and clear to permit the preparation of proposals on a common basis to obtain the benefit of full and free competition. The Scope of Work should include general conditions, special conditions, and technical specifications for the work to be accomplished. Special conditions include the procedures by which contractor proposals will be evaluated and selected. PROCUREMENT MPO 2

COST AND PRICE ANALYSIS

In order to properly evaluate the contractor's cost proposal, the MPO shall develop an independent cost estimate and perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every negotiated procurement action, including contract modifications.

A cost analysis is a detailed evaluation of the cost elements in the potential contractor's offer to perform. It is conducted to form an opinion as to the degree to which the contractor's proposed costs represent what his or her performance should cost. A cost analysis is generally conducted to determine whether the contractor is applying sound management in proposing the application of resources to the contracted effort and whether costs are proper, allowable, and allocable. A cost analysis is performed in these situations:

1. When an offeror is required to submit the elements of his estimated cost.

2. When adequate price competition is lacking.

3. For sole-source procurements (including contract modifications or change orders), unless price reasonableness can be established on the basis of a market price or based on prices set by law or regulation.

A price analysis is an evaluation of a proposed price that does not involve an in-depth evaluation of all separate cost elements and the profit factors that comprise a price proposal. Price analysis is a broad term that includes whatever actions the MPO takes to reach a price decision without using cost analysis methods. These actions may include:

1. A comparison of competitive price quotations submitted to the MPO.

2. A comparison of prior quotations and contract prices with current quotations for the same or similar projects.

3. The use of yardsticks to point up apparent gross inconsistencies.

Documentation of any cost or price analysis will be included in the contract file.

PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTORS

After development of the Scope of Work, the MPO shall post the RFP on its website and may also select a list of prospective contractors to be notified of the RFP by the MPO from a file of contractors who have asked to be considered for this or similar projects. The list shall include sufficient prospective contractors to assure an open process for selecting a contractor. The scope of certain projects, because of the specialized technical nature, may limit the list of qualified contractors. In such cases, at least three contractors will be asked to submit proposals.

DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE

The MPO has a firm commitment to an affirmative action program for disadvantaged business enterprises (DBE) participation in its Third Party contracting opportunities. The Transportation Policy Board of the MPO shall comply with the DBE requirements of the federal or state agency which is providing funding for the project. All potential contractors are encouraged to make every effort possible to meet the established goal and to identify DBE firms in the proposals. However, nothing in this provision shall be construed to require the utilization of any DBE firm which is either unqualified or unavailable.

PROCUREMENT MPO 3

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

The MPO shall develop a Request for Proposal (RFP) as described below.

Instructions for Proposals. Instructions for proposals should give, in summary fashion, general information about what is required from the consultant. The instructions should include the proposal due date and time, the number of copies of the proposal, the person and address for submission, and information about any pre-proposal meeting(s). Proposers shall be considered "nonresponsive" if they fail to conform to the requirements (copies, due date/time) of the solicitation.

Purpose. The purpose briefly describes the objective of the study to be performed.

Proposal Content. The proposal content describes the specific information to be supplied by the proposer including: a cover letter, study methodology, key personnel, management plan, and related work.

Criteria for Evaluation. The criteria and weighing to be used in evaluating the proposals must be included in the RFP. This section contains the published budget for the study effort.

Selection Procedure. An evaluation committee will be appointed to review proposals. The committee will rank proposals and make recommendations. Contracts over $50,000 will be recommended to the Transportation Policy Board.

Duration of Contract. The anticipated length of the contract is described in this section.

Disadvantages Business Enterprise Participation. Section as described previously.

Compliance with Federal Regulations. This section calls the attention of the proposer to the fact that the contract is funded through financial assistance from the United States and Texas Departments of Transportation. As such, the contract must comply with all applicable Federal and State regulations.

Debarment Certification. All prospective contractors are required to execute a "Certification of Lower-Tier Participant" form as a part of their proposal.

Background. This section should give a brief background on the project and the reasons for which contract services are being sought.

Scope of Work. The Scope of Work shall incorporate a clear and accurate description of the technical requirements of the product or service being procured. Such description shall not contain features which unduly restrict competition. The description may include a statement of the qualitative nature of the product or service being procured and shall set forth minimum essential characteristics and standards to which it must conform if it is to satisfy the intended use.

PROTEST PROCEDURES

At any point in the procurement process, any dispute, protest, or claim may be filed. The dispute, protest, or claim should be directed to the MPO Executive Director within seven (7) days after the aggrieved party knows or should have known of the facts or events giving rise to the complaint.

In order for an above mentioned party to enter the protest process, a written complaint must be sent to the MPO Executive Director by certified mail within seven (7) days which identifies the following:

PROCUREMENT MPO 4 • Name, mailing address and business telephone number of the complainant.

• Appropriate identification of the procurement being questioned.

• A precise and concise statement of reasons for the protest.

• Supporting exhibits, evidence or documents to substantiate any claims.

The dispute, protest, or claim must be based on an alleged violation of the MPO's Procurement Procedures, a violation of State or Federal law (if applicable), or a violation of applicable grant or contract agreements to which the MPO is a party. Failure to receive a procurement award from the MPO in and of itself does not constitute a valid complaint.

Upon receipt of a complaint, the MPO Executive Director will forward a copy of the written protest to the MPO Chairman.

The MPO Executive Director (or designee) shall contact the complainant and attempt to resolve the allegations informally. If the MPO Executive Director (or designee) successfully resolves the allegations by mutual agreement, the MPO Executive Director will forward written documentation to the MPO Chairman of the resolution with specifics on each point addressed in the original complaint.

If the MPO Executive Director (or designee) is not successful in resolving the allegations, the complaint along with the MPO Executive Director’s or designee’s comments will be forwarded to the MPO Chairman. At the next regularly scheduled MPO Transportation Policy Board meeting, the MPO Chairman will appoint members and a chairman of a procurement protest subcommittee. Prior to the next regularly scheduled MPO Transportation Policy Board meeting, the procurement protest subcommittee shall meet to review all documents, interview the complainant, and prepare a written decision for consideration by the full MPO Transportation Policy Board. The MPO Executive Director shall place the complaint on the next MPO Transportation Policy Board meeting agenda for action. The MPO Transportation Policy Board may conduct a hearing as a part of their meeting to resolve the appeal. A final written decision shall be forwarded to the complainant. In any event, action by the MPO Transportation Policy Board shall be final.

CONTRACT

The following is the "boiler plate" for professional services contract entered into by the MPO.

PROCUREMENT MPO 5 THE STATE OF TEXAS ) (

COUNTY OF TRAVIS ) ( KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS

This contract is made, entered into and executed this ______day of ______, 20__, by and between the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, hereinafter called the MPO, which is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization of the Austin urbanized area, and ______, hereinafter called Consultant.

W I T N E S S E T H

WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions of 23 USC 134, the Governor of the State of Texas has designated the MPO to be the single-focus planning organization for the Austin urbanized area and has executed an agreement to effectuate the designation; and,

WHEREAS, pursuant to the Governor's designation and in compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, and ordinances, the MPO has developed and maintains the 20__-20__ Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) which outlines work tasks and estimated expenditures; and,

WHEREAS, the latest approved UPWP has been approved by the Policy Board, the State of Texas, acting by and through the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), and the U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT), acting by and through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA); and,

WHEREAS, in the latest approved UPWP, the MPO is authorized to engage a consultant to conduct the ______; and

WHEREAS, the Consultant desires to perform said study;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises of the mutual covenants and agreements of the parties hereto, the MPO and the Consultant do mutually agree as follows:

A G R E E M E N T

ARTICLE I

PURPOSE

1.01 This contract stipulates the terms and conditions whereby the Consultant agrees to perform the Scope of Work, affixed hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by reference, and the terms and conditions whereby the MPO agrees to reimburse the Consultant for work approved by the Policy Board, or its designated representative.

PROCUREMENT MPO 6 ARTICLE II

TERM

2.01 The term of this contract will begin on , and shall terminate upon the MPO's final approval of work completed by the Consultant or on whichever occurs earlier, unless otherwise terminated or modified as hereinafter provided.

ARTICLE III

SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED

3.01 The Consultant shall undertake with its own personnel and resources or through contractors authorized pursuant to ARTICLE V, Subsection 5.04, the tasks as described in the Scope of Work outlined in Attachment A, which has been made a part of this contract by reference.

3.02 Specifically, the Consultant agrees to perform the tasks described in the Scope of Work and report the work accomplished under each task in accordance with the Scope of Work.

3.03 If the Consultant is of the opinion that any work it has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this contract and constitutes additional work, the Consultant shall promptly notify the MPO in writing. In the event that the MPO finds that such work does constitute additional work, the MPO shall so advise the Consultant and provide compensation for doing the work on the same basis as the original work or the MPO shall advise the Consultant not to perform the work. If the compensation for the additional work will cause the maximum amount payable to be exceeded, a written amendment, approved by the Policy Board, will be executed. Any amendment so executed must be approved within the contract period specified in Article II.

3.04 When the Scope of Work requires a completed work product, the MPO will review the work as specified in the Scope of Work. If the MPO finds it necessary to request changes in previously satisfactorily completed work or parts hereof, the Consultant will make such revisions as requested and directed by the MPO. Such work will be considered as additional work and subject to the requirements established in Article III, Subsection 3.03.

3.05 If the MPO finds it necessary to require the Consultant to revise completed work to correct errors appearing therein, the Consultant will make such corrections, and no compensation will be paid for the corrections.

ARTICLE IV

PERSONNEL

4.01 The Consultant represents that it has or will secure, and agrees to furnish, personnel with qualifications, skills, and expertise required to perform the Scope of Work. The Consultant will provide all necessary supervision and coordination of activities that may be required to complete the activities described in the approved Scope of Work.

4.02 The Consultant designates ______as the Consultant Project Manager. The Policy Board designates ______as the MPO Project Manager.

PROCUREMENT MPO 7 ARTICLE V

FISCAL MANAGEMENT & DISBURSEMENT

5.01 The maximum amount payable under this contract shall not exceed the amount ______dollars ($______), as outlined in Attachment B - Budget Summary. Attachment B is hereby incorporated in full in this contract by reference. The MPO will withhold ten percent (10%) of the total contract amount pending completion of the Scope of Work as described in Attachment A. Upon satisfactory completion of the Scope of Work, the Consultant may invoice for the withheld amount.

5.02 The MPO agrees to reimburse the Consultant for work approved by the Policy Board, or its designated representative, that is performed in accordance with the approved Scope of Work, within thirty (30) days of the MPO’s receipt of the invoice prior to the MPO seeking reimbursement for such work from TxDOT. Reimbursement will not exceed the total budgeted for the Consultant in the approved Budget Summary.

5.03 The Consultant agrees to submit bills monthly within forty-five (45) days of the end of the month within which the work was performed (see Appendix A). The MPO agrees to promptly request reimbursement from the TxDOT for monthly bills submitted by the Consultant. Reimbursement under this contract shall be in accordance with applicable federal regulations including Cost Principles, 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31, FAR 31 herein made a part of this contract by reference. Further, to be eligible for reimbursement, a cost must be incurred within the contract period specified in ARTICLE II. The Consultant shall include as part of his request for payment a list of all Disadvantage Business Enterprise subcontractors and the amounts to be paid to each of the subcontractors from the request for payment. This requirement is in accordance with FTA Circular 4716.1A. All costs must be supported by source documents which comply with generally accepted accounting practices.

5.04 In the event the Consultant contracts with an individual and/or an organization to perform certain tasks in order to accomplish the Scope of Work, the Consultant agrees to submit any and all contracts for such work to the MPO for approval prior to execution of said contracts and said agreements must contain all required provisions of this contract and must specify that all bills be submitted to the Consultant. The Consultant will be responsible for all work under this contract even if the work has been subcontracted to another individual and/or organization.

5.05 The Consultant agrees that the MPO, TxDOT, the US DOT, and the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, shall, for the purpose of audit and examination be permitted to inspect all work, materials, payrolls, and other data and records with regard to the study, and to audit the books, records, and accounts with regard to the study. Further, the Consultant agrees to maintain all fiscal records and supporting documentation for a period of four (4) years after the MPO makes final payments and all other pending matters are closed. The Consultant further agrees that, in the event, any expenditures under this contract are found to be ineligible for reimbursement by an audit, and/or any additional audits performed within the four (4) years following acceptance of the original audit, the Consultant will reimburse the MPO for those expenditures declared ineligible within ninety (90) days after being notified in writing of the findings.

5.06 Authorization for expenditure of funds under this contract is contingent upon funding by the appropriate agencies of the US DOT and/or TxDOT.

In the event that funds provided by and/or through the US DOT or TxDOT are not made available, withdrawn in whole or in part, and/or canceled for whatever reason such that the Scope of Work will not be completed, this contract will be terminated effective the date of said termination of funds, in such event:

a. The MPO shall give notice to the Consultant in writing within thirty (30) days of being advised of any funding cutback affecting this contract. PROCUREMENT MPO 8

b. the Consultant agrees that upon receipt of such notice, the conditions and requirements outlined in ARTICLE VIII, Subsection 8.01, will be accomplished by the Consultant.

5.07 In the event that it becomes necessary to amend the Consultant's budget during the course of this contract, the MPO and the Consultant agree that such amendments must have the mutual written concurrence of both parties. In the event that both parties cannot reach mutual agreement, the provisions outlined in ARTICLE VIII, Subsection 8.01, may be applied.

ARTICLE VI

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

6.01 The Consultant shall submit to the MPO monthly progress reports, Attachment C. These reports shall outline work accomplished during the previous month or since the last progress report for the Consultant's work under this contract. These reports will include, but not be limited to, the percentage of completion of the overall work project and each work phase, special problems or delays encountered or anticipated, changes in the estimated value of each phase of work, the anticipated work activities for the next month, and a brief description of work accomplished for each task.

6.02 Upon completion of the Scope of Work, the Consultant will provide electronic files (both Microsoft Word and an Adobe Acrobat pdf) of the final report which documents all steps of the study process with supporting data to the MPO. The MPO will also be furnished all computer generated graphics in a format compatible with ArcInfo/ArcView/ArcGIS software and systems and all supporting documentation (i.e. Synchro model runs and data).

ARTICLE VII

DISPUTES

7.01 The Consultant shall be responsible for the settlement of all contractual and administrative issues arising out of procurement entered in support of contract work.

7.02 The MPO shall act as referee in all disputes regarding non-procurement issues, and the MPO's decision shall be final and binding subject to review and approval by the TxDOT, FHWA, and FTA.

PROCUREMENT MPO 9 ARTICLE VIII

TERMINATION

8.01 This contract may be terminated in whole or in part by either party hereto whenever such termination is found to be in the best interests of either party. Termination shall be effected by the conveyance of a written notification thereof to the other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of the termination. In the event either party to this contract terminates this contract, the Consultant agrees to the following:

a. Stop work under the contract on the date and to the extent specified in the notice of termination.

b. Place no further orders of subcontracts except as may be necessary for completion of the work not terminated.

c. Terminate all orders and subcontracts to the extent that they relate to the performance of work terminated by notice of termination.

d. Submit to the MPO their termination claim within sixty (60) days of the effective date of termination. The termination claim shall not exceed the total amount of funds authorized in this contract less the estimated cost of the work not completed and the amount of payments previously made.

8.02 Violation or breach of contract terms by the Consultant shall be grounds for termination of the contract, and any increased cost arising from the Consultant's default, breach of contract, or violation of terms shall be paid by the Consultant.

8.03 This contract shall not be considered as specifying the exclusive remedy for any default, but all remedies existing at law and in equity may be availed by either party and shall be cumulative.

8.04 Upon termination of this contract, whether for cause or at the convenience of the parties hereto, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, reports, maps, drawings, models, photographs, etc., prepared by the Consultant shall be covered by the provision of ARTICLE XVIII under this contract with respect to ownership.

8.05 Except with respect to defaults of subcontractors, the Consultant shall not be in default by reason of any failure in performance of this contract in accordance with its terms (including any failure by the Consultant to progress in the performance of the work) if such failure arises out of causes beyond the control and without the default or negligence of the Consultant. Such causes may include, but are not restricted to acts of God or of the public enemy, acts of the Government in either its sovereign or contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, freight embargoes, and unusually severe weather. In every case, however, the failure to perform must be beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Consultant.

ARTICLE IX

NON-DISCRIMINATION

9.01 It is mutually agreed that all parties hereto shall be bound by the provisions of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, which was promulgated to effectuate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 710.405(b). In furtherance of the requirements of Title 49, a copy of "Notice to Contractors--Compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for Federal Aid Contracts" is marked Exhibit "B", attached hereto, and made a part hereof.

PROCUREMENT MPO 10 9.02 It is the policy of the US DOT that Minority Business Enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 26, as amended, shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds. Consequently, Minority Business Enterprise requirements of 49 CFR Part 26, as amended, apply to this contract as follows:

The Consultant agrees to guarantee that Minority Business Enterprises as defined in 49 CFR Part 26, as amended, have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds. In this regard, the Consultant shall take all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR Part 26, as amended, to insure that Minority Business Enterprises have the maximum opportunity to compete for and perform contracts.

The Consultant and any subcontractors shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, age, sex, or disability in the award and performance of contracts funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. These requirements shall be physically included in any subcontract. Failure to carry out the requirements set forth above shall constitute a breach of contract and, after written notification from the MPO, may result in termination of the contract by the MPO or other such remedy as the MPO deems appropriate.

9.03 The Consultant shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, sex, national origin, age or disability in the performance of this contract, including the procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The contractor shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by 49 CFR Part 21.

9.04 In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiation made by the Consultant for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the Consultant of the Consultant's obligations under this contract and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, national origin, religion, age, sex, or disability.

9.05 The Consultant shall provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or directives issues pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the TxDOT or the US DOT to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations or directives. Where any information required of the Consultant is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish information, the Consultant shall so certify to the TxDOT or the US DOT, as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.

9.06 In the event of the Consultant's noncompliance with the non-discrimination provisions of this contract, the MPO shall impose such contract sanctions as it, TxDOT or the US DOT may determine to be appropriate, including but not limited to:

a. withholding of payments to the Consultant under the contract until the Consultant complies, and/or

b. cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract in whole or in part.

9.07 The Consultant shall include the provisions of Subsections 9.01 through 9.06 in every subcontract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The Consultant shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the MPO may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event the Consultant becomes involved in, or is threatened with litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the Consultant may request the MPO to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the MPO; in addition, the Consultant may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States.

PROCUREMENT MPO 11 9.08 No otherwise qualified disabled person shall, solely by reason of his disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise be subject to discrimination under this agreement. The consultant shall ensure that all fixed facility construction or alteration and all new equipment included in the project comply with applicable regulations regarding Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in programs and activities receiving or benefiting from Federal Financial Assistance, set forth in 49 CFR Part 27, and any amendments to it.

ARTICLE X

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

10.01 The Consultant agrees to comply with Executive Order 11246 entitled "Equal Employment Opportunity" as amended by Executive Order 11375 and as supplemented in Department of Labor Regulations (41 CFR 60).

ARTICLE XI

INDEMNITY

11.01 The Consultant agrees to be responsible for all claims and liabilities due to the negligent acts or omissions of the Consultant, its agents or employees while performing this contract. The Consultant also agrees to be responsible for any and all expenses incurred by the Consultant in litigation or otherwise resisting such claims or liabilities as a result of any negligent activities of the Consultant, its agents or employees only.

ARTICLE XII

GOVERNING LAW

12.01 This contract shall be governed by the law of the State of Texas and all obligations hereunder of the parties are performable in Travis County.

ARTICLE XIII

AMENDMENT

13.01 No provision of this contract shall be deemed waived, amended, or modified by either party unless and until such waiver, amendment, or modification is in writing, approved by the MPO, TxDOT, and the US DOT before additional work may be performed or additional costs incurred which will be eligible for reimbursement, and signed by the party against whom it is sought to be enforced.

13.02 Changes in the scope, objectives, character, cost or complexity of the work as approved in the latest approved UPWP must be submitted in writing and must be approved by the MPO and TxDOT or the US DOT before additional work may be performed or additional costs incurred which will be eligible for reimbursement. Said charges must be approved by the MPO prior to submittal to TxDOT or the US DOT.

PROCUREMENT MPO 12

ARTICLE XIV

PRECEDENCE OF AGREEMENT

14.01 This contract constitutes the sole and only agreement between the parties hereto for 23 USC Section 104(f) and 49 USC Section 5301 et seq. funds and supersedes any prior understanding, written or oral, between the parties respecting the matters herein contained.

ARTICLE XV

GENDER

15.01 Words of any gender used in this contract shall be held and construed to include any other gender, and words in the singular number shall be held to include the plural, unless the context requires otherwise.

ARTICLE XVI

LEGAL CONSTRUCTION

16.01 In case any one or more of the provisions contained in this contract shall for any reason be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceable provision shall not affect any other provision hereof and this contract shall be construed as if such invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained herein.

ARTICLE XVII

SANCTIONS

17.01 In the event the Consultant does not accomplish the Scope of Work and is unable or unwilling to provide satisfactory cause to the MPO as to the reasons and/or justifications for not accomplishing the work, the MPO reserves the right to impose one or both of the following sanctions on the Consultant:

a. Retain a percentage of current and/or future reimbursements to the Consultant until the Consultant satisfactorily completes the work. The percentage to be retained will be determined by the MPO.

b. Require a reimbursement from the Consultant of funds expended under this contract in an amount not to exceed the amount reimbursed to the Consultant in the study which the Consultant has failed to satisfactorily complete. The exact amount to be reimbursed to the MPO will be determined by the MPO; however, such determination shall not preclude the Consultant’s rights under law.

ARTICLE XVIII

OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT

18.01 It is agreed that the MPO, TxDOT and the US DOT shall own any and all information in whatsoever form and character produced in accordance with this contract. It is expressly agreed that the information, data, written information, or other work produced, collectively "the work", which is produced pursuant to this contract shall be considered a work made for hire, having been specifically ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work, as a PROCUREMENT MPO 13 supplementary work, as a compilation, or as an information, and/or other work produced under this contract shall be furnished to the MPO upon request.

18.02 The MPO, TxDOT and the US DOT shall, with regard to any reports or other products produced under this contract, have the royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and to authorize others to use the work for government purposes. Any modifications made by the MPO to any of the Consultant's documents, or any use, partial use, or reuse of the documents without written authorization or adaptation by the Consultant will be at the MPO's sole risk and without liability to the Consultant.

18.03 The Consultant agrees not to release data or information about the results of the study to any person outside the MPO without first obtaining written authorization to release such information from the MPO.

ARTICLE XIX

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FUNDING SOURCE

19.01 The Consultant shall give credit to the US DOT, TxDOT, and the MPO as the funding source in all oral presentations, written documents, publicity, and advertisement regarding any activities which ensue from this contract.

ARTICLE XX

PROHIBITED INTEREST

20.01 No member of or delegate to the Congress of the United States shall be admitted to any share or part of the contract or to any benefit arising therefrom. No member, officer, or employee of the MPO during his tenure or one year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this contract or the proceeds thereof.

ARTICLE XXI

INSPECTION OF WORK

21.01 The MPO, the State of Texas, and the US DOT, and any authorized representative hereof, have the right at all reasonable times to inspect or otherwise evaluate the work performed or being performed hereunder and the premises on which it is being performed.

21.02 If any inspection or evaluation is made on the premises of a subcontractor, the Consultant shall provide and require his subcontractor to provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and convenience of the inspectors in the performance of their duties. All inspections and evaluations shall be performed in such a manner as will not unduly delay the work.

ARTICLE XXII

NONCOLLUSION

22.01 The Consultant warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for it, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. If the Consultant breaches or violates this warranty, the MPO shall have the right to annul this contract without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from the contract price

PROCUREMENT MPO 14 or consideration, or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee, commission, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee.

ARTICLE XXIII

POLITICAL ACTIVITY AND LOBBYING

23.01 No federally appropriated funds provided under this contract will be paid by or on behalf of the parties to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection of the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.

ARTICLE XXIV

DEBARRED BIDDERS

24.01 The Consultant, including any of its officers or holders of a controlling interest, is obligated to inform the MPO whether or not it is or has been on any debarred bidders lists maintained by the United States Government and the State of Texas. Should the Consultant be included on such a list during the performance of this study, it shall so inform the MPO.

ARTICLE XXV

ENERGY POLICY

25.01 Contracts shall recognize mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the State energy conservation plan issued in compliance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (P.L. 94-163).

ARTICLE XXVI

CLEAN AIR ACT AND FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT REQUIREMENTS

26.01 The Consultant agrees to comply with all applicable standards, orders, or requirements issued under Section 306 of the Clean Air Act (42 USC 1857 (h), Section 508 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1368), Executive Order 11738, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) requirements (40 CFR, Part 15), which prohibit the use under nonexempt Federal contracts, grants, or loans, of facilities included on the US EPA list for Violating Facilities. The Consultant shall report violations to FTA and the US EPA Assistant Administrator for Enforcement (ENO329).

ARTICLE XXVII

COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS

27.01 The Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals in any matter affecting the performance of this contract, including, without limitation, worker's compensation laws, minimum and maximum salary and wage statutes and regulations, and licensing laws and regulations. When required, the Consultant shall furnish the MPO with satisfactory proof of its compliance therewith.

PROCUREMENT MPO 15

ARTICLE XXVIII

SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS

28.01 The MPO and the Consultant each binds itself, its successors, executors, assigns and administrators to the other party to this contract and to the successors, executors, assigns and administrators of such other party in respect to all covenants of this agreement. Neither the MPO nor the Consultant shall assign, sublet, or transfer his/her interest in this agreement without written consent of the other.

ARTICLE XXIX

SIGNATORY WARRANTY

29.01 The undersigned signatory for the Consultant hereby represents and warrants that he/she is an officer of the organization for which he/she has executed this contract and that he/she has full and complete authority to enter into this contract on behalf of his/her organization.

ARTICLE XXX

NOTICES

30.01 All notices hereunder shall be deemed given when, either delivered in person or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the appropriate party at the following address:

If to the MPO: Ashby Johnson, Executive Director Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 3300 N IH 35, Suite 630 Austin, Texas 78705

If to Consultant:

EXECUTED IN DUPLICATE ORIGINALS THIS THE ______DAY OF ______, A.D., 20__.

CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

BY: BY: ______Ashby Johnson Executive Director TITLE: ______

ATTEST: ATTEST: ______

PROCUREMENT MPO 16 ATTACHMENT A SCOPE OF WORK

PROCUREMENT MPO 17 ATTACHMENT B

BUDGET SUMMARY

CONTRACT.MPO ATTACHMENT C

PROGRESS REPORT

CONTRACT.MPO

Prime Consultant: Project: Total Project Amount: Month/Year:

% of Description of work/ Product Progress % Work Task Contract (Provide adequate information to explain work completed to date) Completed

1 0 Work done this month: 0

Next month’s work activities:

Problems/Delays:

Changes in estimated value:

2 0 Work done this month: 0

Next month’s work activities:

Problems/Delays:

Changes in estimated value:

3 0 Work done this month: 0

Next month’s work activities:

Problems/Delays:

Changes in estimated value:

4 0 Work done this month: 0

CONTRACT.MPO

% of Description of work/ Product Progress % Work Task Contract (Provide adequate information to explain work completed to date) Completed

Next month’s work activities:

Problems/Delays:

Changes in estimated value:

5 0 Work done this month: 0

Next month’s work activities:

Problems/Delays:

Changes in estimated value:

6 0 Work done this month: 0

Next month’s work activities:

Problems/Delays:

Changes in estimated value:

Prepared by: Approved by: ______Title: Title:

CONTRACT.MPO

APPENDIX A

INCLUDE WITH INVOICE:

PROGRESS REPORT

TIME SHEETS FOR THE PRIME CONSULTANTS EMPLOYEES

• “Time sheets’ must be actual time sheets and not simply a listing of hours an employee worked on this project

• Highlight the appropriate time on the time sheet as it relates to this study

• Any person’s time being billed that was not included in the original Attachment B is not eligible without a written request indicating the individuals name, title, hourly rate and an explanation of their contribution to the study

EXPENSE REPORTS FOR TRAVEL AND RECEIPTS FOR OTHER REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES

• Reimbursement for travel will be based on each organization’s internal policies but shall not exceed State or Federal allowable rates.

• Do not piecemeal travel expenses. All expenses for the same trip should be submitted at the same time. Appropriate charges should be highlighted

• Include highlighted copies of airline, parking, hotel and meal receipts

• Meal receipts must be itemized and alcoholic beverages and tips/gratuities are not reimbursable expenses

• Mileage for which an employee is reimbursed should be documented with the travel date, trip destination and trip purpose

• Include the number of copies run, what the copies were for, and indicate the appropriate rate (color, black and white, plots, etc.)

• Include highlighted receipts for outside services and identify on the receipt the line item to which the item was charged

• Only those other direct line items on the original Attachment B are eligible for reimbursement. Prior approval must be requested for any additional line items

INVOICE FOR EACH SUB CONSULTANT

• Follow the example given for the Prime Consultant and provide the same information as required to the Prime in labor and other direct charges

CONTRACT.MPO

• Contracts with subconsultants must be on file in the MPO office prior to MPO reimbursing for subconsultants bills

CONTRACT.MPO

Attachment B

Resolution (2017-1-6)

Acknowledging the Transportation Policy Board’s Approval of the CAMPO Procurement Policy

WHEREAS, pursuant to federal law, the Governor of the State of Texas designated the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Austin region in 1973; and

WHEREAS, CAMPO’s Transportation Policy Board is the regional forum for cooperative decision- making regarding transportation issues in Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis and Williamson Counties in Central Texas; and

WHEREAS, the mission of a Metropolitan Planning Organization is to conduct a coordinated, comprehensive and continuous metropolitan transportation planning process; and

WHEREAS, the MPO shall maintain [the approved] written procurement procedures that meet or exceed the requirements of 49 CFR 18, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments,” as it may be revised or superseded; and

WHEREAS, in January 2017, TxDOT approved CAMPO’s Procurement Policy; and

WHEREAS, staff is proposing the approval of the CAMPO Procurement Policy. The policy is in the background material accompanying this proposed resolution; and

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the CAMPO Transportation Policy Board hereby votes to approve the CAMPO Procurement Policy as reflected in this Resolution; and

Hereby orders the recording of this resolution in the minutes of the Transportation Policy Board; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board delegates the signing of necessary documents to the Board Chair.

The above resolution being read, a motion to approve the CAMPO Procurement Policy as reflected was made on January 9, 2017 by ______duly seconded by ______.

Ayes:

Nays:

Abstain:

Absent and Not Voting:

SIGNED this 9th day of January 2017.

Chair, CAMPO Board

Attest:

Director, CAMPO Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Approval

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Ashby Johnson, Executive Director Agenda Item: 7 Subject: Discussion and Approval of STP-MM Funding for Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor (Round Rock)

RECOMMENDATION The CAMPO 2040 Plan contains project listing 224 in the regional category for Kenney Fort Boulevard for FY 2018. Based upon the available information, this funding request is consistent with the 2040 Plan. CAMPO staff recommend that the Transportation Policy Board approve $2,900,000.00 in STP-MM funding for analysis of Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor (FM 1431 to SH 45).

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Round Rock and Williamson County are currently studying mobility needs on the Mokan Corridor/Kenney Fort Boulevard facilities in anticipation of significant privately funded investments near the corridors. A December 9, 2016 Mokan workshop was held by CAMPO with one of the outcomes being the segmentation of the Mokan Corridor and the prioritization of Segment 2 so that Round Rock and Williamson County can move forward with their pending economic development opportunities.

FINANCIAL IMPACT $17,000,000.00 in STP-MM funds recently became available from the FM 1431 and SH 45 projects, and available to be reallocated to qualifying projects. In October 2016, the Transportation Policy Board approved the allocation of $7,600,000.00 for FM 2304 (Manchaca Road), with $9,400,000.00 remaining available.

If the TPB chooses to fund this request, there would be a balance of $6,500,000.00 of STP-MM funds available for the TPB to allocate in the future.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Kenney Fort Boulevard is a major arterial roadway in the City of Round Rock’s Transportation Master Plan. It was included in the City’s first Transportation Master Plan, published in 1994, but has been part of the planning process since 1988. The project is being constructed in phases. Segment 1, which extends between Joe DiMaggio Boulevard and Forest Creek Drive, was completed during the summer of 2013. Segment 2 and 3 would serve to extend Kenney Fort Boulevard approximately 1.5-miles south from its current terminus at Forest Creek Drive to SH 45 North. Segment 2 and 3 of Kenney Fort Boulevard will be a six-lane divided arterial (matching Segment 1).

CAMPO held a workshop on the Mokan Corridor on December 9, 2016. One of the outcomes of the workshop was a recommendation, from the CAMPO board members and elected officials present, to fund a $2.9 million shortfall that would allow the City of Round Rock to move forward with analysis of potential impacts of the corridor. The funding would allow Round Rock to do a high level analysis of Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor and potentially produce a draft schematic of the best option. In particular, the requested funding would enable the City of Round Rock to analyze how the development of the Mokan Corridor could impact the development of Kenney Fort Boulevard as the alignments of the two corridors are very close to each other.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachment A: CAMPO 2040 Project Listing Attachment B: Aerial Map of Proposed Kenney Fort Boulevard Extension Attachment C: Draft Resolution

Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Local Source Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Funding

$7.1 $7.9 $2.1 $3.1 $2.9 $5.8 $5.8 $6.7 $2.8 $6.0 $6.0 $11.4 $17.2 $12.1 $12.9 $15.0 $13.6 $15.2 $12.0 $39.6 $26.2 $25.5 $33.3 (Millions) (Millions) YOE Cost Attachment A - Let 2018 2018 2031 2035 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2022 2022 2020 2040 2020 2025 2025 2025 2022 2025 2020 2025 Year New 2-lane minor arterial 2-lane minor New Widen to MAD-4 MAD-4 MAD-4 Reconstruct and widen to a six lane arterial roadway with a raised center median, turn lanes, wide outer lanes and shared use path. The project will also reconstruct and elevate the Spanish Oak Creek bridge. Construct MAD-4 new with sidewalks and IH 35 crossing New MAD-4 Widen from 2 lanes with median to 6 lanes with median Improve to Principal Arterial Divided; upgrade from 2-lane to 4 DIV arterial 2-lane minor New MAD-2 MAD-2 MAD-2 MAD-2 Reconstruct to a MAD-4 with sidewalks MAD-2 SH 45 SW - Nutty Brown RdSlaughter Lane - SH 45 SW Improve to MAD-4 Improve to MAD-4 US 290 W - Slaughter Lane Improve to MAD-4 FM 969 - Deaf Smith Blvd Zeppelin Drive - Cypress Rd Creek Nutty Brown - Darden Hill Darden Hill Rd - FM (W) 150 Cottonwood Creek Trail - - Trail Creek Cottonwood Street Market Limits/Location Description Chisholm Trail Road - Mays Mays - Road Trail Chisholm Street Loop 1 - Grand Pkwy Ave US 290 - Samsung BlvdJoe DiMaggio Blvd - 1000’ S of US 79 New MAD-4, alignment new IH 35 - Berry Creek Drive RM - Lime 1431 Creek Rd Improve roadway to MAD-4 FM 969 - Harold Green Rd McNeil - 620 Bypass Widen to MAD-6 Walsh Tarlton - Redbud Trail Widen to MAD-4 RM - Flite 12 Acres Rd Blanco County Well - Jacob’s WellJacob’s - Wimberley City Limits Winters Mill - FM 150 - Road Westinghouse Boulevard University Flite Acres - Winters Mill RM 1826* RM 1826* RM 1826 Arterial C Anderson MillAnderson Rd RM 1826 RM 1826 RM / Whitestone 1431 Reconstruction and Blvd Widening Project Arterial L Anderson MillAnderson Rd Arterial A Arterial A (Kenny Fort Blvd) Airport Dr Airport MillAnderson Rd Arterial B RM 2222 RM RM 2244 RM 3237 RM 2325 RM 2325 RM 3237 GrimesA.W. Blvd RM 3237 and Projects and 5. Action Plan Hays Travis Travis Travis Travis / / Travis Williamson Hays Hays Williamson County Williamson Travis / / Travis Williamson Williamson / Travis Williamson Travis Travis Travis Hays Hays Hays Hays Williamson Hays Travis Travis TravisWilliamson Travis Williamson Williamson Georgetown Hays Travis Travis Cedar Park Cedar Hays Hays Cedar Park Cedar Sponsor Cosponsor Round Rock Austin Austin Round Rock Georgetown Park Cedar Travis Travis Travis Hays Hays Hays Hays Round Rock Hays ID 211 217 219 213 214 216 218 212 215 224 207 221 227 226 Travis 205 223 220 225 206 208 209 204 222 Road Projects (continued)

Action Plan and Projects | 173 Mokan Corridor Attachment C

Resolution (2017-1-7)

Acknowledging the Transportation Policy Board’s Allocation of ST-MM Funding to Round Rock for Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor (Kenny Fort Boulevard Extension)

WHEREAS, CAMPO has $9,400,000.00 in STP-MM funding available for reallocation from the FM1431 and SH 45 projects; and

WHEREAS, CAMPO convened a Mokan Corridor Workshop on December 9, 2016 attended by Transportation Policy Board members and elected officials with constituents in the Mokan Corridor; and

WHEREAS, an outcome of the Mokan Corridor Workshop was to segment the Mokan Corridor and prioritize Segment 2 (FM 1431 to SH 45) and recommend the allocation of $2.9 million in funding for further analysis; and

WHEREAS, CAMPO has chosen to allocate $2,900,000 of these STP-MM funds to Round Rock for analysis of Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor as it relates to the Kenny Fort Boulevard Extension; and

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the CAMPO Transportation Policy Board hereby votes to approve the requested STP-MM funding as reflected in this Resolution; and

Hereby orders the recording of this resolution in the minutes of the Transportation Policy Board; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board delegates the signing of necessary documents to the Board Chair.

The above resolution being read, a motion to approve $2,900,000 of STP-MM funds to Round Rock for Segment 2 of the Mokan Corridor (Kenny Fort Boulevard Extension) as reflected was made on January 9, 2017 by ______duly seconded by ______.

Ayes:

Nays:

Abstain:

Absent and Not Voting:

SIGNED this 9th day of January 2017.

Chair, CAMPO Board

Attest:

Director, CAMPO Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: August 8, 2016 Action Requested: Approval

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Ashby Johnson, Executive Director Agenda Item: 8 Subject: Discussion and Approval of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for the Park and Ride Study

RECOMMENDATION CAMPO staff recommends that the Transportation Policy Board approve the Memorandum of Agreement for the Park and Ride Initiative between the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA), Texas Department of Transportation-Austin District (TxDOT), Capital Area Rural Transportation System (CARTS) and Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Capital Metro).

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed Park and Ride Initiative focuses on identifying and developing a program of Park and Ride facilities that will operate on existing and planned Mobility Authority project corridors. The MOA will identify the roles and responsibilities of each agency in advancing this initiative. The CTRMA Board authorized execution of the Memorandum of Agreement at their July 27, 2016 board meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT One of the duties of CAMPO in the MOA is to conduct a regional park and ride study to inform any future right-of-way preservation, land purchase and/or environmental documents that might happen prior to the implementation phase. The estimated cost of such a study is $600,000 - $700,000. There is currently no funding in the CAMPO Unified Planning Work Program for this item.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The CTRMA, Capital Metro, TxDOT-Austin District, CARTS, and CAMPO are major partners in the development of mobility solutions for the residents of Central Texas. All Parties have worked collaboratively over the past several years in coordinating their respective projects and creating opportunities to improve mobility. Over the past two years, the Parties have identified the need to intensify their collaboration efforts and to focus on the strategic implementation of Park &Ride facilities that will be located in optimal locations to access the managed/express lane projects being implemented by the CTRMA. The Park & Ride Initiative is a joint effort by all Parties to identify mobility solutions in Central Texas. The CTRMA project corridors related to this agreement include the North MoPac Improvement Project, the South MoPac Improvement Project, US 183 North, US 183 South, SH 71 East, the Manor Expressway, and the Oak Hill Parkway. The initial listing of potential Park & Ride project locations to be evaluated under the conditions of this agreement, are included in the Appendix to this agreement.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachment A: Draft Memorandum of Agreement Attachment B: Draft Resolution.

Attachment A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT PARK AND RIDE INITIATIVE

CENTRAL TEXAS REGIONAL MOBILITY AUTHORITY, CAPITAL METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, AND CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) is made by and between the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (the “CTRMA”), the Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Capital Metro”), and the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (“CAMPO”). (Collectively referred to as the “Parties”) The parties hereto agree to the following regarding the planning and development of Park and Ride (P&R) facilities that will benefit from the use of managed/express lanes being developed by the CTRMA.

WITNESSETH

WHEREAS, the CTRMA’s mission is to implement innovative, multi-modal transportation solutions that mitigate congestion and create transportation choices that enhance the quality of life and the economic vitality in the Central Texas metropolitan region (“Central Texas”); and

WHEREAS, Capital Metro serves as the largest provider for the Central Texas area’s public transportation, including commuter rail, bus rapid transit, express bus operations, local bus operations, rideshare programs, and paratransit services (collectively referred to as the “Services”); and

WHEREAS, CAMPO produces and maintains both the Long-Range Transportation Plan and the Transportation Improvement Program for the 6-County region, including those activities involving the Capital Metro and the CTRMA; and

WHEREAS, the CTRMA is advancing a program of projects that include managed/express lane elements, that shall provide reliable travel times and travel time savings to users; and

WHEREAS, these managed/express lanes are free to use for Capital Metro Services; and

WHEREAS, the Parties seek to coordinate the integration of P&R facilities to serve the managed/express lanes within these projects; and

WHEREAS, the Parties desire to cooperate and coordinate with each other to avoid overlap or duplication of efforts, and plan, develop, and construct P&R facilities in a logical development sequence in order to minimize costs while maximizing mobility to all Parties and allow the Parties to proceed with projects in a timely and cost efficient manner; and

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 1

WHEREAS, the agreement proposed by the Parties is more particularly described in the Roles and Responsibilities Section of this Agreement; and the P&R Projects are identified in Appendices to this Agreement[KK1]; and

WHEREAS, the Parties represent that they have the authority to enter into this Agreement and the Parties intend to comply with the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Texas Government Code Section 791.001, et seq.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, do hereby mutually agree as follows:

I. Purpose

The purpose of this Agreement is to memorialize the responsibilities of the Parties regarding the planning for and the development of a P&R Initiative throughout Central Texas and to solidify the mutual relationship in developing a P&R Initiative between all Parties. This agreement will establish the following:

II. Description and Background

The CTRMA, Capital Metro, and CAMPO are major influencers in the development of mobility solutions for the people of Austin and the surrounding metropolitan area. All Parties have worked collaboratively over the past several years in coordinating their respective projects and creating opportunities to improve mobility. Over the past two years, the Parties have identified the need to intensify their collaboration efforts and to focus on the strategic implementation of P&R facilities that will be located in optimal locations to access the managed lanes being implemented by the CTRMA, to provide convenient access and travel time savings to Capital Metro customers, and addresses the planning needs of Central Texas identified by CAMPO. The P&R Initiative is a joint effort by all Parties to address mobility solutions in Central Texas. The CTRMA project corridors related to this agreement include the North MoPac Improvement Project, the South MoPac Improvement Project, US 183 North, US 183 South, SH 71 East, the Manor Expressway, and the Oak Hill Parkway.[KK2]

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 2

III. Roles and Responsibilities

1) The CTRMA roles and responsibilities are agreed as follows: a) Coordinate with Capital Metro and CAMPO [KK3]on P&R locations throughout Central Texas where these facilities would benefit from managed/express lane projects being undertaken by the CTRMA; and b) Provide staff to lead efforts on P&R site location, project development, and approval; and c) In coordination with local transit operators and/or local governments, provide site narratives, preliminary site assessments, existing conditions analysis, environmental studies, preliminary design, and other planning-level activities necessary to identify, select, and acquire property for each P&R location identified; and d) Conduct public outreach for each P&R site location in conjunction with Capital Metro and CAMPO; and e) Request CTRMA Board approval for all P&R locations as appropriate; and f) Coordinate with CAMPO and submit concepts and projects for inclusion in the long-range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program at the discretion of the Transportation Policy Board in accordance with a 3-C transportation planning process as required under 23 CFR 450 and 49 CFR 613; and g) Collaborate with all parties to identify all funding needs and sources to advance the P&R initiative.

2) Capital Metro roles and responsibilities are agreed as follows: a) Coordinate with the CTRMA and CAMPO on P&R locations throughout Central Texas where these facilities would benefit from managed/express lane projects being undertaken by the CTRMA; and b) Provide staff for project coordination on P&R site location, project development, and approval; and c) Provide operating plans for each P&R location; and d) Develop demand forecasting and service planning for each P&R location; and e) Provide design standards and criteria for P&R facilities; and f) Support public outreach for each P&R site location in conjunction with the CTRMA and CAMPO as appropriate; and g) Serve as the liaison to the Federal Transit Administration as appropriate to maintain compliance with federal law and to retain project eligibility costs for federal funding support; and h) Submit concepts and projects to CAMPO for inclusion in the region’s long-range transportation plan and Transportation Improvement Program at the discretion of the Transportation Policy Board in accordance with a 3-C transportation planning process as specified in 23 CFR 450 and 49 CFR 613; and i) Conduct operations and maintenance capacity analysis for each P&R location, and incorporate each approved P&R location into the Capital Metro operations and maintenance budget; and j) Request Capital Metro board approval for all P&R locations as appropriate; and

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 3

k) Develop the branding logo and related marketing materials for the P&R Initiative; and l) Provide Express Bus Service to each P&R location; and m) Maintain operations and maintenance of each site after completion.

3) CAMPO roles and responsibilities are agreed as follows: a) Assist with the CTRMA and Capital Metro in the identification, evaluation, selection, and advancement of each P&R project; and b) Include P&R projects identified in this effort in the development of the CAMPO Long-Range Transportation Plan and the Transportation Improvement Program; and amendments as needed; and c) Work collaboratively with the CTRMA and Capital Metro to identify funding opportunities for P&R projects; and d) Building on these efforts and other P&R projects in operation or being developed by Capital Metro and others, within their respective service areas, develop a Regional Park and Ride Plan for the 6-County CAMPO region.

4) Responsibilities for property acquisition, detailed design, and construction will be determined at a future time under a separate agreement when more specific information is available.

IV. Miscellaneous

This Agreement represents the entire agreement between the CTRMA, Capital Metro, and CAMPO. This Agreement supersedes all other agreements, understandings or commitments, written or oral, relative to the intent of this MOA. Unless expressly provided for in this Agreement, this MOA may not be amended or modified except pursuant to a mutual written agreement or supplemental written agreement executed by each member of the Parties.

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 4

This MOA shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas.

Executed by:

CENTRAL TEXAS REGIONAL MOBILITY AUTHORITY

By:______Date: ______Name: Mike Heiligenstein Title: Executive Director Approved as to form:

By:______Date: ______

Title:______

CAPITAL METROPOLITAIN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

By:______Date: ______Name: Linda Watson Title: President/CEO Approved as to form:

By:______Date: ______

Title:______CAPITAL AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION

By:______Date: ______Name: Ashby Johnson Title: Executive Director Approved as to form:

By:______Date: ______

Title:______

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 5

Appendix List of Potential Park and Ride Projects

1. North Mopac Improvement Project a. Howard Lane

2. South Mopac Improvement Project a. Escarpment Drive

b. South Bay Lane

c. Slaughter Lane

3. US 183 North a. US 183 & 620

4. US 183 South a. No P&R projects identified

5. SH 71 East a. SH 71 (at SH 130 Toll)

6. Manor Expressway a. US290 (at SH 130 Toll)

7. Oak Hill Parkway a. Oak Hill P&R (near ACC Pinnacle Campus)

Map of Potential Park and Ride Projects

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 6

Working Draft: May 8, 2016 Page 7

Attachment B

Resolution (2017-1-8)

Acknowledging the Transportation Policy Board’s Approval of the Memorandum of Agreement for the Park and Ride Initiative between the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, Capital Area Rural Transportation System, Texas Department of Transportation-Austin District and Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

WHEREAS, the mission of a Metropolitan Planning Organization is to conduct a coordinated, comprehensive and continuous metropolitan transportation planning process; and

WHEREAS, CAMPO, CTRMA, CARTS, TxDOT-Austin District and C apital Metro seek to integrate Park and Ride facilities to serve the managed/express lanes being developed by the CTRMA; and

WHEREAS, CAMPO, CTRMA, CARTS, TxDOT-Austin District and Capital Metro desire to cooperate and coordinate with each other to avoid overlap or duplication of efforts regarding the Park and Ride initiative; and

WHEREAS, CAMPO, CTRMA, CARTS, TxDOT-Austin District and Capital Metro represent that they have the authority to enter into an Agreement and the Parties intend to comply with the Interlocal Cooperation Act, Texas Government Code Section 791.001, et seq.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the CAMPO Transportation Policy Board hereby votes to approve the Memorandum of Agreement for the Park and Ride Initiative as reflected in this Resolution; and

Hereby orders the recording of this resolution in the minutes of the Transportation Policy Board; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board delegates the signing of necessary documents to the Board Chair.

The above resolution being read, a motion to approve the Memorandum of Agreement for the Park and Ride Initiative as reflected was made on January 9, 2017 by ______duly seconded by ______.

Ayes:

Nays:

Abstain:

Absent and Not Voting:

SIGNED this 9th day of January 2017.

Chair, CAMPO Board

Attest:

Director, CAMPO Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Information

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Ms. Doise Miers, Community Outreach Manager Agenda Item: 9 Subject: Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program Report

RECOMMENDATION None, this is an informational item. This item will come back to the Transportation Policy Board at a future meeting to accept the report.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Burnet County and TxDOT approached CAMPO about conducting an outreach program in Burnet County to gauge the community’s thoughts on adding a Colorado River crossing at Wirtz Dam Road between Marble Falls and Horseshoe Bay. A four-month community outreach program surveyed and received input from the community about a potential new river crossing. The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program Report details the program activities, survey results, and public comments.

FINANCIAL IMPACT The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program was conducted by CAMPO staff and a community outreach firm, Concept Development and Planning (CD&P). The program’s associated activities, material, and staffing was funded with $50,000 in planning funds.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Wirtz Dam Road in Burnet County is currently a low water crossing at the Colorado River that is not currently in use or accessible by the general public. In 2005, TxDOT conducted a feasibility study on constructing a bridge over the river but the project didn’t move forward at that time. Because of numerous factors such as distance between river crossings and population and traffic growth, TxDOT and the County saw the importance of gaging the community’s thoughts on a potential new crossing. In a four-month period, this outreach program resulted in over 800 surveys and nearly 800 general comments. The program also included 18 community meetings and events, including local government briefings and two public meetings. Survey results show that the majority of respondents view an additional river crossing as beneficial. The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program Report will be given to Burnet County and TxDOT to work on next steps in the project development process. Because this program included significant outreach and built a substantial stakeholder database, this information can be used in future project development steps, including an environmental study. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachment A: Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program Report

WIRTZ DAM ROAD PROGRAM SUMMARY Community Outreach Program

THE GOAL: to engage the community and gather input on an additional crossing of the Colorado River near Wirtz Dam Road. CAMPO worked closely with area partners including Burnet County, TxDOT, and LCRA to engage the community and better understand their needs. The Community Outreach Program began in August and was complete in December 2016 with a report of findings. All partners are appreciative of the input and will consider community needs and preferences as next steps are determined.

OUTREACH HIGHLIGHTS:

Community Public Meetings & Meeting 18 Events 97 Attendees 1,029 Click Throughs

Surveys General 848 Collected 812 Comments

WHAT WE HEARD: Top 5 zip codes represented in survey responses =Wirtz Dam How beneficial would a new river crossing Burnet County at Wirtz Dam Rd. be to you?

450 448 40 350 78611 29 250 58 150 78639 415 78654 118 50 94 267 15 71 Very Beneficial Beneficial Not at all Beneficial 78657 78669

What is the greatest transporation need in Burnet and Llano Counties?

Bridges and Other Public Safety River Crossings Roads (specified) Transportation Measures ?? 33% 30% 15% 9% 5% WIRTZ DAM ROAD Community Outreach Program

REPORT December 2016 Table of Contents

Background and Purpose ...... 2

Outreach Materials ...... 2

Outreach Efforts ...... 3

Meetings ...... 6

Public Meetings ...... 6

Community Meetings and Events ...... 7

Results ...... 8

Survey ...... 8

General Comments Summary ...... 32

Appendices

Appendix A: Community Outreach Plan ...... 34

Appendix B: Community Meeting Summaries ...... 40

Appendix C: Public Meeting Summaries ...... 46

Appendix D: Comments Log ...... 49

Appendix E: Materials ...... 82

Public Meeting Exhibits ...... 83

Public Meeting Presentation ...... 88

Fact Sheets ...... 99

Public Meeting Flyers ...... 103

Contact Cards ...... 105

Appendix F: Media ...... 107

Tear Sheets ...... 108

Advertisement ...... 129

1 Background and Purpose The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program is a public engagement process to gather community input on an additional river crossing near Wirtz Dam Road. The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) led this outreach program, working closely with other partners including Burnet County, TxDOT, and LCRA.

Area partners wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to plan ahead for the growing needs of the community by considering growth projections, growth in tourism and seasonal traffic, existing river crossings, and traffic flow in the area. US 281 is a major north-south thoroughfare that will be limited in supporting the expected growth. An additional river crossing near Wirtz Dam Road could provide an alternative for local traffic in the future.

Community Outreach Goals

x Gather input on a potential new bridge crossing at Wirtz Dam x Create public awareness and participation x Provide relevant information to the public so that they may share meaningful input x Engage a broad range of stakeholders, including: nearby residents, property owners, business owners, community groups, lake users, organizations, agencies, and jurisdictions x Maintain an open and transparent community outreach and engagement process x Provide a variety of easily accessible and exciting opportunities for involvement x Relay the community’s needs, concerns, thoughts, and ideas to Burnet County and TxDOT for potential use in future project development

The Wirtz Dam Community Outreach Program was a unique approach to gathering public input prior to beginning the formal project development process. In 2005 TxDOT conducted a feasibility study, but a project never developed. CAMPO, Burnet County, and TxDOT knew at some point in the future an additional river crossing would need to be considered, but wanted to first engage the community and gather input to better understand needs and preferences. Area partners understand how valuable community input is and feel that this process was beneficial to guide potential future project development.

Outreach Materials Several outreach materials were developed as informational resources for community members. These materials were used to create awareness of the Community Outreach Program and inform the public about various ways to get involved. These materials included:

Contact Card – A contact card was developed to distribute at community meetings and events. The card included a brief summary of the program’s purpose as well as the program phone number, email address, and webpage address.

Fact Sheet – A program fact sheet was developed in both English and Spanish and included the history of Wirtz Dam, infographics demonstrating projected growth in the area, a map of the potential crossing location, and information about public meetings and various opportunities to share input. Contact information for the outreach team and an explanation of CAMPO’s role were also included in the program fact sheet.

2 Comment Cards – Comment cards were available at community meetings and events, as well as both public open houses. Comments submitted were analyzed and documented in this report.

Flyers – Flyers were developed in both English and Spanish advertising public meeting dates and locations, as well as the various additional ways to get involved with the public input process. This flyer was distributed to local businesses and community groups to promote awareness of the program and opportunities to share input.

Webpage – A program webpage was developed and made available on the CAMPO website featuring all program information, survey links, and public meeting information.

Exhibit Boards – Exhibit boards were created for use at public open houses to share program information. These boards include:

x Welcome Board – described the purpose of the open house x Program Goals – described the objectives of the Community Outreach Program x How to Get Involved – gave information about survey availability, comment submission, and opportunities for online participation x Program Progress and Schedule – gave information about outreach completed to date, including estimate of surveys and comments received, number community events and meetings attended, and an infographic of the outreach program timeline x Next Steps – provided important dates for the program, including open house dates, survey closing date, comment submission deadline, and the anticipated publication date of the final report Outreach Efforts The Community Outreach Program was a four-month program that included an array of outreach activities in an effort to reach a broad range of stakeholders. Outreach activities included:

Community Outreach Plan – The plan was created to document goals, strategies, and outreach activities.

Database – A database of contacts was developed early through research and outreach to initial stakeholders such as neighborhood associations, school districts, and other organizations in the area. As stakeholders were contacted, they were asked to help get the word out to community members about the outreach program. The database was consistently maintained as new contacts were identified and grew from an initial list of 85 email addresses to 465 emails in December.

Phone Outreach – Throughout the community outreach process, stakeholders were contacted through phone outreach to promote awareness of the program and ways to share their input. Community leaders were also contacted over the phone to coordinate attendance at community events and local groups were asked to share information on the program with others who might be interested in getting involved.

3 Emails – Emails were distributed to promote the outreach program, encourage community members to participate and take the survey, and provide meeting details.

Date Subject Recipients Sept. 27 Program Introduction 85 Oct. 7 Survey and Background 147 Oct. 24 Meeting Reminder 335 Nov. 22 Survey Reminder 465

Oct. 24 Email Update Spanish Outreach – To reach the Spanish-speaking community, the program fact sheet was translated into Spanish, and a separate Spanish survey was available online and in print at community events and meetings. Initial outreach was made through phone contact with area employers and other community leaders involved with the Spanish- speaking community. Through these outreach efforts, La Liga Adult Soccer was identified as a primarily Spanish-speaking stakeholder group. The program coordinated with league officials to attended a day of soccer games, where they visited with spectators and players to inform them about the outreach program and collect surveys.

In addition, Spanish Facebook messages were posted on the CAMPO page, receiving 272 views and 12 likes. Facebook advertisements were La Liga Soccer Event placed in Spanish to target the Spanish-speaking community, resulting in a potential reach of 6,139 with 451 direct click throughs.

Social Media – Facebook and Twitter were used to promote the program and encourage participation in the survey. When asked “How did you hear about the outreach program?” in the survey, most respondents selected social media.

Facebook posts were made on October 11, 25, and 27 with 188 likes, 78 shares, and 266 views of the video. Twitter posts were made on October 25 and 26 with 845 impressions, with one retweet.

Advertisements in English and Spanish were used on Facebook to promote posts with direct links to the survey. Ads were targeted to those 16 and older in the zip codes and communities identified in the survey.

Facebook Ad Campaign Results Results English Campaign Spanish Campaign Total Link Clicks 578 451

Reach 15,643 6,139 Impressions 31,966 18,463

Advertisements – Ads were also placed in local publications to promote the public meetings, survey, and program contact information.

x The Horseshoe Bay Beacon – October 13, October 16 x The Highlander – October 18, October 21, October 25, November 11 x Burnet Bulletin – October 19, October 26 x The Picayune – Print Ad October 19; Online Ad, Digital Banner Ad, and Email Campaigns running October 20 through November 3 (15,114 Impressions) x Llano News – October 19

Media Coverage – Information was provided to local media outlets to share program details, encourage media coverage, and generate interest and participation from the community. The Sample Advertisement first media release was distributed on October 4 to share details on an upcoming media event and promote the outreach program. A second release was distributed on October 24 as a reminder of public meetings and opportunities to complete the online survey.

A media event was held onsite at Wirtz Dam on October 14, Location of Media Event 2016. This provided an opportunity for the media to photograph the area and visit with CAMPO staff, Burnet County Judge James Oakley, Commissioner Joe Don Dockery, and LCRA staff.

Media coverage included the following articles:

x Burnet Bulletin o “County leadership considers Wirtz Dam bridge,” September 14, 2016 o “Officials gather public input for bridge at Wirtz Dam,” October 19, 2016 x The Highlander o “Wirtz Dam Bridge: CAMPO consults public,” September 13, 2016 “Officials gather input for Wirtz Dam bridge,” o Article by Burnet Bulletin October 18, 2016 o “Wirtz Dam bridge draws questions,” October 28, 2016 o “Economics, survey under question at second Wirtz Dam Bridge meeting,” November 15, 2016 x The River Cities Daily Tribune o “Officials discuss bridge below Wirtz Dam as solution to 281 traffic,” September 9, 2016 o “Two opportunities coming to offer input on Wirtz Dam bridge project,” October 5, 2016

5 Meetings Public Meetings Two public open house meetings were hosted to provide an opportunity for members of the community to view information about the outreach program, ask questions about the potential project, and provide input. The same information was shared at both meetings and the different locations were provided for convenience. Meetings were an open house format with a brief presentation at 6:00 p.m. followed by a question and answer session. Then attendees viewed program boards, visited with staff and team members, shared comments on a large aerial map, Public Meeting in Horseshoe Bay and took the survey.

Wednesday October 26, 2016 Thursday, November 3, 2016 4 – 7 p.m. 4 – 7 p.m. Quail Point Community Center Lakeside Pavilion 107 Twilight Lane, Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657 307 Buena Vista Drive, Marble Falls, TX 78654 57 attendees signed in at the meeting 38 attendees signed in at the meeting

Materials: x Program Fact Sheet x Comment Cards x Surveys x Copies of the 2005 TxDOT Feasibility Study x Aerial map of the area near Wirtz Dam Road x Exhibit Boards o Welcome Board o Program Goals o How to Get Involved o Program Progress and Schedule o Next Steps

6 Community Meetings and Events Rather than just host meetings and ask the public to attend, opportunities were identified for the outreach team to attend other meetings and events to share program information. The outreach team contacted different event organizers and groups, offered attendance in correspondence with the community, and worked with elected and other officials to brief councils. Community meetings were scheduled to conveniently engage community members where they already gathered, share program information, and distribute surveys. By attending different types of events and meetings and in different locations, input was collected from a diverse set of stakeholders. Below is a table of meetings and events attended.

Event Date Highlight Shared program information with 25 entities and gathered input Partner Kickoff Meeting Sep. 9 on promoting program Burnet Bluegrass Festival Sep. 17 Collected 21 surveys and visited with attendees Fiesta Jam on Lake Marble Falls Sep. 24 Collected 31 surveys Marble Falls Citywide Garage Oct. 1 Promoted program to attendees Sale Marble Falls National Night Out Oct. 4 Collected 17 surveys and 2 additional comments Marble Falls City Council Briefing Oct. 4 Presented information to council Meadowlakes POA Meeting Oct. 8 Shared information with 50+ attendees and distributed surveys Cottonwood Shores Volunteer Oct. 11 Shared information with over 25 attendees Fire Department Meeting Highland Haven POA Meeting Oct. 11 Shared information and distributed surveys Marble Falls Rotary Club Oct. 13 Shared information with over 50 attendees Meeting Media Event at Wirtz Dam Oct. 14 Distributed information to media sources to promote program Marble Falls Homecoming Game Oct. 14 Promoted program as attendees entered the game Llano Wild West Weekend Oct. 15 Visited with attendees about program and public meetings City of Sunrise Beach Village Oct. 20 Presented program information and distributed surveys Meeting La Liga Soccer Matches Oct. 22 Collected 33 Spanish and 7 English surveys Marble Falls EMS 40th Oct. 29 Shared information with over 30 attendees Anniversary Celebration Marble Falls Rotary Club Nov. 8 Shared information and distributed surveys Presented program overview to council and reminded all of Cottonwood Shores City Council Nov. 15 survey deadline

7 Results Survey A survey was developed in English and Spanish to collect input from the community about their travel in the area, how frequently they cross the Colorado River, whether an additional crossing of the river would be beneficial, and any additional comments. The survey was shared with the community through the website, social media, advertisements, email updates, at events and meetings, and through community partners and groups. The survey was developed online and anytime paper copies were distributed, they were manually entered.

Results The survey was open from September 9 through November 27, 2016. A total of 848 surveys were received (810 in English and 38 in Spanish). All results below include English and Spanish versions and input collected in the online and paper formats.

1. In what zip code do you live? (848 answered, 0 skipped)

60% 415 (49%) 50% 40% 267 (31%) 30% 20% 126 (15%) 10% 40 (5%) 0% 78654 78657 78611 Other

Other Responses (126) Zip # Zip # Zip # 78639 58 76513 1 78645 1 78669 15 76550 1 78674 1 78643 11 76825 1 78705 1 78609 5 77868 1 78727 1 78605 5 78548 1 78734 1 78642 3 78607 1 786539 1 78070 2 78608 1 78654-8237 1 78653 2 78633 1 H Haven 1 78663 2 78636 1 Live 78750, work 78645, 1 own lot in 78657 I 2 78638 1 76402 1 78641 1

8 2. In what zip code do you 45% 358 (42%) work/attend school? 40% (843 answered, 5 skipped) 35% 272 (32%)

30%

25% 179 (21%) 20% 15% 10% 34 (4%) 5% 0% 78654 78657 78611 Other

Other Responses (272) Zip # Zip # Zip # retired, am retired 86 77092 1 78654 & Austin 1 78639 28 77868 1 78643, 78654, 78640 1 N/A, No Answer, None, 24 78548 1 78654, 78657, 78611, 76550 1 Not Applicable 78643 11 78605 1 78654, 78657, 78611, and Other 1 All, All above, All Three 8 78609 1 active volunteer 1 78654, 78657, and 7 78620 1 All, I work for MFEMS 1 78611 78626 5 78633 1 78209 1 78669 5 78641 1 At home; work from home 2 Don't work or attend 6 78644 1 Baylor Scott & White Hospital 1 school, Don’t do Either 78701 3 78653 1 I cover two states. My kids go to school in 78658 1 78723 3 78660 1 I work all of burnet county 1 78654 and 78657 3 78663 1 I work in all three zips plus 78639 1 78070 2 78681 1 Llano 1 78636 2 78705 1 Llano, North & South Austin, San Antonio 1 Make daily trips to Marble Falls own property in 78645 2 78721 1 1 Horseshoe Bay 78657 2 78727 1 Marble Falls, Kingsland, Burnet, Sunrise Beach 1 78704 2 78734 1 N/A Senior 1 78735 2 78736 1 residence 1 78745 2 78737 1 retired. shop, attend church in 78654. 1

9 78759 2 78738 1 Retired, Do not commute 1 78654 and 78611 2 78741 1 San Antonio 1 Austin 2 78746 1 San Antonio 78240 work 1 Travel to several plant locations in Burnet Homemaker 2 78748 1 1 County work in 76522, but kids and grandkids go to 7 1 78750 1 1 school in 78611 76121 1 78758 1 77008 1 76402 1 768643 1 78654, 78639, 78657, 78611 1 76513 1 78611, 78654 1 78654, 78657, 78606 1 as a home health care RN I work in all the zip codes in Burnet, Blanco, Llano counties and parts of 1 Travis and Williamson too, occasionally even Lampasas 78654- But we do NOT work/go to school, We are both retired 1

3. What area best represents where you live? (845 answered, 3 skipped)

Horseshoe Bay 212 (25%)

Marble Falls 150 (18%)

Granite Shoals 115 (14%)

Kingsland 65 (8%)

Highland Haven 55 (7%)

Cottonwood Shores 54 (6%)

Meadow Lakes 33 (4%)

Other 161 (19%)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

10 Other Responses (161) Area # Area # Area # Burnet 27 Timber Ridge 2 Bee Cave 1 Wilderness Cove 17 Castle Acres 1 Bertram/Burnet 1 Tobyville 15 Council Creek South 1 Belton 1 Spicewood 14 CR 120 1 Brady 1 Blue Lake 6 Deer Springs 1 Briggs 1 Smithwick 6 FM 1980 1 Burnet County 1 Sunrise Beach 6 Stephenville 1 Capstone Ranch 1 Bertram 5 Hill Country 1 Granite Shoals/Marble Falls 1 Inks Lake/Buchanan Dam 5 Hoover Valley 1 White Hall 1 Llano 5 Horseshoe Bay West 1 Wirtz Dam Road 1 Fairland 4 Johnson city 1 Wolf Creek Ranch 1 Austin 3 Killeen 1 Rural NW of Marble Falls 1 Lake Buchanan 3 Lampasas 1 retired 1 Georgetown 2 Leander 1 All - Marble Falls Area EMS 1 Lago Vista 2 Oak Ridge Estates 1 1980 - Past Strawberry Farm 1 Liberty Hill 2 Round Mountain 1 Round Rock 1 Sandy Harbor 2 Scobee 1 Rural NW of Marble Falls 1 Spring Branch 2

4. About how far is your home from your main place of work/school? (844 answered, 4 skipped)

Less than 1 mile 76 (9%)

About 1-5 miles 118 (14%)

About 6-10 miles 153 (18%)

About 10-20 miles 145 (17%)

More than 20 miles 114 (14%) 238 (28%) Not applicable

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

5. What is your primary mode of transportation to work/school? (842 answered, 6 skipped)

100% 90% 730 (87%) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

30%

20% 93 (11%) 10% 5(1%) 2(0%) 1(0%) 11 (1%) 0% Car or Bus Carpool Bicycle Walk Other motorcycle

Other Responses (93) Primary Type of Transportation # Primary Type of Transportation # Not applicable, none 32 Do not commute 1 Retired 23 Electric car (Chevy Volt) 1 Work from home 6 Foot/work at home 1 Truck 5 Home based business 1 Bus 5 Homemaker/home schooler 1 Don't work or go to school 4 Pickup 1 Work truck, trailers 3 Retired/Car 1 Boat 1 Bicycle 1 Crew-cab Chevy work truck 1 Coche o moto, autobus 2 Don't go to work or school, but use car for transportation 1 Car - But we are both retired - no work/school. We do volunteer in the area and we shop 1 throughout the area I use my car to travel to and from Spicewood area and MF for errands, entertainment, church 1

12 6. What is your secondary mode of transportation to work/school? (843 answered, 5 skipped)

60% 423 (50%) 50%

40% 308 (37%)

30%

20%

10% 37 (4%) 30 (4%) 25 (3%) 13 (2%) 7(1%) 0% Car or Walk Carpool Bicycle Bus Other Not motorcycle applicable

Other Responses (25) Secondary Mode of Transportation # Retired 9 No Answer, Non available, None 5 Work from home 3 300zx 1 Do not commute 1 Foot/work at home 1 Friend 1 Golf cart 1 Retired/pick up truck 1 There is no alternative since I can't walk 25 miles or carpool 1 in my job and I haven't seen any bus except for the disabled Viaje Compartido, coche o moto 1

13 7. In a normal week, how many roundtrips do you make between the north and south sides of the Colorado River for: work/school, recreation and social activities, and shopping/other personal business? Work school (731 answered, 117 skipped) Recreational and social activities (779 answered, 69 skipped) Shopping and personal (802 answered, 46 skipped)

Work School

35% 223 (31%) 30% 205 (28%) 25% 20% 110 (15%) 15% 98 (13%) 95 (13%)

10%

5% Recreation and Social Activities

0% 45% 303 (39%) 1-2 3-4 5-6 7 times or Never 40% times/wk times/wk times/wk more/wk 35% 30% 219 (28%) 25% 20% 110 (14%) 15% 81 (10%) 66 (8%) 10% 5% 0% 1-2 3-4 5-6 7 times or Never times/wk times/wk times/wk more/wk

Shopping and Other Personal Business 40% 304 (38%) 35%

30% 211 (26%) 25% 20% 125 (16%) 15% 94 (12%) 10% 67 (8%) 5% 0% 1-2 3-4 5-6 7 times or Never times/wk times/wk times/wk more/wk

14 8. When traveling between the north and south sides of the Colorado River, what crossing do you use most? (846 answered, 2 skipped)

Other 26 (3%) FM 2900/FM 1431 95 (11%)

US 281 725 (86%)

Other Responses (26) What Crossings Do You Use Most? # What Crossings Do You Use Most? # Both; US 281 Y FM 2900/FM 1431 5 By boat 1 2147 3 No PAC I-36 1 No answer 2 RR 307 1 1431 1 Slab road RM 3404 1 1431 into Marble Falls, 281 to 2147 1 US 281, RR 307 1 1980-1431-281 1 FM 620, Loop 360, Mopac, and US 281 1 2147 to 71 to Kingsland 1 Hwy 2900 / hwy 71 1 2900 Kingsland and US 281 1 Mopac, 620 1 2900 to 71 1 FM 2900/FM 1437, 71 1 All 1

15 9. What discourages you from traveling between the north and south sides of the Colorado River? (Check all that apply.) (809 answered, 1 skipped)

No need to cross the river 93 (7%) Other 88 (6%)

Heavy traffic 457 (32%)

Limited river crossings 278 (20%)

Distance to/from Distance to/from river other destinations crossings 221 (16%) 272 (19%)

Other Responses (88) Response # Not Specified, N/A, None, Nothing 33 Not Discouraged, Not Disouraged at All, Nothing Discourages Me; Nothing stops me 19 281-1431 intersection 1 Hate lack of traffic management or traffic planning in Marble falls 1 I cross on 281 and have NO problem with traffic 1 I don't feel traffic is an issue 1 I'm NOT discouraged from crossing the river. The new bridge is absolutely wonderful! 1 It doesn't "discourage" or stop me from going!!!!! 1 It's really my only option so I have to use the Hwy 281 bridge to get to MF for shopping, 1 recreation, church, etc. Just cross bridge 1 Low speed limits 1

16 Other Responses (88) Marble Falls Traffic 1 No problems crossing either way 1 No problems...into town whenever I want...... 1 Not a problem 1 Not discouraged/no worries, no heavy traffic, it's fine 1 nothing dicouages me from going into Marble Falls 1 Nothing discourages me. 281 has an awesome bridge. 1 Nothing discourages. Access is easy. 1 Nothing discurages me - bad question. 1 Nothing other then a hospital to go to south of the river. 1 Nothing when I need to get somewhere especially for work I just get there. But another 1 crossing at Wirtz Dam would definitely simply my life Nothing, 281 accommodates the need. 1 Nothing, it is a small distance and not a problem. 1 Nothing, not discouraged; it will still be shorter to take 281 1 Nothing, the 281 bridge is sufficient 1 Nothing, you do what you have to do 1 Nothing. I travel when needed. 1 Nothing. It's a wonderful bridge. 1 Now with two bridges it isn't a problem 1 Rarely discouraged 1 Stop lights 1 Stupid question 1 The slow speed limit on 2147 from Cottonwood to HSB sucks. 1 Time required 1 Unpredictability of combined factors. Afternoon hailstorms and flooding can quickly leave 1 you no quick way to cross 64 mile long Lake Travis. Unsynchronized stop lights 1 Working EMS we are required to cross the bridge 1

10.How beneficial would a new river crossing at Wirtz Dam be to you? (845 answered, 3 skipped)

60% 448 (53%)

50%

40%

30%

20% 118 (14%) 94 (11%) 10% 34 (4%) 39 (5%) 22 (3%) 18 (2%) 21 (2%) 27 (3%) 24 (3%) 0% Very beneficial Beneficial Not at all beneficial

11. Do you have additional comments on a potential new river crossing at Wirtz Dam? (Optional) (323 answered)

Responses to this question were open-ended. Full comments are included in Appendix D. Respondents generally shared whether they support or do not support a new river crossing. More responses in support were given. Responses referenced: x growth of the area x a bridge is long overdue x current congestion and the need for solutions x concern for impacts to other roads and nearby neighborhoods x the need for an alternative to US 281 x concern for the cost x consideration of other improvements that may be a priority for the area

12. What is the greatest transportation need in the Highland Lakes area in Burnet and Llano Counties? (847 answered, 1 skipped)

277 (33%) Bridges/river crossings

Roads 258 (30%)

Public transportation 79 (9%)

Safety measures 39 (5%)

Bike Lanes 25 (3%)

Sidewalks 18 (2%)

Multi-use paths 17 (2%)

Street/directional signage 5(1%)

Other 129 (15%)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Other Responses (129) Greatest Need # Roads and bridges/river crossings 5 Roads, public transportation, bridges/river crossings 4 Bike lanes and sidewalks 2 No answer 2 Public transportation and bridge/river crossings 2 Road and public transportation 2 Roads, bridges/river crossings, and safety measures 2 Bypass around Marble Falls get big trucks out of traffic 1 281 Bypass 1 5th lanes on our highways to help support the amount of traffic and development 1 A more efficient and prompt way to travel thru Marble Falls North to South. I will say though that traveling out of Marble Falls toward Granite Shoal during drive times is getting 1 more concerning in regards to congestion.

19 Other Responses (129) A Truck Route Loop around Marble Falls that relieves in town traffic on Hwy 281 1 All 1 Anything that reduces the congestion on US 281 through Marble Falls 1 Bike lanes and multi-use paths 1 Bike lanes, sidewalks, bridges/river crossings 1 Bridge/river crossings and a bypass for trucks and other big vehicles 1 Bridge/river crossings and safety measures 1 Bridge/river crossings, safety measures, turn lanes, passing lanes on 29, alternative bridge 1 (low water crossing) in Llano) Bridges or River Crossings, a loop or semi loop around Marble Falls 1 Bridges/river crossings, Center turn lanes on 281 to 71 1 Bypass 1 Bypass around Marble Falls 1 Bypasses around the cities 1 Central lanes on 281 for turning 1 Dedicated right turn lanes to expedite getting through traffic lights. This is a huge issue 1 and 281&1431 as well as 281&29 East side of Hwy 281 rather then West side of Hwy 281. 1 Enforce speed limits in Marble Falls - PLEASE !! 1 Faster and safer north-south traffic on US 281 1 Fine the way it is 1 Fixing the congestion on IH35 so people do not come throught Marble Falls to avoid that 1 Fixing what we already have that needs updating. 1 Greatly improved traffic light timing on 281 through Marble Falls. Lights are out of sync & are too long for smooth traffic flow. Lower speed limits on 281 south to 71 are way too 1 restrictive and clog traffic Heavy traffic on 281 Fridays 1 Heavy traffic on 281 thru Marble Falls 1 Hwy 281 Bypass around Marble Falls 1 I'd say a 281 bypass - around MF or both MF and Burnet 1 If the speedlimit is kept at its current level on Hwy 281 (between Marble Falls and Burnet), a center turnlane or a barrier needs to be provided between the northbound and 1 southbound traffic Improvement of roads with industrial traffic, i.e. County Road 120 1 Keeping the roads we have in good condition 1 Left Turn lane on Hwy 2147 in Horseshoe Bay from Ferguson Road to Hwy 71 1 Let's solve a real problem like all the meth use in our town 1 Light rail to Austin 1 Lighting 1

20 Other Responses (129) Lights that help not hinder. Makes me want to totally bypass Marble Falls and just go to 1 Austin Loop 1 Loop around east side of Burnet and MF 1 loop around marble falls that doesn't feed into crowded 1431 or hsb roads 1 Loop around Marble Falls. 1 Loop or half loop around marble falls 1 Many unpaved roads in this county 1 Marble Falls bypass 1 Marble falls needs an over pass 1 Meaningful relief for north/south traffic on Hwy 281 through MF 1 More bridge / river crossings are needed, but not one that is simply a second 281 bridge. 1 The next bridge should be somewhere between Marble Falls and Austin More lighting is needed 1 Multi-use paths and bridge/river crossings 1 N/A 1 Need a bridge over Colorado River near Hoover Valley 1 New River crossings and turn lanes on existing US and State highways. 1 No great needs 1 Perfectly happy.... 1 Public transportation and safety measures 1 Public transportation and sidewalks... look how many people try walk the ditches to try 1 avoid being run over Public transportation to Austin especially ABIA 1 Public transportation, bridges/river crossings, and safety measures 1 Raise speed limits on ALL 4 lane roads & some 2 lane 1 Redesign intersections, like Mission Hills and Morman Mill 1 Reduce traffic in M.F. Too many gravel/rock trucks & increased traffic at 281/1431! 1 Road below Wirtz Dam 1 Road conditions 1 Road improvement 1 Road improvements to facilitate travel & safety 1 Roads and bridges 1 Roads and center turn lanes on 281 from Burnet to HWY 71 1 Roads and sidewalks 1 Roads and street/directional signage 1 roads with less holes 1 Roads, bike lanes, multi-use paths, and bridges/river crossings 1 Roads, bike lanes, multi-use paths, and safety measures 1

21 Other Responses (129) Roads, street/directional signage, bridges/river crossings 1 Roads, street/directional signage, bridges/river crossings, and safety measures 1 Roundabout in Marble Falls 1 Safe travel - whether it be on 281, on foot, or by bicycle - must be a priority. In too many cases, I see pedestrians and bicyclists interacting with traffic directly, even along 281, but 1 especially along secondary and neighborhood streets. The choices listed above are too narrow; all must be considered in the name of safety. Safety measures, Slower traffic 1 See above- the emergency response is actually a no brainier. The new Scott and White facility solves a significant element. What is the actual number of cases that were a 1 response issue over the last 2-5 years? I would think this is relatively small. Sequence the traffic lights in Marble Falls, on Fridays it takes me 20min to go from 1 2147/281 to walmart Shoulders on roads would increase safety by bunches. Public transportation in the area 1 sucks Sidewalks will increase the active culture the counties surely strive for but in order to properly unfold such a project, we must redirect the vehicles to keep the flow. Without 1 the crossing at the dam, I'm not optimistic such a project will be welcomed and completed in a timely manner Sidewalks, multi-use paths, bridges/river crossings, safety measures 1 Sidewalks, multi-use paths, public transportation 1 Sidewalks, public transportation, bridges/river crossings 1 Smart traffic control in Marble Falls it has become terrible 1 Synchronize stoplighs and keep arterial roads moving 1 Synchronized lights- lights that don't turn red when there is NO ONE TURNING OR ON THE 1 OTHER SIDE!!! Synchronized street lights 1 Syncing the stoplights on 281 as well as 1431 in Marble Falls 1 Syncronize the lights in Marble Falls. They are worse than terrible 1 Taxi Service or services like uber and lyft 2 The county road system in these two counties is desperately in need of improvement. This 1 includes bridges and low water crossings. Timing traffic lights. There appears to be no effort anywhere on this 2 Traffic 1 Traffic reduction 1 Transporter 1 Turn lanes 1 TxDot continues to waste our money in constantly paving roads which were recently paved and are in no need of repair. Why would they pave 2147 and then decide to add 1 turn lanes AFTER the work was completed?? Where is is leadership and common sense in TxDot??????? Unknown 1

22 Other Responses (129) We also need to have a bridge constructed to cross the Colorado from 1431 to Spicewood, 1 TX We need a loop around Marble Falls for 281 traffic 1 We need all the major highways to have a center turn lane all the way, not jst for a couple 1 miles out Widen 281 in sections with little or no shoulders. Widen to 3 lanes each way in MF 1 Widen HWY 2147 from HWY 71 to HWY 281 1 Widening of 2147, HSB to MF 1 Carreteras Y transporte publico 1 Carreteras, Cruces de rio y puentes, and Medidas de seguridad 1

13. How confident are you with your ability to quickly reach and/or receive emergency services (by vehicle) on existing north-south routes? (844 answered, 4 skipped) Definitely not confident 38 (5%)

Very confident Not confident 226 (27%) 163 (19%)

Somewhat confident 417 (49%)

14. What do you envision for the future of the Highland Lakes area of Burnet and Llano Counties? (Optional) (320 answered)

Responses to this question were open-ended. Full comments are included in Appendix D.

The most frequently given response for this question was growth, the expectation varying from moderate to explosive, and coming largely from Austin. Additional comments noted an improved transportation system, better connected communities, housing and business boom, and a loop or bypass around Marble Falls.

23 15. How did you hear about the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program? (845 answered, 3 skipped)

Social media 229 (27%)

Media 165 (20%)

Community meeting or event 131 (16%)

Print/online advertisement 94 (11%)

Email 82 (10%)

Friend 76 (9%)

Phone 4(0%)

Other 64 (8%)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Other Responses (64) Type # Newspaper 7 Highlander Newspaper 4 Facebook, facebook sponsored post 3 Print/online ad and media 2 Rotary meeting 2 By newspaper when Bill Orr decided it wasnt what the people wanted(when weve been neesing it 1 for years) Campo 1 Chamber of Commerce 1 Chief of Police 1 Community meeting and social media 1 Dailytrib.com 1 Dude asked 1 Email and media 1 Email from the City of Horseshoe Bay 1 Email, Community meeting or event 1 Email, Social Media 1 Email, social media, media, and friends 1

24 Email, social media, print/online ad, community meeting 1 ESD Board Meeting 1 Football game 1 friend AND community meeting/event 1 Hear say 1 HOA 1 HOA, Picayune on-line, Highlander 1 I live right there. We've been talking about it for years. 1 I work in construction industry 1 I've been involved in this project proposal since 2003! 1 James Oakley 1 Judge James Oakley Speech 1 Judge talked to club 1 Kiwanis Meeting Speaker 1 Media, Community meeting or event 1 media, friend 1 Multiple 1 No answer 2 Outreach effort at local high school football game. 1 Print/online ad and social media 1 Print/online adv ertisement, media, friend, community meeting or event 1 print/online advertisement, media 1 Radio 1 [email protected] 1 Saw the original preliminary plans several years ago 1 Social media, print/online advertisement, friend 1 survey 1 The Tribune 1 TV News 1 Various ways 1 While I was on EDC 1 medios de comunicacion Y un amigo 1 Telefono, Los medios de comunicacion 1

16.Would you like to receive email updates about the program? Only periodic emails about the program Yes will be sent. No 371 (44%) 468 (56%) (839 answered, 9 skipped)

17.How satisfied are you with the outreach efforts for this program? (843 answered, 5 skipped)

Not at all satisfied 42 (5%)

Very satisfied 224 (27%) Somewhat satisfied 156 (19%)

Satisfied 421 (50%)

26 18. Please share any additional comments on the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program. (Optional) (723 answered)

Responses to this question were open-ended. Full comments are included in Appendix D.

Respondents shared comments on the outreach program as well as general comments on a river crossing which were consistent with answers to question 11. Of those who commented on the outreach program, there were comments that praised the program and some that criticized. There were comments that specifically critiqued the outreach messaging and survey as being biased for adding the river crossing. Responses also included specific suggestions of where and how to reach out to the community.

19. What gender do you identify with? (Optional) (798 answered, 50 skipped)

Female 318 (40%) Male 480 (60%)

27 20. What is your race/ethnicity? (Optional) (776 answered, 72 skipped)

White 688, 89%

Hispanic 61, 8%

Other 18, 2%

African American 6, 1%

Native American 2, 0%

Asian 1, 0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other Responses (18) Race/Ethnicity # American 3 2 races 1 Answer to 19-I do not "identify" as a male, God Almighty with an 1 assist from my parents made me that way Finnish 1 German/Native American/Scottish/other 1 Human 1 I dont know why this question matters. Im "white" 1 Italian 1 Native Texan 1 No answer 1 Racial designation is less a science than a tool of bigotry. 1 USA 1 What difference does it make...... we are all citizens of the USA 1 What the hell difference does that make? That's RACIST! 1 White/asian 1 Your gender identity question phrasing is ridiculous 1

28 21. What is your age? (Optional) (answered 790, skipped 58) 18-25 Under 18 20 3(0%) (3%) 26-35 83 (11%) 66 and up 237 (30%) 36-45 98 (12%)

46-55 142 (18%) 56-65 207 (26%)

22. What is your highest level of education? (Optional) (answered 792, skipped 56)

Graduate degree 140 (18%)

Bachelor's degree 275 (35%)

Associate's degree/trade/vocational school 99 (13%)

Some college 175 (22%)

High school/GED 94 (12%)

Less than high school 9(1%)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

29 23.What is your annual income? (Optional (answered 623, skipped 225)

Less than $25,000/yr 46 (7%)

$25,001 to $50,000/yr 157 (25%)

$50,001 to $100,000/yr 216 (35%)

$100,001 to $150,000/yr 104 (17%)

$150,001/yr or more 100 (16%)

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

24. How many cars are in your household? (Optional) (784 answered, 64 skipped)

4 or more 1 93 (12%) 94 (12%)

3 163 (21%)

2 434 (55%)

30 25. Do you have children in your household? (Optional) (782 answered, 66 skipped)

Yes 234 (30%)

548 (70%)

Do you have children? # Yes - 1 87 Yes - 2 79 Yes - 3 29 Yes - 4 21 Not specified 7 Yes - 5 2 Yes - 6 1 Yes - 7 1 1- he is 22 1 2 dogs 1 College now 1 Grandson 1 Would like them 1 One grandson age 25 1 Empty Nester's but children and 1 grandchildren living in Marble Falls.

31 General Comments Summary Several opportunities were provided for the community to share general comments including through emails sent to the program email address, online survey open-ended questions, comment cards collected at meetings, and in a mapping exercise.

812 Total Comments Received:

x 6 emailed x 6 written x 17 mapped x 783 through the survey

All written comments received provided valuable information ranging from preferences, to concerns, and considerations. As comments were reviewed, frequently occurring themes and topics were identified. Generally, the most common noted topics included:

x Support for the new river crossing x Congestion relief x Improved emergency response times x Decrease in travel times x Benefits to local economy and businesses x Would accommodate growth x An alternative to 281 is needed x Oppose the new river crossing x Additional crossing not needed x Crossing would only benefit a small part of the community x Concern for cost x Environmental impacts x Would cause increase in traffic on connecting roads and in neighborhoods x A new crossing should not be prioritized over other local road improvements x Concerns for truck traffic in Marble Falls x Concerns for the environment x Noting bald eagles and pelicans x Impacts on the nature preserve x Preserving the quietness of the area near Wirtz Dam x Comments on cost x Not a good use of taxpayer funds x Cost is underestimated/unknown x Not worth the cost x Comments on growth of the area x Concern for current congestion and future congestion x Community should be proactive to get ahead of growth x Safety x Concern for safety of existing traffic conditions x Concern for safety of connecting roadways if more traffic uses those roads

32 x Additional considerations x Consider what improvements will be needed to connecting roadways (FM 2147, FM 1431, etc.) x A connection south to SH 71 is needed x Consider adding loop or bypass around Marble Falls

Appendix A: Community Outreach Plan

35 Community Outreach Plan

Background and Purpose The Texas Highland Lakes area located in Burnet and Llano Counties has experienced tremendous growth in recent years. Best known for its natural beauty and lake-related attractions, this area has an active tourism industry, as well as a high proportion of vacation homes.

Rapid growth and a large population of residents commuting to and from work have increased traffic volumes on area roadways, particularly along US 281, which drivers use to travel between the north and south sides of the Colorado River. Moreover, limited crossing at the Colorado River has contributed to increased distance and travel times between locations. As such, the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is collecting public input on a potential new bridge crossing over the Colorado River near Wirtz Dam.

Community Outreach Goals The goals of the community outreach process are to:

x Gather input on a potential new bridge crossing at Wirtz Dam x Create public awareness and participation x Provide relevant information to the public so that they may share meaningful input x Engage a broad range of stakeholders, including: nearby residents, property owners, business owners, community groups, lake users, organizations, agencies, and jurisdictions x Maintain an open and transparent community outreach and engagement process x Provide a variety of easily accessible and exciting opportunities for involvement x Provide the community’s needs, concerns, thoughts, and ideas to Burnet County and TxDOT for potential use in future project development

A map of the outreach area appears on the right; however, all members of the public are welcome to be a part of this process, regardless of their geographic location.

36 Community Outreach Schedule

TASK Month: Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Outreach and Engagement Community Outreach Plan Development Community Outreach (phone, emails, social media) Community Meeting and Event Attendance Community Surveys and Collecting Input Public Meeting Community Outreach Evaluation Community Input Report Development Final Report Available

Stakeholders The outreach team will work to identify and engage with a wide variety of stakeholders throughout the community outreach process. A database of contacts will be developed early on and will be updated as more stakeholders are identified. The community outreach process will target:

x Individuals and groups near Wirtz Dam, including: residents, property owners, business owners, community groups and organizations, agencies, and jurisdictions x Environmental Justice (EJ) and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Areas x Those interested in the program

Communication Tools The project team will utilize a number of communication tools to engage and inform the public concerning project events and updates. These tools will include:

x Email updates sent to contacts in the stakeholder database x Meeting announcement signage located within the community x Announcements on project webpage x Phone calls to associations and community groups that can distribute information x Meeting notices and project fact sheets to distribute throughout the community x Social media posts x Advertisements x Media releases

37 Outreach Strategies

Community Meetings A number of local community organizations might be interested in receiving information and updates about the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program. By coordinating with these community groups, the outreach team will have the opportunity to reach community members where they are already gathered. The team will identify and reach out to a variety of community organizations that might be interested in receiving an update or presentation during their scheduled meeting times. These groups might include chambers of commerce, homeowner associations, civic service groups, professional, and special interest activity groups.

Public Meeting The outreach team will hold at least one public meeting to: (1) share existing project information, (2) collect input on a potential new river crossing, and (3) address questions, concerns, and comments. Efforts will be made to plan this meeting at a time and location that will be convenient for the greatest number of community members. Meeting materials and opportunities to comment will be available online for those interested and not able to attend. Meeting plans and activities will be announced before each meeting.

Surveys Surveys will be developed to collect detailed input from stakeholders. Surveys will be administered in person at community and public meetings and will be available in both English and Spanish. The survey will also be available online for those who are not able to participate in person, and all survey results will be entered into an online tool so that data reports can be run quickly and easily.

38 Evaluation To ensure a high degree of public engagement is achieved effectively and efficiently, public outreach tools will be monitored regularly and adjustments will be made as needed to enhance levels of engagement. Communication and involvement tools will be evaluated through numerical values of stakeholders reached with each effort. As input is collected, the team will also encourage participants to provide direct feedback on the quality of public involvement activities and the community outreach strategies. The following table outlines what information will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of various outreach strategies.

Outreach Strategies Information Collected Online Social Media Posts Number of posts, shares, and potential reach data Community Meetings Number of meetings, geographic analysis Community Attendance Total attendance Meetings Input collected Onsite polls, surveys and comments

Public Meetings Number of meetings Public Attendance Total attendance Meetings Input collected Surveys and comments Survey Responses Number of responses

Input collected Number of additional comments

Citizen Satisfaction Survey Questions posed during outreach opportunities

Input Comments Received Number of comments received for the period Comment Categorization Summary of topics and evaluation Identify needs to update information and materials or Comment Utilization adjust plan Citizen Recommendations Used Summary

Stakeholder Database Total number of contacts Database Number Added Number of contacts added during the period Frequency of Updates Number of updates provided by week

Email Updates Number of updates Email Distribution List Number of email addresses Outreach Materials Distributed Total number of materials distributed Phone Outreach Number phone calls, contacts identified

Responses to Email Inquiries Number of responses

Print Advertisements Number of publications Media Online Advertisements Number of impressions, number of click-throughs Media Coverage Number of stories or mentions Demographics, Participant Details Collected through surveys, polling, comment cards to Participation identify demographics, how participant learned of project, location of residence and employment, etc.

Appendix B: Community Meetings Summaries

40 Community Meetings and Event Summaries

Partner Kickoff Meeting Date: Friday, September 9, 2016 Time: 10 a.m. – 12 p.m. Location: Marble Falls City Council Chambers, 800 3rd Street, Marble Falls, TX 78654 Project Team: Doise Miers, Ashby Johnson, Anthony Gonzales with CAMPO; Arin Gray, Teri Durden and Julie Richey with CD&P

A Partner Kickoff Meeting was held to engage individuals and groups that can help shape the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program. The purpose of this meeting was to present the program overview, share materials, gather feedback, and identify community events and stakeholders to include in outreach efforts. Thirty-eight attendees from local cities, counties, community groups, law enforcement, EMS providers, media outlets, TxDOT, and LCRA were in attendance.

Burnet Bluegrass Festival Date: Saturday, September 17, 2016 Time: 1 p.m. – 3 p.m. Location: Haley Nelson Park, 301 Garden Trails, Burnet, TX 7861 Project Team: Teri Durden and Julie Richey with CD&P

The outreach team distributed fact sheets and conducted a survey at the Burnet Bluegrass Festival. Over the course of two hours, the team collected 21 surveys and 2 comment cards from festival goers. Altogether, 5 festival goers requested to be added to the program mailing list.

Evan Milliorn, with the City of Burnet, provided a table and chairs for the outreach team. Additionally, one of the featured bands made an informal announcement about the program from the stage to encourage festival goers to visit the outreach team’s table.

The program fact sheet and a map of the focus area were provided for educational purposes. Many festival goers mentioned that they had learned about the program through local media.

Fiesta Jam on Lake Marble Falls Date: Saturday, September 24, 2016 Time: 4 p.m. – 6:45 p.m. Location: Lakeside Park/Pavilion, 307 Buena Vista Drive, Marble Falls, TX 78654 Project Team: Teri Durden and Jacqie Wilson with CD&P The outreach team attended Fiesta Jam on Lake Marble Falls and over the course of two hours and forty-five minutes, the team collected 31 surveys from attendees, vendors, and media. A total of 5 attendees requested to be added to the program mailing list.

41 Jill McGuckin, the media contact for Fiesta Jam, helped coordinate attendance and logistics with the outreach team.

The program fact sheet and contact card were provided as additional resources for survey participants.

Marble Falls Citywide Garage Sale Date: Saturday, October 1, 2016 Time: 9 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Location: Johnson Park, 230 Ave J, Marble Falls, TX 78654 Project Team: Teri Durden and Jacqie Wilson with CD&P

The outreach team attended the Marble Falls Citywide Garage Sale and coordinated attendance with Pat Burton. Program information was distributed, including fact sheets and contact cards, while administering the Community Input Survey. Over the course of 2 hours, the team collected 14 surveys, and 3 participants asked to be added to the program mailing list. Many participants mentioned that they had learned about the program through local media. Marble Falls National Night Out Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 Time: 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. Location: Johnson Park, 230 Ave J, Marble Falls, TX 78654 Project Team: Teri Durden and Julie Richey with CD&P

The outreach team attended Marble Falls National Night Out, organized by the Marble Falls Police Department. Other emergency services, as well as community services providers, were present for this event. Over the course of two hours, the outreach team collected 17 surveys and 2 comment cards. Additionally, 2 participants signed up for the program mailing list.

Marble Falls City Council Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 Time: 6:00 – 7:00 p.m. Location: Marble Falls City Council Meeting Project Team: Doise Miers

Doise Miers provided an overview of CAMPO and of the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program to members of the Marble Falls City Council.

Meadow Lakes Annual POA Meeting Date: Saturday, October 8, 2016 Time: 10 a.m. Location: Meadowlakes Annual POA Meeting Project Team: Julie Richey with CD&P

The outreach team attended the Meadowlakes Annual POA Meeting to share information with the community about participating in the outreach program. Judge James Oakley spoke to the group for a few minutes to explain the history of the potential crossing and Julie Richey encouraged attendees to

42 complete the survey online. Fact sheets, contact cards, and paper copies of the survey were given to attendees.

Cottonwood Shores Volunteer Fire Department Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 Time: 7:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Location: 610 Birch Ln, Cottonwood Shores TX Project Team: Holly Bell with CD&P

The outreach team attended the Cottonwood Shores Volunteer Fire Department Meeting where an informal oral presentation was given at their regular business meeting to an audience of approximately 25 people. The team distributed program fact sheets and contact cards, a total of 6 attendees requested to be added to the program mailing list, and several completed the survey. Janet Taylor-Carusi, the Secretary for Cottonwood Shores Volunteer Fire Department, helped coordinate attendance and meeting logistics for the presentation with the outreach team.

Highland Haven POA Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 11, 2016 Time: 7 p.m. Location: Highland Haven POA Meeting Project Team: Julie Richey with CD&P

Julie Richey attended the Highland Haven Property Owners Association Meeting and gave a brief presentation that included project information and ways to get involved in the community outreach program. The presentation was followed by a short question and answer session, and POA members were given the opportunity to fill out and submit surveys.

Marble Falls Rotary Club Meeting Date: Thursday, October 13, 2016 Time: 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. Location: River City Grille, 700 1st St, Marble Falls, TX 78654 Project Team: Holly Bell and Jacqie Wilson with CD&P

The outreach team attended the Marble Falls Rotary Club Meeting where a presentation was given at their regular business meeting to an audience of approximately 50 people. The team collected 12 surveys and provided fact sheets and contact cards as additional resources for the group. Commissioner Dockery and Judge Oakley, helped coordinate attendance and meeting logistics for presentation with the outreach team. The fact sheet and contact card were provided as additional resources for the group.

43 Onsite Media Event Date: Friday, October 14, 2016 Time: 3:00 p.m. Location: Wirtz Dam, 1338 Wirtz Dam Rd, Marble Falls, TX 78657 Project Team: Doise Miers, Anthony Gonzales, and Ashby Johnson from CAMPO, Julie Richey from CD&P

The outreach team hosted a media event which provided an opportunity for the media to photograph the area and visit with CAMPO staff, Burnet County Judge James Oakley, Commissioner Joe Don Dockery, and LCRA staff. Media kits containing project materials and current survey results were made available to the media. Representatives from the Highlander were in attendance.

Marble Falls Homecoming Game Date: Friday, October 14, 2016 Time: 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. Location: Mustang Stadium- 2101 Mustang Drive; Marble Falls, TX Project Team: Doise Miers from CAMPO, Julie Richey and Haley Partin from CD&P

The outreach team attended the Marble Falls High School Homecoming game and set up a table near the entrance to the stadium. The team distributed project fact sheets, info cards, and contact cards to approximately 200 community members as they entered the stadium and during half-time. Surveys were available in English and Spanish.

Llano Wild West Weekend Date: Saturday, October 15, 2016 Time: 9:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Location: Grenwelge Park, 199 E Haynie St, Llano, TX 78643 Project Team: Matthew Rampy with CD&P

The outreach team distributed fact sheets, public meeting flyers and conducted a survey at the Llano Wild West Weekend. Over the course of two and a half hours, the team collected 1 survey and distributed 50 public meeting flyers. Altogether, 9 attendees requested to be added to the program mailing list. The program fact sheet and a map of the focus area were provided for educational purposes. Many attendees mentioned that they had learned about the program through previous events attended by CD&P.

City of Sunrise Beach Village City Council Meeting Date: Thursday, October 20, 2016 Time: 2:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Location: Civic Center - 124 Sunrise Dr., Sunrise Beach, TX 78643 Project Team: Doise Miers with CAMPO

The Outreach Team attended the City of Sunrise Beach Village’s monthly City Council Meeting, where they gave a five-minute update including information about the community outreach program and ways for members to get involved and share input.

La Liga Soccer Matches Date: Saturday, October 22, 2016 Time: 3:30 p.m. – 6:30 p.m. Location: Johnson Park – 1118 Johnson Street, Marble Falls TX 78654 Project Team: Matthew Rampy and Albert Castro with CD&P

The outreach team distributed fact sheets and conducted a survey at the Saturday evening La Liga soccer matches. Over the course of three hours, the team collected 33 Spanish surveys and 7 English surveys from participants and spectators of the league. We left copies of the survey and fact sheets with our contact Efrain Perez who is the president of the league. He expressed desire to collect more surveys from his community before the comment period closes. The program fact sheet and a map of the focus area were provided for educational purposes. Many league participants were interested in the program and expressed desire to have their communities opinion entered into the input process.

Marble Falls Area EMS 40 Year Celebration Date: Saturday, October 29, 2016 Time: 1:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Location: MFAEMS – 609 Industrial Blvd, Marble Falls, Texas 78654 Project Team: Julie Richey with CD&P Per Judge James Oakley’s request, the outreach team attended the MFAEMS 40 Year Celebration. The event was attended by emergency service providers and their families from Marble Falls and surrounding communities. The outreach team staffed a table near one entrance to the building and visited with guests as they entered. Prior to the conclusion of the event, the team member also circulated among attendees to share contact cards and encouraged survey participation online. Over the course of two hours, the outreach team visited with approximately 30 attendees, collected 9 surveys and distributed contact cards and fact sheets.

City of Cottonwood Shores City Council Meeting Date: Thursday, November 17, 2016 Time: 6 p.m. Location: Civic Center - 124 Sunrise Dr., Sunrise Beach, TX 78643 Project Team: Doise Miers with CAMPO

Doise Miers spoke during the citizen comment period to share details of the community outreach program, noted that nearly 800 surveys had been received to date and responded to a few questions from city council members.

Appendix C: Public Meetings Summaries

46 Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program Public Meetings Summary October 26, 2016 and November 3, 2016

CAMPO hosted public open house to share information about a potential new crossing of the Colorado River near Wirtz Dam Road. The purpose of this meeting was to provide an opportunity for members of the community to view information about the outreach program, ask questions about the potential project, and provide input.

Meeting Details

Date: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 Date: Thursday, November 3, 2016 Time: 4:00 – 7:00 p.m. Time: 4:00 – 7:00 p.m. Location: Quail Point Community Location: Lakeside Pavilion – Marble Center – Horseshoe Bay, TX Falls, TX

Attendance: 57 signed in Attendance: 38 signed in

The meeting was in an open house format where attendees were able to come and go at their convenience, speak with outreach team members, fill out surveys, and write comments on a map of the area surrounding the potential project. A brief presentation was given at 6 p.m., followed by a question-and-answer discussion with County Judge John Oakley and CAMPO staff.

Contact information cards, program fact sheets, and copies of the 2005 TxDOT Feasibility Study were provided as educational materials for attendees.

Attendees were given the opportunity to share input by filling out comment cards and surveys or sharing location-specific input on two large aerial maps of the area surrounding Wirtz Dam Road and the potential bridge crossing location.

47 Comments Summary and Responses

Community members at both meetings were given the opportunity to ask questions and comment on the potential new river crossing through comment cards and discussion with the team. Common themes discussed in the meetings and comments included:

Funding and Timeline x The potential timeline for completion of this river crossing, including preliminary studies and public involvement, ranges between 5 and 10 years. x This potential project was identified in a 1974 traffic study and has been considered for years. x The cost of the potential project is estimated to be between $15-$20 million. x While the funding for this project has not been identified, it is anticipated that some of funding will come from Proposition 7 transportation funding and the state gas tax. All parties will work together to determine remaining funding without impacting local tax payers. x Some shared concerns that renovations to existing roads would be a better use of funding than building a new river crossing. Location x The location of the potential river crossing was chosen because the LCRA is willing to donate the ROW and because of the location’s existing infrastructure. x Some voiced concerns about security issues caused by the construction of the bridge and its location on LCRA property. x Some voiced their desire for a more central location for the new river crossing. Traffic Patterns x Though current traffic in the area is not a major problem, this project is suggested as a proactive solution to increased traffic volume that is expected in the coming years. x Traffic data does not suggest that the river crossing would be used as a shortcut to reach 71. x Though the 2005 Feasibility Study is still a good indicator of the traffic patterns in the area, another study would be conducted before any project development. Environmental Effects x Some residents are concerned about construction and traffic causing extra noise and disruption to their quality of life. The crossing would be built with modern materials to help divert and decrease traffic noise. x Many expressed concern about the effects of construction on wildlife living in the nearby nature preserve. Before moving forward with the project, an environmental study would be conducted to consider possible negative effects and how to best handle them. Community Outreach and Input x Some expressed concern that the promotion and survey tools of the Community Outreach Program feel biased in favor of constructing the crossing. x Input from all surrounding areas is being considered equally, and no weight will be placed upon some sources of input over others. x The final decision about whether to move forward with the project will be made by Burnet Count and TxDOT with consideration of all input received from the community.

Appendix D: Comments Log

49 Appendix D: Full Comments Comments for the Wirtz Dam Community Outreach Program were collected via email, in the online survey open ended questions, from comment cards collected at meetings, and in a mapping exercise. All comments are provided verbatim as they were received below. Personal contact information, names, and any profanities have been redacted.

Survey Comment Question Comment Format No. 11.) Do you have additional comments on a potential new river crossing at Wirtz Dam? (Optional) Survey 11 use of EMS Survey 11 There's no need for this bridge. Why force it on a community that doesn't want it Survey 11 options are great Survey 11 2147 does not need additional traffic Survey 11 waste of taxpayers funds The crossing would benefit very few people and will do nothing to improve the mobility on Survey 11 281. Other alternatives should be studied and considered before spending $15 million on a bridge to nowhere Survey 11 Not in favor of it. Seems to benefit a small number of people that don't even live in the area. Hopefuñly, large trucks will be directed to 1 bridge so they would stop being so invasive to Survey 11 normal local business/tourist traffic It is an unnecessary waste of money and would creat many new problems that would be Survey 11 costly to resolve. This is an environmentally sensitive area that migratory pelicans, eagles and cranes depend on for food and breeding. It would be a crime to ignore and destroy just because PEC and a Survey 11 few individuals want to cut a few minutes off of their travels. Some things are better left to the birds and not mans perception of progress! We feel it would be a good thing for our area, especially for medical emergency and fire Survey 11 protection. we are growing area so would be good for the future. It doesn't make any sense to me since TxDOT built the new twin bridges on HWY 281. The Survey 11 money could be better spent on more worthwhile projects. Survey 11 Get it done, build it. I am NOT in favor of it. I believe it is the first step in a west loop around MF. That would Survey 11 destroy CR120/1855 and my property values in Timber ridge. Survey 11 My husband may soon be in Horseshoe Bay and it would really help me. Survey 11 Hwy 2147 '2 lane Hwy,,traffic has gotten very busy.. Survey 11 If you can build it you had better build it. We certainly will need it in years to come Unfortunately if the bridge is not part of a by-pass loop around Marble Falls for traffic on 281, Survey 11 it is a bridge to pretty much nowhere. why build an expensive bridge when a raised low water crossing would suffice. Went across Survey 11 the old one many times. Survey 11 Why is it needed? Nothing wrong with going thru MF....sometimes too busy Do not believe it is using $$ wisely. It is not going to alleviate traffic on 281--it dumps it on Survey 11 1431 and then again on 2147 where both directions comes from 281 Survey 11 Connecting road to 71 & hospital very desirable.

50 Survey 11 This would decrease travel time in my business significantly! While there is some benefit (3 minute time savings to Marble Falls), the disadvantages for Cottonwood Shores far outweigh the advantages. Disadvantages are destruction of the Cottonwood Shores nature area (an area defined as a noise sensitive zone by ordinance and a Class A land in 23CFR772 with an Leq limit of 57 dB(A)), impacts on local bird migration (while pelicans and geese), diversion of traffic from business district that has been established, safety concerns requiring a traffic signal and advanced signing for blind intersection with Survey 11 RM2147, road improvements to Dam Road that will be required (a City street at this time), inside homeland security at Dam), destruction of a unique habitat called the Jewel of Cottonwood, impact on other parks such as Noah Thompson, impact on local bird feeding area (Bald Eagles, Hawks, and Falcons), increased truck traffic in Cottonwood Shores and Horseshoe Bay, local noise impact to residents who moved to area for quiet, and impact to long range plans of Cottonwood Shores. It is a good start on what should be many crossings over the Colorado River. Lake Travis at 64 miles long and no river crossing (excluding the Lohmann's Bridge connecting through Dink Pearson's land from Lago Vista to Lakeway which was submerged with Lake Travis) should be next. Did LCRA commit to Travis County (whom they bought the bridge from) to rebuild a Survey 11 bridge over Lake Travis when they submerged that one? Were other bridges submerged in creating Highland Lakes? Does LCRA, TXDOT, or any federal project have a commitment to rebuild submerged bridges? Maybe there would be instant funding for other bridges in the region if we documented a prior commitment? What is the cost for this? How are you going to deal with the subdivision and R V park at the Survey 11 end of wirtz dam road? I think it would be better served, if the congestion on Hwy 281 and Hwy 1431 was eased. I Survey 11 see more congestion on the main thoroughfares, than I do other routes, such as the one you are surveying for. Survey 11 I think it would be a very good thing to happen! The city is growing, which of course, increases traffic. Another route would ease traffic Survey 11 buildup, and having another route for emergency vehicles is obviously beneficial, and needed. Survey 11 I am against crossing at Wirtz Dam. Survey 11 Think it is a very good idea. Survey 11 It would be a major step to addressing our transportation needs. It would save time and gas not having to go all the way through Marble Falls to get to Survey 11 treatment plants in HSB area Survey 11 Wildlife disruption, noise, and added traffic Survey 11 Waste of taxpayer funds. Survey 11 It is a great need for local citizens Survey 11 Make an additional crossing on the other end to encourage big truck too use Needs to be above the 500 year flood plane and needs to connect south to 71 and north to Survey 11 281 Just moved from rockwall tx. If 30 was stopped 66 & 80 usually were too & access to another Survey 11 surrounding town was stopped. No ems no firemen nothing to help us out The new river crossing should also address the congestion on 281 through Marble Falls, Survey 11 especially at the river. If this dam does not improve the movement of traffic north-south on 281, its usefulness will be reduced.

51 This area is growing quickly. In the summer the traffic into Marble Falls can be quite heavy Survey 11 because there is just the one bridge. If something happened to it, getting to shopping, doctors, etc would be difficult. Build the bridge. If something should happen to the current bridge. People woyld have to Survey 11 travel miles to cross. Survey 11 It would relieve large amounts of traffic in marble falls! I was for this bridge 15 years ago when Oakley first suggested it. I would go eat at On the Rocks/Julie's more if ot wad not so far around lake. I do not understand Mayor Orr's Survey 11 arguement. Nor the HSB I don't think amyone would use 2147 to get to 71 from the Nprth side! I VOTE YES! Survey 11 This is way over due. Survey 11 Do it. Survey 11 Also need better access to 71 and hospital from Wirtz It would be a safety outlet that would also benefit the local economy and reduce gasoline Survey 11 waste. No problems now. Why spend the money? There are better projects out there for this Survey 11 money! Move the potential crossing at least an 1/8 of a mile down Wirtz Dam Road to vastly improve Survey 11 safety and congestion. It would avoid a big intersection with Wilderness Cove neigbhorhood, The RV Park, LCRA and PEC Towers! Survey 11 provide better emergency access both north and south We moved to Wilderness Cove because we like being off the beaten path. I do not want additional noise and traffic. This is a waste of taxpayer's money. James Oakley seems to Survey 11 have already made the decision for us. The newspapers are already making this sound like it is a done-deal. Do we really have any voice in this? Doesn't sound like it. Improve our current roads. We don't need a bridge across the water to Horseshoe Bay. It would provide a better avenue for Emergency services to help each other. It would assist in Survey 11 lowering traffic in Marble Falls Survey 11 Build it soon as we are aging and need a shorter route to the Hospital. Survey 11 It would also increase the time for emergency personnel to arrive at a scene This bridge is not about one city over another and whether or not that particular city needs the bridge. It's about the region, and more connectivity invites more development, more business, and more growth...which, in spite of the anti-growth naysayers, is a good thing. Survey 11 Growth can be channeled in healthy ways. The other option is for growth to happen with little to no infrastructure development or planning, which is our current issue with traffic conditions. Either way, our little town and the surrounding region is growing, and it's showing little sign of stopping. Build the bridge. It would reduce my fuel usage when working in the Horseshoe Bay area getting to and from Survey 11 the supply houses and home. I am a plumbing service contractor and the majority of my work is in Horseshoe Bay. I am opposed... if this is the first step in making a loop around the west side of Marble falls Survey 11 and back to the east on CR1855 I feel it is imperative for future growth and present emergency response needs. Stay ahead Survey 11 of the growth so in 50 years we are not 20 years behind. Survey 11 Delivery for businesses would be more less time consuming and profitable

52 Would heavily impact FM1431 to US 281 & TX71!! Too much traffic with possible huge 18 Survey 11 wheelers on FM1431. Why spend this money on what I view as an unneeded project. And it will adversely affect the Survey 11 environment. Survey 11 I would rather see a new bridge on the east side of U.S. Hwy 281. It has been in the Burnet Transportation Plan since 1974. It is time to seriously study this project, put some cost estimates together and get it on the CAMPO project schedule. This is a Survey 11 homeland security issue since US 281 is a military use highway. We must have an alternate to the US 281 bridge. Survey 11 Think it is way over due This is the craziest idea I have ever heard of, for I see it as very dangerous to build a bridge Survey 11 that close behind a dam that has to pass large amounts of water during a flood. I also question the impact this would have on the higher levels of security required around dams. Survey 11 My concern is how would Cottonwood be affected by the traffic flow? Stupid idea that will only hurt business in main district. This could only benefit current Survey 11 landowners that want to increase values. Look closely at who will directly benefit Survey 11 would help ease the GROWING traffic problem in Marble Falls. Survey 11 This should have been considered before!!!!! Survey 11 281 loop to bypassing Marble Falls Would help me get to work at the hospital much faster, and divert traffic around and away Survey 11 from Marble Falls This would be a big waste of my tax dollars.... not needed and will just cause more problems Survey 11 than good Survey 11 No Survey 11 Needed I live in Horseshoe Bay and work in Granite Shoals. I've said many times it would be nice to Survey 11 have a bridge that would come out on the FM1431. I think it's a great idea! Survey 11 This new river crossing isn't needed. Let's use this money to make 281 safer. Survey 11 No need for a new bridge... Survey 11 Non-committed Survey 11 Don't spend money, even if TxDot has a "use it or lose it" policy. Be responsible. Survey 11 Would help the Horseshoe Bay area. Survey 11 I'm disgusted by the bias CAMPO and the County have shown in this program. Survey 11 This is not needed. - Not a good use of funds. - Cost to benefit ratio not good - EMS has other ways of Survey 11 improving times for 2nd responders that would cost much less than a bridge A new crossing at Wirtz Dam would immensely improve the consistently increasing traffic Survey 11 issues across the US 281 bridge. Need more crossings for convenience but also to reduce as much 281 traffic as possible. It's Survey 11 overloaded today, what about the future? There are many people that travel from Granite Shoals to Horseshoe Bay to work, this would Survey 11 cut traffic on 281 and also provide faster response time for fire, ems and law enforcement. Survey 11 I travel to Horseshoe Bay almost daily. A Wirtz damn crossing would be very helpful Survey 11 seems like a good idea. Would speed up my time to the Bay Marina where I service my boat Survey 11 Long overdue. Long way from Granite Shoals to Horseshoe Bay.

53 The community's on Wirts Dam road will be turned up side down. Traffics will be bad for Survey 11 those residence. Survey 11 Would love to see it would solve some of the horrible traffic on 281 issues in marble falls With the new hospital and clinic, a new crossing would create faster access to healthcare Survey 11 services and emergency services. Having a bypass for Marble Falls should be a high priority...city "officials" close 281numerous time a week due to minor issues and foolish yearly stupidity, short run stop lights to cause Survey 11 traffic back ups and have no regard for importance of the 281 traffic connection between Northern USA and South Texas. Marble falls cant block diversity routs with unnecassary stop signs or lights at every parkinglot. The proposed bridge should have been built years ago. A bridge is also needed between Survey 11 Spicewood and Smithwick. Survey 11 Not worth the cost. Horseshoe Bay city council decided it to be a low priority item for them. Survey 11 immensely beneficial to me both in time and $$$ Survey 11 Should have happened years ago! Survey 11 In addition to shorter distances to a destination, it would take a lot of traffic off 281. The building of the bridge is not justified by the cost to benefit figures shown in the 2005 study. Moving more traffic to 1431 increases congestion there and puts more drivers in the school zones of Marble Falls Elementary and Marble Falls Middle. Also Wurtz Dam is not the appropriate road to be used in building a loop around the city. The bridge at Wurtz dam Survey 11 would have a negative impact on enjoyment of life for residents in Wilderness Cove and Sunset Point by increasing their time to travel anywhere due to increased traffic and the proposed lower speed limit as well as increased noise and security issues. Finally the building of Wurtz Dam bridge is a poor use of tax payer money.

Horrible idea. Destroys Cottonwood Shores Nature Preserve and migratory bird area. Noise problem and with updates for a signal on blind corner at RM2147, new road including base Survey 11 on south side of river, really required noise walls, it will cost at least 4x the estimate. Put the money on US281 to stop the fatal head on collisions! I think it would help distribute traffic in a more efficient way. At heavy traffic periods we Survey 11 could travel across the new bridge at Wirtz and get to the west side of Marble Falls much more easily. Survey 11 This was a low priority for residents of HSB. Time should not be spent on it. Survey 11 If road work or accident the delayed time on 2147. Survey 11 Would this help to alleviate heavy truck traffic flying through Marble Falls? waste of money, needs to have loop on 281 that by passes marble falls and goes straight back Survey 11 to near 281 and 71 intersection. 1431 and horseshoe bay road already to over crowded with cars. Should spend money on making 71 safer near hospital and HSB - 2 deaths in last 12 months. Survey 11 Control the deer population too. Feasibility study done in 2005. Traffic on 2147 between 281 & Hwy 71 has increased tremendously since then. Housing at LaVentana area at 281 will already add a great amount Survey 11 of burden to the 281/2147 intersection. 2147 needs to be expanded more between 281 & proposed bridge location such as was done in Cottonwood.

54 Travel time is pretty outrageous between Highland Haven and Horseshoe Bay for how geographically close they are, it takes 30 minutes now to get from Highland Haven to Survey 11 Horseshoe Bay since they lowered the speed limit in Cottonwood, as opposed to 8 minutes by boat if you were to just cross the lake and go down to Horseshoe Bay. Survey 11 Would be excited to see another option for travel. Survey 11 New bridge will save me 15 to 35 minutes work commute and 15 miles Survey 11 should have been done long ago... Survey 11 May reduce traffic through Marble Falls This could be one of the greatest things out community has ever done. It would link Survey 11 horseshoe bay to marble falls making our community stronger Very important for general public. Imperitave for First Responders for both answering calls Survey 11 and positioning for backup. Would do nothing to relieve the traffic on 281 & that is the biggest problem in Marble Falls. Survey 11 The money would be better spent on a by-pass. This would alleviate So much traffic in Marble Falls. It would also promote more economic Survey 11 development within our community As this area continues to grow, we do not want to have to depend on just current routes, we Survey 11 need additional options. if it could be extended later to be a pass-through traffic loop avoiding downtown Marble Survey 11 Falls, local traffic would benefit greatly Survey 11 I think it's a GREAT IDEA! I own On The Rocks. The road would be right by us. We are for it. We believe that it would Survey 11 help the local business by bringing new customers as well as opening new areas from which to hire employees from. Survey 11 Suspect it would help alleviate heavy traffic on 281 in Marble falls. It would give a bypass for thru traffic on 281 in Marble Falls for trucks. If Bridge is built the Survey 11 new road should continue to 281 west of Marble Falls. Questions: Why is this proposal thought to be that necessary?Will the number of people that Survey 11 use this bridge have an effective impact of any consequence? What traffic problems will result on 2147? Marble Falls Traffic needs some relief. It has become unacceptable, especially if there is an Survey 11 accident on HWY281 Survey 11 This is a must!! It needs to happen I am absolutely FOR this. Traffic is increasing at a tremendous pace on Hwy 281. This would Survey 11 help alleviate some of that. Another exit in and out over the lake would help in the traffic situation which backs up in crossings from light to light. I also believe it will cut down on the accidents with drivers Survey 11 weaving in and out around cars just trying to get home or to work. The population in Marble Falls is only going to get bigger with the years to come, so we need to nip it in the bud as early as we can. It is already a mess. Survey 11 Get it built! Please do this bridge, it is a win-win for our extended community; the bridge would be a Survey 11 lifesaver for many citizens in emergencies. Survey 11 will create too much new traffic through Horseshoe Bay Survey 11 Very concerned about potential of creating additional traffic on 2147 through Horseshe Bay.

55 Survey 11 No. Now with two bridges it isn't a problem definitely a safety factor: emergency vehicles times shortened; stay off 281, it is a Survey 11 nightmare! Survey 11 Use in emergency situations Survey 11 Growth is evident, better to be proactive rather then reactive. Survey 11 Don't do it on the cheap. Think about a 281 route around Marble Falls. This has been needed by all the communities , north and south of Lake Marble Falls. 281 Survey 11 traffic & all the stoplights is a nightmare, especially with all the 18 wheelers using 281 to avoid I 35. Survey 11 Very nice it will save me lots of money The cost of this bridge of $20,000,000 is never announced to the public. I am totally against Survey 11 my tax money being spent for a bridge that is not needed! Survey 11 Its construction is not a question of "if" but when. Survey 11 The bridge would recharge the economy as a whole. Survey 11 Fewer vehicle miles is good for our environment. I would use the crossing at wirtz dam to take my kids to school at MFES from HSB and to go Survey 11 to church at St Peter's Lutheran. Survey 11 It is necessary for continued growth of this ateal Survey 11 It should have been done years ago! The crossing does NOT need to be all weather. It can be closed during high water or flooding Survey 11 conditions and still be usable almost all year. Survey 11 I believe it would be very beneficial and relieving to traffic on the 281 bridge. Survey 11 GREAT idea! Improved opportunities for Horseshoe Bay paid service & Emergency personnel to backup unreliable volunteer services in Non HSB areas. Thereby leaving HSB less effectively covered Survey 11 and bearing higher depreciation costs on equipment and extended liability for injuries to our personnel. Survey 11 No Survey 11 Just do not want more traffic coming through Horseshoe Bay! Not sure of the full route, but not sure how much distance is saved between current routes Survey 11 and Marble Falls/Kingsland. This would be a real boon to the area and to the citizens of Horseshoe Bay and Cottonwood Shores. As we watch 281 through Marble Falls become more congested and less safe this Survey 11 would provide a better, quicker and safer route to and from Marble Falls. With the new HEB store this works very well. Anything we can do to stay off 281 is much appreciated. Survey 11 A wide two lane with shoulders would be nice. If FM 2147 is not widened to 4 lanes I don't see the advantage to people on the north side of the lake trying to avoid the hwy 281 bridge. FM 2147 often becomes a dangerous bottleneck trying to get to Hwy 281. Because of that, we don't see a bridge being beneficial to those of us on the north side with the exception of emergency support from either shore. We are certain that the traffic flow going into Marble Falls on 1431 would substantially increase by Survey 11 travelers avoiding 281 from the south shore which, of course, would be of great benefit to them. Widen FM 2147 first before the bridge goes in, then you would truly have a project that would benefit all citizens as well as being a tremendous asset to the emergency services community. (As an alternative to 2147, take wirtz Dam Road all the way through to Highway 71!)

56 Being an employer, having the new crossing would enable more potential employees Survey 11 available for our business in Cottonwood Shores Travel and communication between communities would be greatly enhanced, especially as Survey 11 the population increases. Survey 11 Wish that they had done it sooner because Celeste Care 'nursing home' is across the river. Survey 11 It would greatly improve the congestion on FM 2147 from Horseshoe Bay to TX 281.

I am a mobile Technician. I travel to and from Kingsland, Marble Falls, Horseshoe Bay, and Burnet all day long. If I am on the Horseshoe Bay side and I have another client over in Granite Shoals or Burnet. I either drive all of the way through Kingsland and around, or I risk the traffic and go through Marble Falls. The traffic in Marble Falls is horrible. It will continue to get worse as more people move in. Eventually, as Marble Falls grows it will be plagued with what Austin has dealt with for years. No loop or bypass around the town. They were worried that it would dry up businesses in the town. For the record businesses like retail outlets downtown closed down anyway and now there are banks where the stores were. Everything goes North, South, East, and West. People have to eat, have to shop, and have to commute. The stores will not dry up, there is nowhere else to shop. And I do not believe Survey 11 someone is not going to drive all the way to Austin to get their essential things. The town is a tourist attraction and the little stores on main street will always get business. They will use the bridge only for travel to and from work and home. I do think that it would help some to get this river crossing. But I highly doubt that it would relieve much traffic in Marble Falls. I would strongly suggest a better river crossing somewhere down stream, maybe at Max Starke. Don't let the town grow so much to the state where you cant put in a loop or a semi loop because there are so many homes built up just like Austin. Right now its mostly ranch land anyways downstream. A lot cheaper to buy the land now then 30 years down the line and you have to go above the houses or buy the people out and tear the homes down. All in all, anything is better than nothing though.

I feel that it would alleviate quite a bit of the local work/school traffic that now travels from Survey 11 C'wood/HSB to GS/K'land and vice versa using the Hwy 281 bridge. I think the Wirtz Dam crossing is a great idea. Never miss an opportunity to build another river crossing. I cannot see any negatives with an Survey 11 additional way to cross a river when the current crossings are so far apart. Survey 11 We have 30 million dollar bridges in MF that work just fine Survey 11 I consider this project to be essential to the future of Marble Falls and surrounding areas. We would support more businesses in Cottonwood Shores and Horseshoe Bay with our Survey 11 travel being greatly reduced by this project. Survey 11 This crossing is long overdue ! Survey 11 No Key question regarding 1431, 1431 cannot handle much of a traffic increase; there are 5 stop Survey 11 lights between Wirtz Road & 281 heading east. Traffic would be unacceptable. Project is impossible to evaluate without this information Survey 11 Would be nice to be able to get to the 71 hospital As this is part of a transportation plan, how does that plan fit together? Not described here. Survey 11 Single issue of no value Survey 11 should plan for future and make it 4 lanes Survey 11 Make it 4 lanes to start Survey 11 I sell real estate and the bridge would help

57 Survey 11 Good, if it reduces traffic in Marble Falls This is a much needed optional route to cross the river/lake. I encourage the construction of Survey 11 this much needed crossing. Survey 11 Talked about this for years. Time to get it done. Survey 11 Use dark sky lighting I am a business owner in Cottonwood Shores. A crossing at wirtz dam would be a boon to us Survey 11 and others on both sides of the lakes. It's ineviable. Better to be proactive than reactive. do it now and get out in front of the Survey 11 population growth. The Wirtz Dam river crossing would be amazing to have cutting travel times by more than half! It would be very beneficial to emergency services and save lives by decreasing Survey 11 emergency reaction time. We in Highland Haven have been dreaming of this for over 17 years and would love for this project to move forward and eventually be undertaken. Survey 11 Synchronize traffic lights in Marble Falls and the reason for this crossing goes away. Survey 11 It would be amazing for local citizens and not have a negative affect on tourism Survey 11 The sooner the better, thank you for the study. Survey 11 20 years late, I have said we needed a bridge there that long. It needs to cut straight up to 71. Survey 11 Lets get this survey & study done & solve our problem before it's an emergency I hope the state considers the natural habitats and nature preserve in Cottonwood Shores. Citizens and visitors come to swim, fish or kayak for the serenity and low volume of noise to enjoy the lake critters and scenery. I hope they highly consider a noise analysis of what the Survey 11 effects are going to be. Since we have fire, police, and ems already on both sides I'm not sure other than moving more traffic through town how this is going to help. Worries about security is an issue too. If this must be maybe consider a tunnel. Budget of course is an issue. Needed to releave traffic on bridge in Marble Falls. Terrible trouble when the bridge is shut Survey 11 down in Marble Falls. Survey 11 Concerned that it would bring more traffic on 2147, especially in the Horseshoe Bay area. Survey 11 Reduce cost projection Survey 11 Build it already!! Survey 11 Would cut drive time and traffic congestion in marble falls. Survey 11 Enhanced public safety response is crucial. Survey 11 PRAY BEFORE WORK Survey 11 Traffic on 281 through Marble Falls is horrific What will the environmental impact of a new bridge at this point be? Will the lakes Survey 11 ecosystem be considered and protected? Survey 11 No Survey 11 The idea is absurd. Need a bypass around Marble Falls much more. Traffic in Marble Falls 1431 - 281 is growing, businesses like Beall & HEB along with school Survey 11 buses, adding more traffic lights, creates traffic issues and slow go to work ! Another route through MF traffic jam would be welcome ! It would be great. I could totally bypass Marble Falls and gobto my friends in granite shols Survey 11 and kingsland. Survey 11 I would even be willing to pay a toll to use a new bridge!

58 I'm very concerned about the negative impact of a new bridge... the impact on our nature preserve in Cottonwood Shores, the impact on our quiet lifestyle in Cottonwood Shores, and Survey 11 the impact on the businesses in Cottonwood Shores. Before County money is spent on a bridge that few people want or need, we need to consider the needs of those residents who live on dirt or gravel roads. This is not a good idea.... a waste of taxes..... it will hurt the environment and cause noise Survey 11 pollution and vehicles over our beautiful lake... stop it! If was provide closer emergency route in and out of the are as well as be good for business Survey 11 and bringing the community together. Survey 11 Not a smart idea Survey 11 This is so overdue This bridge where serve no one but HSB residents and some cottonwood shores. NO benefit Survey 11 to the 281 traffic that flows north / south through Marble Falls or to take truck routes out of Marble Falls - waste of tax payers money I believe that a new crossing would reduce traffic in Marble Falls and on 281 by an enormous Survey 11 amount. I know as a contractor living in Fairland and working all over the Highland Lakes area that I would use it and my crews would use it everyday we worked at least twice. Survey 11 We need a loop around Marble Falls for 281 traffic Not necessary and would asthetically take away from the river, environmentally impact the Survey 11 area for the worse, more noise over the water, oil runoff Survey 11 Do it!!! We need that shorter route!!! Survey 11 This is an excellent idea. We need this greatly. Survey 11 Never gave it a thought, interesting concept. Survey 11 Turn it into a loop around marble falls to help with 281 traffic through town. Survey 11 With the potential growth in the area, this is a much needed traffic choice. To accommodate the growth in Horseshoe Bay, Summit, and Cottonwood Shores area this Survey 11 bridge beneficial in relieving congestion on 2147 than 281.We can anticipate an influx in traffic due to growth Think safety. Survey 11 Current road between HSB and Marble Falls is not adequate. Concerned about increased traffic on FM 2147 ... Cost to county for improving access road to Survey 11 bridge ... Afraid traffic light on 2147 would cause traffic jam I could save approximately 16 miles per day, if there were a crossing at Wirtz Dam, and lots of Survey 11 time. Survey 11 Think it's a great idea, should have been done many years ago although I would not benefit on a daily or weekly basis from this, but I feel it is needed in case Survey 11 an accident or something has 281 shut down then its kingsland or 1431 into Austin I don't understand why you find it necessary to disrupt the peace and calm of those who live along lake Marble Falls. A bridge will take away the serenity of the area and what attracts Survey 11 people to visit and live in this area. We are good citizens and have paid lots of $$ and taxes to have a tranquil property. This will no longer exist. There are far bigger projects to be working on. An alternative route is needed for north/south Survey 11 281 traffic. We need a bypass to relieve traffic in Marble Falls. Survey 11 Do It! Survey 11 It just makes sense because most of the roadway is already there

59 County officials state that the new bridge road will intersect w/ 1431; while the bridge may provide another route for emergency vehicles, it will not ameliorate the traffic problems. If approx. 3500 vehicles are dumped on 14310a very basic shoulderless undivided 4 way road to head east into MF; the backup will be horrific as those cars will encounter 5 stoplights before intersecting 281. At 281 they will rejoin traffic coming across the MF bridge heading Survey 11 north. With additional turn times required, a monster will have been created-unintended consequences strike again. This is a project that has been developed with tunnel vision and which ignores the complete picture. Where are the comprehensive traffic studies including travel time projections which should precede this process? County officials apparently lack the courage to propose a true solution-a bypass-because of the political ramifications. A bridge may be merited but the entire project needs to be revamped.

Survey 11 We need it. Survey 11 Let's get it done Survey 11 It's needed for safety Survey 11 Hurry Survey 11 Optional route Survey 11 Good idea! Hope an additional crossing will lessen traffic in Marble Falls. Hope it will be a loop of HWY Survey 11 281 not a FM bridge. Survey 11 Good idea Survey 11 We need better access to our hospital on 71 Survey 11 Alternative way to travel; beneficial to everyone Survey 11 Work it Survey 11 As long as it does not harm the environment. Survey 11 Build the bridge Survey 11 We have needed this for years Survey 11 Please! If the bridge on 281 were closed in an emergency, things would be very bad. Survey 11 I think this needs to be in or very close to Marble Falls. Needs a loop around Marble Falls. Survey 11 Needed for EMS and convenience. Would support marble falls businesses This is way overdue. Traffic flow is being greatly affected by not having an alternative route, Survey 11 making travel times unnecessarily long. Survey 11 I think it would be a great asset and help ease traffic in Marble Falls. Survey 11 The other bridge would ease the traffic issues on 281. Survey 11 Would love this crossing for all involved. It would truly make lifemore enjoyable due to me being able to spend more time with family Survey 11 and less time in the road. Survey 11 Please build it, it cannot be built fast enough I consider the Writz Dam possible crossing as an another emergency crossing road. At present Survey 11 you can cross at Hwy 2900 and also by way of looping around at Llano. Most of the construction workers in our area live in Granite Shoals or Kingsland. They travel to Horseshoe Bay for work and as the southern part of town expands towards the Hospital Survey 11 the demand for another river crossing will become even more imminent. It makes more sense to get out in front of the need rather than try and keep up with it when it gets here. Marble Falls is already witnessing the bottle-neck traffic during peak hours.

60 My wife and I do a lot of volunteer work at our church in Horseshoe Bay. This crossing would Survey 11 be a blessing to us, saving us both time and mileage! Survey 11 No Survey 11 We need this Judge Oakley is an ignorant pompous ass who's grandstanding would be laughable if he didn't Survey 11 want to waste so much taxpayer money Survey 11 Looking forward to it! Most people are traveling to Marble Falls. The money would be better spent expanding 2147 Survey 11 and looking into a 281 bypass to the east of town to better deal with exponentially increasing population and 281 traffic. The new bridge would definitely ease the traffic on 2147 from Horseshoe Bay to Marble Falls. Survey 11 Especially for people who live in Highland Haven and Granite Shoals. The saved alone would be the greatest benefit, and to relieve some of the horrible traffic in Survey 11 Marble Falls would also help. Survey 11 Good project for safety and take pressure off 281 Survey 11 Great plan Survey 11 Been waiting 20 years for this. Need to make a larger road with median or center turning lane. Also bridge should be as nice Survey 11 as the one on 281. Survey 11 No need for the bridge Highway 281 through marble Falls needs to be modernized from Lowes to the bridge over Survey 11 Lake Marble Falls before a single dollar is spent on a Wirtz Dam crossing. This includes curb, gutter, side walks, new traffic lights and more. I think it would open up new development. Initially, the land owners would have a financial windfall, but overall, I think it would be beneficial to the Hill Country Economy. Additionally, there would be some downside to the Marble Falls economy, but as stated, in the long-run, it would be a financial benefit. I would recommend that you study the Bypass constructed in Survey 11 Coppers Cove, TX. I think that bypass would be similar to the eventual bypass this would create around Marble Falls in the next 20 years. At that point, Marble Falls will be begging for an alternative route and this project will be the catalyst for that future development opportunity. Survey 11 Changes would need to be made to FM2147 or an extension to 281 or 71 would be needed. I believe that this crossing if implemented would ease much of the traffic along 2147 and the Survey 11 281 corridors as well as 1431. Survey 11 We need it ASAP Survey 11 Hope we get it; we need it Survey 11 Do it!! Survey 11 Should be done Survey 11 Emergency response and convenience This alternative route will alleviate traffic congestion on US 281. The route will also add Survey 11 business opportunities to Horseshoe Bay and Granite Shoals. At the same time, I do not believe business would be negatively affected in Marble Falls. Survey 11 A low cost project that will solve many traffic issues. Survey 11 It will cause additional traffic on an already crowded 1431.

61 It can save lives. We share EMS services and if we have 2 heart attacks or accidents on the Survey 11 same side of the lake at the same time, someone could die waiting the 25 minutes it takes to drive from Granite Shoals to Horseshoe Bay. That's a terrible fact. I believe a crossing at or near the Dam becomes a security risk and endangers the Survey 11 community. Survey 11 Would relieve traffic in MarbleFalls YOU NEED TO INCLUDE SUNRISE BEACH, DEER HAVEN, BLUE LAKE and LLANO. All these areas Survey 11 work and shop in Marble Falls. This proposal needs to include the extension of the road to Hwy 71 otherwise I would not be Survey 11 in favor The crossing would improve the flow of traffic for the entire south end of Burnet County. It Survey 11 will also open a lot of other options for future transportation needs in the county. This bridge will be a game changer and improve people's lives for generations. Survey 11 There is already roads on both sides, just needs a bridge, provides a needed shortcut. For most people in Horseshoe Bay that currently use 2147 to access HEB, downtown Marble Falls, etc, the new bridge located at the proposed crossing would actually add mileage, and Survey 11 perhaps time, to their trip. Moving the bridge closer to 1431 would decrease the mileage and time for them, and have less impact on Sunset Point, Wirtz Dam operations and Wilderness Cove. I am much in favor of another means to cross the river but am concerned about the low Survey 11 water crossing which could be a problem. It would be nice to have a new road that bypasses LCRA Facility and perhaps intersected at 1980. Survey 11 Concerned if use Wirtz Dam Rd. Threat to our neighborhood and the dam. Use Wirtz dam road but move the crossing a bit east of the dam to ease traffic in front of Survey 11 Wildnerness cove and the Sunset RV park as well as safety and security for the dam Survey 11 I would suggest it be made East of the current Wirtz dam road and go around LCRA. Survey 11 Would reduce travel on 281 with HSB residence using new crossing Survey 11 Good idea for alternate route Please make the connecting road from the bridge to N. Wirtz Dam Rd. a little farther away Survey 11 from the entrances to Wilderness Cove and Sunset Point RV Park. The connecting road would be straighter and a smoother incline. Survey 11 No. Survey 11 No. Survey 11 Where is the money going to come from? Survey 11 No. Survey 11 We are very happy this is already in your plans Survey 11 Makes life easier; all for it! Survey 11 Much needed Survey 11 Do it! Survey 11 Good news! Survey 11 Think it is a good idea Survey 11 None Survey 11 Please DO NOT do this project Will kill business on Wirtz Dam Road. Entire Wirtz Dam road itself would need to be rebuilt. Survey 11 Increase in traffic to home owners in Wilderness Cove.

62 A new road would need to be constructed to connect to the Dam. The existing Wirtz Dam Survey 11 Road is too close to the LCRA, Sunset Point, Wilderness Cove to be safe. Bridge is needed. The increased traffic (>3500 cars per day?) would be terrible for Wirtz Dam Survey 11 Road Survey 11 Fix the city and county roads, including paving those that aren't. Proposed river crossing would do little to alleviate traffic in MF. Also, N Wirtz Dam Road would need major upgrade to accommodate increases traffic: foundation, shoulder, surface. Survey 11 Spend TXDOT funds widening 218 from State 71 to Park Road 4 instead. That would be far more meaningful in terms of efficiency and safety.

Not needed or justified. Distance to Hwy 281/1431 intersection in MF actually 35% longer via a new bridge. Creates security and safety issues for LCRA and nearby neighborhoods as drawn. If it is built, the north side routing should definitely be moved east away from secure gated areas to merge with N Wirtz Dam Rd about 1/3 mile north of current tri-gated area. Survey 11 Also,given current pedestrian use, sidewalks and other costly improvements for N Wirtz Dam Rd would be required to Hwy 1431. Hard to justify spending this effort and money on something that is not needed now or in the foreseeable future, even considering aggressive population growth. Doesn't address real need for relieving Hwy 281 issues for north/south traffic trying to get through MF. Lot of money for very little net benefit.

I live in wilderness cove and do not want the new road to intersect with our subdivision, Survey 11 though it would be beneficial to me to have road access across the river, I would not be in favor if the new road uses the existing Worth Dam road. Survey 11 It would be a good alternative river crossing to avoid traffic on 281 Survey 11 reduce traffic in Marble Falls Alleviate traffic on 281!! Good to have an alternate route to cross the river in case of Survey 11 emergency Survey 11 Still a good idea Survey 11 I believe it would be great if someone lived in the Wirtz Dam area. We go to Nan's Needle Work in Horseshoe Bay weekly. We attend Hill Country Theater Survey 11 events, if we are in a play Mon-Thurs. evenings x 6 weeks, we would go 1431 to 2147 Survey 11 Seems impossible to widen 2147 from Marble Falls to Horseshoe Bay Survey 11 Sounds good! Survey 11 It would make our county smaller, it should be done Survey 11 Make it environmentally friendly My hope is that there is a less expensive way to build a crossing than a 6+mm bridge. This Survey 11 crossing would greatly reduce the congestion through Marble Falls. Survey 11 seria muy buena proyecto para la sociedad Survey 11 es una gran idea Survey 11 me gustaria que se llege a un fin con lo del punte beneficiaria muchos Survey 11 Es nessecerio Survey 11 Buena dicicion Survey 11 Sera de mucha alluda para la comunidad. Survey 11 Para mi es muy importante. Survey es una gran idea 11

63 14.) What do you envision for the future of the Highland Lakes area of Burnet and Llano Counties? (Optional) Survey 14 more homes; less live stock Survey 14 Gridlock! Survey 14 growth Survey 14 n/a Survey 14 continued reasonable growth Realize growth is going to happen. One reason for living in the area is to escape the noise Survey 14 and traffic of big cities. Survey 14 A business loop It will continue to grow toward bee cave and Austin. Unless schools in our area are added or Survey 14 improved, young professionals will not move to our communities. If this proposal is the future, it holds nothing but commerce 1st and the environment dead Survey 14 last! Survey 14 Reasonably controlled quality growth of 2 to 5 % per year. Survey 14 More building, more people and more traffic. Survey 14 better retail shopping Survey 14 growth Survey 14 More rapid growth Survey 14 Better access to emergency vehicles A major bypass route around Marble Falls either on the east or west side. A bridge is required either side plus connecting roads. Through traffic on Hwy. 281 through Marble Falls Survey 14 is highly congested. Hwy 281 is becoming a major north/south artery vs. I-35 from San Antonio north to Ft. Worth/Dallas. Survey 14 Rapid Growth Survey 14 Growing...... a great are in which to live Survey 14 Light rail train extension from Leander to Llano. The area will outgrow itself sooner than later. This project would definitely reduce congestion Survey 14 in high traffic areas and may even lead to commercial business and residential development which is also greatly lacking. Survey 14 continued growth and pressure on the roads Survey 14 Growth near new hospital and along US281 and SH71 corridors. Burnet and Llano could benefit from a coordinated plan through the dam in Austin/Travis County. Likely all areas could land more funding with a more regional approach. Burnet County seems to function as part of the Austin metro (already 5 counties, and surely Burnet County is at least as tied to Austin as is Caldwell County which seems more like half tied to San Antonio?). This could help Burnet County in landing major employers if seen as part of the metro, and possibly other resources. As roads, 1431 is a major road plus loops to IH-35 and SH 130, not to mention ties in with most bridges across the Highland Lakes. Thinking Survey 14 regionally, a bridge across Lake Travis tied to the LCRA land at Pace Bend creates a loop more or less through existing county and possibly smaller roads to Hamilton Pool, then Dripping Springs, Wimberley, San Marcos, over to SH-130, and back to 1431. It also could gain support from Hays and Williamson County, and Caldwell County too. Might be FEMA funds to create an alternate bridge between Marble Falls rain bomb, Steiner fires, Bastrop fires, Pedernales tornado. What do they all have in common? All these disasters happened adjacent to the Colorado River and lakes, and limited river crossings impacted emergency responders in all

64 cases. With the Legislature coming into session, we need to make funding of river crossings a priority. For Burnet County and Travis County, what could be saved in redundant services both sides of the lake or curing current out of compliance response times should justify some investment. If created as a bridge as part of a regional loop, Williamson and Hays might contribute too, and likely the 620 community and 281 community would highly support to right size their traffic too plus give them alternate choice (like when Steiner fire closed 620, or the recent fire on 281 that was a few miles north of MF, and luckily did not close the 281 bridge). The strength of the area is recreational tourism and recreational business, and as a region seeking employers in hospitality, sports manufacturing, boating, aircraft, watersports and outdoor sports of all types, etc. plus food, wine, organic and health conscious living, healthcare, etc. creates a unified theme for the region. Survey 14 Bypass around Marble Falls Survey 14 Need a loop to the East of Marble Falls to get the trucks and travelers out of the city. Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Growth, but I fear the result if left up to current elected officials. Survey 14 Growth I see Burnet and Llano County experiencing growth. We need to meet our transportation Survey 14 needs. Survey 14 More and more people moving to our area Survey 14 Growth, hopefully managed in ways that enhance quality of life issues. Survey 14 Growth/more traffic - we need to be prepared Survey 14 Lots of growth Survey 14 Better travel roads & stores Survey 14 Large hospital in Marble Falls. Survey 14 bypass around Marble Falls More roads connecting surrounding areas. Maybe tram or rail transportation so bicyclist can Survey 14 travel for work or recreation. Both counties need bond money and tax money to fix their failing physical infrastructure (including roads and bridges). In the future, I would expect that these counties will find the Survey 14 funds to begin work on upgrading its physical infrastructure and control the damaging effects of uncontrolled, unregulated overweight vehicles that cost we taxpayers to repair the damage. Survey 14 Envision growth to continue at the rate it's at now, or more than likely a greater rate. Survey 14 Better access to hospitals. Survey 14 More and more people moving here because of constant level lakes (water). Survey 14 Plan for growth Survey 14 More population Survey 14 Need a bypass of 281 traffic currently routed through Marble Falls. Survey 14 More density Survey 14 Shared services and greater tightness between the communities on LBJ Survey 14 Massive growth. Survey 14 More population, cleaner energy and transportation. Light rail. Survey 14 A Witrz crossing option and bike lanes. Survey 14 extreme growth Survey 14 Widen and make safe the current roads. Survey 14 Being proactive in our transportation issues

65 With the growth that Marble Falls is experiencing it will continue to carry into other areas of Survey 14 Burnet and Llano counties. The road infrastructure must be there for growth to occur. Somehow being able to take the pressure off of 281 without the dreaded 'loop'. I think the Survey 14 road infrastructure in the HLA hasn't been touched in decades. Survey 14 More population and more congested traffic. I see it, honestly, as a moderately-connected arm of the Austin metro area. It won't be like Cedar Park or Round Rock, but it will definitely fill in between here and the metro, especially Survey 14 along 71 and likely along 29 as well. Our existing roads cannot currently handle the additional traffic that will accompany that growth. I would also like to the the RR 3404/ CR 307 bridge at Kingsland also know as the Kingsland Survey 14 Slab raised. So that when there is minor flooding on the Llano River access to Kingsland from Llano is not obstructed. Survey 14 I hope it does not grow any faster.. Substantial growth, once the infrastructure catches up and quality employment opportunities Survey 14 emerge. Survey 14 Growth, a lot Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Much more population. Survey 14 A bridge between Hwy 29 and Hwy 71. Much better option then the current study. Survey 14 Alt route or modified streets to ease inner city traffic Survey 14 Continued growth toward Austin Survey 14 Significant population growth. Survey 14 Commercial growth Survey 14 Rapid growth of people getting out of Austin Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Highland lakes hike and bike trail connecting communities around Lake LBJ Survey 14 A beautiful alternative to the busy north south Austin growth corridors. Survey 14 keeping our nice peaceful community - don't want more noise and traffic Survey 14 Growth! Survey 14 Population growth with incoming Industry and creation of a full university campus. Survey 14 A lot more traffic Survey 14 High growth Survey 14 Additional housing, retail & businesses that bring jobs to the community. Survey 14 Extreme growth. Hugh traffic jams. More burger joints Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Continued congestion Survey 14 Continue to protect nature/wildlife... The peacefulness of this area attracts many tourists. Not [a] specific question. Vision regarding growth, traffic, bridges, parks, commercial...what Survey 14 vision do you want to know? Survey 14 More growth Survey 14 Too much truck traffic. Traffic getting worse. Survey 14 Population growth as Austin becomes more expensive Survey 14 Let communities control their own destiny. Survey 14 Growing along 281 and 71 Large population expansion. Austin is moving our way. Need to be ahead of the planning now Survey 14 before we are overrun by more people with more cars.

66 I just wonder why the low water crossing was closed at Wirtz Dam road, that was a step Survey 14 backward. A bridge is going forward.

Survey 14 I see this area becoming a lot like Cedar Park/Leander in about 10 years Up to Date Medical Care, Working water and sewer infrastructure updates at affordable Survey 14 costs, better road maintenance and access Survey 14 Tremendous growth Survey 14 Many more people moving to lakes. Survey 14 No heavy traffic on major thoroughfares Survey 14 Need public eye transportation it would help a lot. Survey 14 Will continue to grow Community that maintains small town feel by alleviating traffic on 281 at FM1431. Slowing Survey 14 traffic down on 1431 would be wonderful also. Survey 14 Over growth, no infrastructure for basic serices, lack of sound political leadership. With the new hospital and clinic, I feel the area will continue to grow at a fast pace. As a Survey 14 business owner in Kingsland, greater access to different areas will likely be the deciding factor in opening a new location in the future. Continue wasting money on sports arenas while graduate undereducated children looking for Survey 14 their entitlements Continued growth and conversion of land use from agricultural to residential, commercial Survey 14 and industrial. Survey 14 Residential growth. Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 More growth Survey 14 Growth near new hospital, in Marble Falls, and much more use of US281. I see a greater concentration of population centers connected ever more tightly by upgrades Survey 14 in local and regional roadways. Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 I envision more and more people, and a lot more setting in traffic. more congestion and stop lights slowing traffic in hsb and on 1431 and bad traffic on 281 in Survey 14 marble falls. even worse backup at hsb and 281 traffic signal during most times of day We need a straight road from from 2147 south to 71 half way between the two that now Survey 14 exist, the one through summit rock is dangerous if you are in a hurry and the one through horseshoe bay is usually closed. Survey 14 For Marble Falls, a truck bypass around the city to help with traffic congestion on 281. Survey 14 Growth As population grows out of the urban centers of Austin and San Antonio, the pressure on the Highland Lakes area will increase. As an example, see Lake Travis, Bee Caves, and Dripping Survey 14 Springs. Increased infrastructure, opportunities for employment, and purposeful planning are needed to guide the direction and development of the area. The growth is coming, so prepare to leverage that growth for the benefit of the entire region. Survey 14 Overcrowding, worse traffic, Quick travel time between the North and South sides of the lake, and better opportunities for Survey 14 our emergency services to quickly and effectively reach people in need in our county. Survey 14 Housing Survey 14 A boom of new people and businesses. Survey 14 More future growth and rising population

67 Survey 14 Worse traffic I personally like my quiet neighborhood and town that isn't crammed packed with people Survey 14 unless it's tourist season. Growth rate will increase causing more congestion, especially in hwy 281. Additional routes Survey 14 including a bridge are extremely important. Survey 14 Too many people moving in and not near enough space for traffic Survey 14 population out growing services Survey 14 Growth, business, population and money Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 a pass-through traffic loop around Marble Falls Survey 14 Fast growth. Survey 14 Great place to live Survey 14 More fast growth as Austin moves this direction. More new homes and traffic- a new bridge will disperse the local traffic away from the 281 Survey 14 traffic passing north/south thru town Survey 14 I see much more growth. Continued heavy traffic on 281 thru Marble falls with increase of people and trucks avoiding I Survey 14 35. Survey 14 Prosperity Survey 14 Population explosion as people from out of Sate and from other countries find us. Widened public roads to handle the volume of traffic we now have, in addition to future Survey 14 volumes that will only increase. Triple in population( if not more) in 5 years, especially with the big major stores moving in to Survey 14 this area. We are going to see unprecedented population growth rates over the next 10 years. It's Survey 14 coming, like it or not. Survey 14 More growth. Safer road traffic on 281 near pottery barn business, all that big truck traffic vs. automobile Survey 14 traffic is intense. This area is growing and there needs to some way of improving large truck traffic in Marble Survey 14 Falls. Survey 14 growth Survey 14 more growth is not coming, IT'S HERE Survey 14 Continued increase in people and traffic Survey 14 Growth is evident. Survey 14 better connected thru roads and bridges Survey 14 Slow steady growth. Survey 14 Rapid growth Controlled growth...not developers building out our beautiful land, selling, and then leaving it Survey 14 to local communities to provide more roads. Growth will continue. The pace will be above average until the schools are better. Then it Survey 14 will quicken. Survey 14 Growth The growth potential is high. Several people are moving into the area, and we must have the Survey 14 services and transportation needs met. Survey 14 Less crowded roadways!

68 Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 I would like to see more light rail in ALL of the US to limit traffic and pollution. Survey 14 Bypass around Marble Falls for trucks Survey 14 Continued growth & economic development Survey 14 Continued growth and more traffic. Survey 14 More growth Survey 14 More people moving into the area and traffic getting heavier. Modest growth. Expansion of Time share business's will fail unless there is a significant improvement of eating establishments, no consistently good restaurants in area & a Survey 14 substantial influx of trainable young workers with an increase in AFFORDABLE housing, $125K or less and $350 to 500 rentables. Survey 14 More housing overflow from AUSTIN. Survey 14 281 thru Marble Falls is frequently congested and needs widening. I just worry about the property taxes getting out of control. Growth is good, but take it easy Survey 14 on us homeowners. Survey 14 Just to keep growing with more people and more traffic The population will continue to grow placing more pressure on the existing roadways Survey 14 between north/south Lake LBJ Survey 14 The traffic on highways 281 and 1431, already heavy, will likely become congested. Survey 14 More and more congestion in Marble Falls! This area is only going to grow. I don't foresee growth with the city of llano. I don't think there is the "want to". I see Kingsland, Marble Falls, and Burnet the main growers in this area.The lakes are a big attraction. And with the new proposed addition on Lake Marble Falls, Survey 14 will only add to the draw. Marble Falls is going to have explosive growth soon, just a matter of time. One worry that people will have with any addition like this bridge for instance, are the tax implications associated with it. A lot of growth. We have outgrown our roads, I usually get caught at one stoplight multiple Survey 14 times. I foresee more growth in southeast Burnet county due to Austin creeping westward. Our Survey 14 once-quaint towns have already been forever changed. Inevitable growth. Please consider that most residents of north Blanco County use Marble Survey 14 Falls as it's commercial and recreational center. Survey 14 major growth. Austin is full. Survey 14 diversified recreational opportunities Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 growth Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Bridge Survey 14 smart growth Survey 14 Continued growth, thus ever increasing traffic. Would love to trade my car for a bicycle, but don't feel safe riding a bike on 1431. Future Survey 14 holds more people moving in, and more traffic. Survey 14 uncontrolled growth The entire area will be overgrown in the next ten years if not sooner. An additional crossing Survey 14 would greatly reduce the traffic congestion at 2147 and 281. Survey 14 Much growth and development in this immediate area due the hospital.

69 Bypass around Marble Falls to handled the ever increasing traffic load. Secondary bridge at Wirtz Dam to reduce the long drive from Marble Falls to HSB and to provide an alternative Survey 14 bridge if 281 bridge is closed. Faster emergency services between Marble Falls and Scott & White Hospital on 71. Survey 14 Growth. Survey 14 Very quick travel time from Granite Shoals/Highland Haven area to Horseshoe Bay. Survey 14 Expansion in roads and routes to keep up with the growth that will come Survey 14 A loop around Marble Falls I see continued growth, in HB the housing growth alone is booming. There remains a need for lower to middle class housing, my children fit into this bracket. There is a need for better Survey 14 paying jobs. As people move to this area possibly new business will too creating jobs and drawing more people. We need to start right now preparing for the traffic this all brings with it. Survey 14 Crowded Additional explosive growth & tied up transportation on Hwy281. Until Austin traffic Survey 14 problems are alleviated or solved, north/south bound truckers will come this way. It's already heavy through MF, gonna get lots worse! While one can't stop growth I would hope all parties involved will consider the citizens and Survey 14 wildlife in the area. The one positive that people come out to these areas is to escape the rat race. Survey 14 Too damn many people. Survey 14 I would love to see a flippin loop around Survey 14 Alot moreally growth. Survey 14 Hopefully, very slow growth Survey 14 Lower wage workers being forced out of area due to taxes more growth with more traffic lights, eventually looking like the old 183 did before the toll Survey 14 roads and upper deck was added. Survey 14 Slower growth please- there are too many people here already More traffic congestion!!! Hwy 281 through Marble Falls is crazy!! But this Wirtz Dam Plan is Survey 14 not going to help it!! Survey 14 Bridge between smithwick and spicewood also Survey 14 Hopefully better traffic management and river crossings. Survey 14 PEOPLE THAT WANT TO WORK NO HAND OUTS Survey 14 Destroyed ecosystem Survey 14 Way too many people, traffic, with not enough roads!!!! Survey 14 Growth South of Marble Falls Survey 14 Much heavier traffic. Survey 14 Overpopulation and soaring property taxes followed by more banks and gas stations Survey 14 Continued growth Survey 14 Maintain the beautiful and natural features of our topography. maintain our beautiful areas - improve the fire 'department' in Cottonwood Shores.... get rid Survey 14 of the criminal running it now. Survey 14 Grow as one. Survey 14 Population growth Survey 14 More growth Survey 14 More traffic

70 Survey 14 281 is way overcrowded going through Marble Falls. We need a loop around Marble Falls. Survey 14 A bigger population and more visitors. Survey 14 To keep it attractive and not turn it into Austin, which is where we used to live. Survey 14 Marble Falls loop Survey 14 Lots of Growth needing more roads bridges etc. maybe eventually some sort of loop Continued growth on already crowded highways. Hwy 281 is already extremely congested. If there is a problem on the bridge that closes it there is no other way to get across the river Survey 14 except the Llano slab road or going up 1431 to Austin. Neither of these is acceptable for the thousands of people that travel hwy 281 every month. Survey 14 An ever increasing population surge and to much building of expensive housing. The area is growing and traffic will only get heavier. Weekends and summer are already Survey 14 overloading 281 thru MF. Survey 14 GROWTH Survey 14 Very quick growth and gridlock Survey 14 Huge growth and with that comes traffic issues Survey 14 More roads and traffic control measures. Highway lane expansion projects. Survey 14 Too many people Survey 14 Area is going to continue to grow and a very fast rate. Survey 14 Continued growth, especially in southern Burnet County A "Loop" road of some sort with bridges where needed..to be done in an appealing manner Survey 14 sensitive to the areas utilized. Extreme growth taxing our already inadequate roadways. The need from for an intelligently Survey 14 designed loop within the next 10 years Survey 14 Shorter lines at the stop lights coming through Marble Falls Make turn lanes/medians in between Burnet and Marble Falls on Hwy 281. Very dangerous Survey 14 and too many lives have been taken on that stretch of road. Also Hwy 29 from Burnet to Liberty Hill. Survey 14 Better traffic routes Survey 14 What's wrong with it now?? Survey 14 N/A Survey 14 Growth - more people thus more cars Survey 14 High growth Survey 14 Controlled growth. Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Extreme growth. Survey 14 Growth and more routes Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Easier access to emergency rooms and pharmacys as well as shopping Survey 14 To grow Survey 14 Lots of growth. Survey 14 Further growth and more vacationers Survey 14 growing Survey 14 New bridge, and public transportation. Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Even worse traffic (Sorry but you asked)

71 I would hope to see within the next ten years for sure 281 thru Marble Falls "double decked" with the top lanes possible being toll lanes if financially if this road improvement can be done sooner than later. The City of Bastrop comes to mind when I say "double decked" or portions of IH 35 as it runs thru Austin. I believe a "loop" around Marble Falls will definitely hurt the economy of the city. Study the impact of the loop around Copperas Cove, Tx. and I Survey 14 think most any knowledgeable person will agree with me. I'm certainly not saying that someday a loop around 281 in the Marble Falls area will be needed but first improve the travel thru the given main road way 281. I also would add, that definite planning needs to go into play as to moving more traffic thru the City of Burnet. As is known 281 is a main artery thru our state. Not a small "city," but rather a big "town." With the beautiful waterways/creeks etc... in our counties, we ought to be utilizing them as "features" rather than hazards. As San Antonio did with their river walk area, we too could intentional craft small commercial pockets throughout our Marble Falls with walkways and bike paths that connect them and encourage Survey 14 people to come and spend a day/weekend exploring our Hill Country Culture. They start near Main street and stretch through to HEB, then towards HWY 281 across and all the way to commerce. Commerce is currently an Industrial area which could be relocated to the outskirts of town and capitalize on the proximity to the main corridor of HWY 281. Survey 14 continued growth both commercial and residential Survey 14 Going to continue to grow, causing more traffic. Survey 14 Quick and safe way to travel from CWS to Kingsland and Granite Shoals. Survey 14 Rural as always with the rich along the lakes More people and cars. I moved to Cottonwood in 1994, Marble falls had 1 (one) red light. Survey 14 Need to remove shoes to count them all now. The area is continuing to grow at a rapid pace even in the face of a poor national economy. Austin will continue to grown and this area is a hot bed for population and traffic growth. If Survey 14 we do not look into alternative routes for 281 at this stage of the game it is likely to end up as bad a I35 in Austin in 20 years. Plan ahead wisely! Survey 14 Growth and congestion Survey 14 Growth! We need to get prepared for it! Need to update and make commutes easier. Survey 14 More traffic - more congestion on US 281 Major industrial and housing developments as population moves west to escape Austin's high Survey 14 cost of living Survey 14 More growth. Survey 14 Bridge at dam, and a 281 bypass on the east of MF Survey 14 Marble Falls is and always will be the economic hub. Txdot needs to focus on that. Survey 14 rowth Survey 14 Continued population growth. As stated earlier, I believe the Wirtz Dam bridge will offer future opportunity for a Bypass Survey 14 around Marble Falls. Additionally, the construction of a Bridge connecting Spicewood to 1431 would be a great financial windfall. Survey 14 N/A Survey 14 Significant growth Survey 14 Large growth in the area Survey 14 Lots of growth Survey 14 Extensive growth

72 The future of the area will mean a larger population and an increased stress to the Survey 14 infrastructure in the area. This means that there will only be an even stronger need for alternative routes in the area. Survey 14 More people. Population trends all strongly suggest movement along the I-35 corridor from Georgetown to Survey 14 new braunfels is west. I envision a tremendous population increase in the next few years Survey 14 Growth and new developments which will need new bridges Continued growth making it a bedroom community to Austin. Use of roads and public transportation into Austin. 281 should become "a parallel conduit" to I-35, and as such Survey 14 should bypass around the major towns. I think the river crossing at Wirtz Dam is short sited and benefits only local residents. Survey 14 Continued urban sprawl from Austin which will be fought vigorously. Survey 14 Become a thriving community where people can live and work. Survey 14 More and more people & traffic Survey 14 Lots of growth and traffic jams. Survey 14 Continued growth. Survey 14 More congested Survey 14 More congestion with increased population Survey 14 Growth If the bridge is built, I would like to see a highway by-pass built along existing road right of Survey 14 ways as much as possible connecting N. Wirtz Dam Rd. to Hwy 281 by-passing and relieving congestion on Hwy 281 through Marble Falls. Survey 14 Continuing growth; traffic Survey 14 It's going to keep growing Survey 14 Growing/increasing population Survey 14 Wise growth Survey 14 Bike routes/running routes Survey 14 More moderately priced housing Survey 14 Continued growth Survey 14 More growth Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Growth Survey 14 Exceptional growth Survey 14 Overrun by Austin Survey 14 Unknown Survey 14 :) Survey 14 Lots of growth Survey 14 Improved building zoning and quality restrictions. More bridges across the Colorado River are clearly needed, but not one as close to Hwy 281 Survey 14 as this. A bridge halfway between Marble Falls and Austin makes more sense, not a bypass bridge around Marble Falls. Survey 14 Being a nice, quiet place to enjoy my retirement years. The community will continue to grow but not explosively due to poorly rated schools. MF's Survey 14 unwillingness to meaningfully deal with congestion on 281 & 1431 will become increasingly frustrating. Survey 14 Modest growth in Llano - Moderate growth in Burnet

73 Survey 14 A well thought out infrastructure plan. A community that has planned for the growth that makes it enjoyable to live here. This Survey 14 includes efficient and effective mobility so that traffic flows smoothly. Survey 14 New crossing at Wirtz Dam Survey 14 Vibrant growth Survey 14 High growth Easier access to emergency facilities and better public transportation for people without Survey 14 autos. Survey 14 It will become busier with housing developments due to Scott/White staff Survey 14 More congestion on 281 and 29 more stores in Marble Falls Survey 14 Loop around Marble Falls to relieve traffic congestion Survey 14 Exponential growth, better be ready Survey 14 que seria mejor tiempo paratodos Survey 14 al aser ese puente ahorraiamos tienpo jgas Survey 14 seria lo mejor sopresa para llegar a tiempo a nuestros destinos Survey 14 Crecimiento Survey 14 Que mejoren las carreteras y senales Survey 14 Un buen desarroyo 18.) Please share any additional comments on the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program. (Optional) Please share any additional comments on the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Survey 18 Program. (Optional) Survey 18 Open-Ended Response Survey 18 you may use low water crossing as road I'm new to the outreach. Might want to contact Horseshoe Bay Business Alliance - good way Survey 18 to get info to H.S.B people. (Francie Dix) (J.C. Cauthen) 512-968-5272 Survey 18 n/a Survey 18 cost? Survey 18 This is not a needed bridge and will negatively impact our neighborhood. The survey was poorly designed and seemed skewed to get the answers those in favor of the Survey 18 project wanted and never addressed whether anyone planned to use the bridge, Survey 18 Watch the news, read the paper but still had to hear about it second hand. I hope this program does a thorough environmental study before deciding to destroy one of Survey 18 the few sanctuaries left for migratory birds in this area and all of Texas. DO NOT want a loop around the west side of Marble Falls if it will come down CR120/1855 Survey 18 (Fairland road). Survey 18 Wirtz Dam Road is what our communities in this area of the Hill Country is much needed. Survey 18 Do not let isolationists stop this project Should the bridge become a reality I hope the approach road north of the bridge will bypass Survey 18 the Wilderness Cove Subdivision and Sunset Point RV Park entrances. Straightening the approach road to the bridge would accomplish this. Survey 18 Just another program...... "outreach" seems very biased only to a bridge at Wirtz Dam without other considerations for Survey 18 alternative actions Survey 18 Pleased that effort is being made. Survey 18 DO IT!!

74 Survey does not allow for any direct answer that is negative. Tends to only allow positive Survey 18 responses except for one question. Survey 18 Very pleased! I would also use this road to eat out at Julie's or Hole in One. I don't go there now because it Survey 18 is just too far to drive around the lake Survey 18 No public meeting in city most affected. Very biased presentations in favor. Survey 18 This is not a needed bridge and will negatively impact our neighborhood. Survey 18 don't need it fix other roads This Program did not describe in enough detail the purpose of the Wirtz Dam Project. Simply asking if the Wirtz Dam would be beneficial is a poor way to gather useful responses from the Survey 18 public. The Program should have provided the rationale for the Program in the first place. Then a judgement can be made by the public as to whether it will be beneficial. Survey 18 what's taking so long? Survey 18 Eventually. M Falls will need a loop up to 71 I follow a lot of vehicles to HSB daily from Granite Shoals. This bridge was save us time and Survey 18 gas! So Marble Falls sells a few less breakfast tacos, LBJ Donuts in Cottonwood can use the busoness Survey 18 Sure need a new bridge Some survey questions are "leading" (i.e. contain embedded asssuptions) and are not very well designed if the intent is to receive open, honest feedback. It almost seems as if they Survey 18 were designed by those wanting this project vs someone wanting to truly know how folks felt about it. Survey 18 Great project and is needed. I hope that people can see the benefits of this program. More people are coming to the Survey 18 region, folks in Cottonwood Shores will not lose business (no one going along 2147 is going to cut across Wirtz Dam Rd. to take 1431 into Marble Falls and bypass their shops). Survey 18 Do not feel that it is really needed I've never heard of the program. Simply stumbled across it. Community communication may Survey 18 need to have a broader audience. Survey 18 Don't waste my tax dollars on this road project Survey 18 Only benefits HSB residents. The outreach program sounds like a used-car sales job... CAMPO should be unbiased to get Survey 18 info I'm just now learning about the program so I wasn't sure how to answer #17 I'll be checking it Survey 18 out though! Survey 18 Will there be [a] stoplight at Cottonwood Shores at 29472 [and Wirtz] Dam Road? Survey 18 Been needed for a long time. Survey 18 Very one sided and biased. Self-serving. If yo have to sell it, you shouldn't do it! Survey 18 Cannot answer in a negative fashion to questions in survey. First meetings were only with people in favor of it such as EMS - of course they would like a Survey 18 new road! I think that a bridge would definitely help the economic development of Cottonwood Shores. Survey 18 The business owners support, along with a majority of the people that live in Cottonwood Shores. I think we are going to be unhappy with this bridge. The traffic will become problems on Survey 18 2147. Survey 18 Very happy that this project is finally being researched and hopefully pursued! Survey 18 Please least put a sidewalk on the bridge

75 Survey 18 County Judge used it as a campaign issue. It was a non issue. How about actually visiting the City of Cottonwood Shores? One small meeting with the VFD Survey 18 doesn't really count and we are most affected. Have worked in horseshoe bay for 16 years driving everyday. Sometimes the delay time from Survey 18 construction is horrible. Survey 18 witz dam road waste of taxpayer money Survey 18 A waste of Taxpayer money. Both my parents worked for EMS in Burnet county when they got out of college, and we talk about how great this will be for our emergency responders and EMS. There are many parts of Survey 18 the community around the lake that have a small entrance on the south side that takes a long time to get to if you are on the north side of the lake. I believe this will be very beneficial to both emergency services and private citizens. We really need another way to cross the river! I am a real estate agent and go back and forth Survey 18 all the time. There could be tremendous increase's of traffic on 2147, 281S, and 71. Has this factor been looked at? More police, sheriff, highway patrol will be needed. Possible widening of 2147 will be needed from Marble Falls to Hwy 71. Are the numbers of people to use the bridge Survey 18 really there for a bridge or is it just a convenience? Burnet has a hospital that EMS can go to on the north side of the county. Scott and White is a hospital on the south of the county. Looks to me like a bridge is not needed. When we first moved to this area (approximately 20 years ago) we attended a meeting at the Meadowlakes clubhouse to hear a presentation on the 'proposed bridge at Wirtz Dam'. It made sense then and it makes even more sense NOW. But as we left the meeting, my husband said - this will be just like the Gulf Freeway in Houston - it will never be built in our Survey 18 lifetime! HMMM - and that was 20 years ago! We do not even go out of Meadowlakes (unless there is an emergency) on Friday afternoons dues to the traffic. Between the HUGH TRUCKS and just regular traffic, you can wait through at least 2 lights - some times 3 - at the intersection of Hwy 281 & FM 1431. Ridiculous! Love this area - happy to call it home but hate the traffic getting through town . . . Survey 18 I would vote yes to building this bridge if it were on this coming November election ballot. Survey 18 a necessity Survey 18 We need it!! Survey 18 Build sooner then later The public MUST be told the cost of this bridge and how it will be financed...the reasons I Survey 18 have heard for building this, to me, are not valid at all. The dam and our water supply need to be protected...not polluted with structures for traffic! I've heard talk about this supposedly going to happen for well over 10 years. Why has it not Survey 18 been done Survey 18 Think it is a comprehensive effort Survey 18 This alternate route would benefit the area as a whole. Survey 18 Values should increase due to accessibility to other areas Survey 18 Advertise advertise Survey 18 Easier access for criminals to South side of river, increasing our policing costs. Survey 18 Just ask the people in 78657 and you will find a they want and need this bridge. Survey 18 This has been rumored for years... Businesses and emergency personnel would benefit from a shorter connection between N Survey 18 and S of the Colorado river. Survey 18 Again, why not done when they first thought of it?

76 Thank you for asking the community for their input, I think that you are on the right track with your plans. I do think that it would help the community, just not quite sure if it would Survey 18 relieve any traffic stress in Marble Falls. I wouldn't mind seeing an estimated cost of the project and/or estimated tax implications. Blanco County residents, particularly those in the north portion of the county should be Survey 18 included in the survey. The heavy vehicles, such as trucks/trailers, need to have another path other than 281. This Survey 18 would eliminate a lot of the traffic problem through Marble Falls and be much safer. Survey 18 It's inevitable. Let's be proactive. Survey 18 Hope we get this up and running! Survey 18 It's good you are trying to get feedback and involve the public. It would help out a lot with local traffic and keep the main vain of traffic flow moving on 281 Survey 18 easer. If your in Granite Shoals you have to use 281 to get to HSB. Maybe tv advertisement for those that don't receive a news paper or are convenient to the Survey 18 Internet. It would cut our time in half while trying to get to our chronically ill love one in HSB when Survey 18 emergency situations occur. Survey 18 Reduce cost, stop thinking you have to have the best We NEED it! Our options to get from Kingsland to Cottonwood shores are limited and this Survey 18 would be so good to not have to drive through Marble falls when we have to go to the other side of the river! Survey 18 Ok if no new taxes #13 should have addressed the timing issue of emergency services, not just access. Fire Dept Survey 18 mutual aid agreements are negatively impacted with lack of additional river crossings. Survey 18 I WILL BE PRAYING GOD'S WILL BE DONE

Survey 18 No This would be awesome for the residents. Cottonwood simply doesnt want it becauae Marley Porter and a nd keith pestke doesnt own it or cant figure out how to monopolize a bridge. Survey 18 WE WANT THIS. Saves us time and faster emergency response. Number 2 has anybody thought about not relying soley on tge Marble Falls bridge. What if that should ever crumble, is there another way around? Since we already have protective services on both sides of the lake, then our priorities need to look toward protecting the tranquility of the environment, one of the main reasons people Survey 18 enjoy coming to this area. Spending this amount of money on a road that isn't necessary or desired by the residents is simply irresponsible. it was such a surprise to read about this project in the newspaper with all the 'rah, rah' and Survey 18 there was no effort to discuss the project with the residents of Cottonwood Shores - who would be the most affected - prior to going to the press .... shame on the politicians! Survey 18 The citizens of Cottonwood Shores need to be included in the process directly. We need a loop around Marble Falls for 281 traffic. I think the proposal for the Wirtz Dam Survey 18 crossing is a waste of money. Survey 18 We need it, it would be a great addition to the area, and a great help for EMS All data used in this study is over 10 years old ... Before proceeding shouldn't there be new Survey 18 data gathered? Survey 18 None at this time. Interested in attending one of the public forums Survey 18 Good start Survey 18 Looks good

77 Bridge would increase pass-through traffic on FM 2147 through Horseshoe Bay which is Survey 18 already a heavily traveled arterial. I think it would be beneficial to everyone. It seems to take an hour to gt to Horseshoe Bay Survey 18 from Granite Shoals no matter what traffic is like. Survey 18 Open up back side of damn for fishing, again!!! Survey 18 They have been talking about this for 20 yrs. It is time Survey 18 I believe my comments above are sufficient. I support it and enjoy those visionaries wanting to plan ahead and be proactive rather than Survey 18 reactive to future of our community. Survey 18 The Mayor does not speak for all of CWS. Cottonwood Shores desperately needs this bridge crossing. The mayor and 2 of the Survey 18 councilmen are only thinking of the self=vets and not the community as a whole. Survey 18 STUPID Survey 18 Question below says "What gender do you identify with?" Are you serious? asexual Survey 18 Very polite and helpful Survey 18 The Wirtz Dam Road will cause me more traffic headaches. Is it truly worth millions of dollars to save 5 minutes in order to drive to HEB? Spend the Survey 18 money improving RR 2147 instead of trying to find a way to put more traffic on it! Survey 18 Please build this bridge This project is only about 10 years behind the need which is better than most. Usually Survey 18 improvements come in 20 years behind the need. The TCB feasibility study performed in 2005 was seriously flawed, which I made them aware of at that time. The traffic count methodology employed was insufficient to compute the average number of cars per day. It only counted existing traffic traveling from the south side Survey 18 all the way to the north side. This ignores the fact that a great deal of traffic from the south would use this route to go into Marble Falls, by going east on FM 1431 and aren't currently showing up at the north end when they drive into Marble Falls. Survey 18 This is one of the most important project in Burnet County's history. Survey 18 We really need this bridge, it will help in so many ways. Survey 18 Get it done Survey 18 It will provide a faster way to the S+W hospital Survey 18 Would be a great plus to our area! Relieve some 281 congestion! Survey 18 Jacqie is a real nice/sweet person Survey 18 None Survey 18 Would be very useful for people in the area As a member of Wilderness Cove I am very concerned about privacy and noise-congestion Survey 18 within this new road proposal. I would hope our concerns could be alleviated with fruitful discussions. Thank you. Alex and Nance Oliver Wirtz Dam Rd would need to be widened to the same 4 lanes of highway as 1431 to Survey 18 accommodate the additional traffic. Wirtz Dam Rd is currently not adequate for the added traffic. It is a rough road as it is and has poor shoulders. Survey 18 Dream up something else and somewhere else to spend taxpayer's money! Survey 18 Local residents need better, more timely input to plans. I believe it could be done without much disturbance to our Cottonwood Shores park-like Survey 18 atmosphere. Survey 18 It would make getting from Kingsland to Marble Falls easier Survey 18 feliz porque lo piensan aser ho del puente

78 Survey 18 Gracias Survey question # 9 is slanted…it makes it appear that we are discouraged from using the Comment curent crossing of the Colorado River. An appropriate question would read: Is there anything card that discourages you from traveling between the north and south sides of the Colorado River Written For safety, security and quality of life reasons, the Wilderness Cove HOA is opposed to the comment; current routing of this project at the sourthermst portion of Wirtz Dam Road. If this portion mapped of the project can be re-routed eas and north away from our existing subdivision entrance, comment the Wilderness Cove HOA would no longer be opposed. Adopted position 10/24/16 #18 Why I am opposed to the construction of the Wirtz Dam bridge: - It is a poor use of taxpayers' money. The funds could be much better spent where they would have a greater impact (i.e. the Austin metro area) - The construction of the bridge has a very poor cost to benefit ratio. (see 2005 Feasibility study) -The use of the bridge puts more vehicles drivving through 2 school zones on 1431 (MFE and MFM) - EMS can better manage the placement of their emergency vehicles for 2nd responders, and can buy additional equipment for much less than this $15million+ bridge project written -If this project is one leg of a loop around Marble Falls, an extension of 1980 south would be a comment more efficient route. A river crossing at Starke Dam could also be considered if the goal is to route traffic around Marble Falls. -The construction of the Wirtz Dam bridge would have a negative ipact on the enjooyment of life for citizens in Wilderness Cove and Sunset Point by increasing travel time to everywhere in Marble Falls because of increased traffic and lower speed limits on Wirtz Dam road. There would also be increased noise and security issues. -The construction would possibly disturb the pelican roosting during migration through Lake LBJ Thank you written Benefit to the bridge making the access to the Horseshoe Bay area boat ramps for Bass Tour comment on Lake LBJ. Traveling from Burnet to the Horseshoe Bay area written Challenging to get to Horseshoe Bay, Marble Falls, and Kingsland comment Build bridge Wirtz Bridge and Road… yes written Also, build another bridge -- lower river down Marble Falls, TX comment Bridge and Road. Project # on Burnet County books (drawn map below written comment) Written We live on 508 Ridgeview in Cottonewood Shores. We are very much in favor of the bridge. comment; We feel that this avenue will help workers, firemen, EMS, and police quicker response in mapped emergency comment Mapped 1. Owners of 12 acres of land between Dogwood and Ridgeview in Cottonwood Shores• Comment Concerned about access to property/barriers• Still supportive of bridge 2. Horseshoe Bay area resident Mapped • Big concerns with increased traffic on 2147 Comment • Additional concerns include how this project will impact taxpayers 3. Resident of Wilderness Cove Mapped • Concerned about traffic coming to the RV Park Comment • Suggestion: widen Wirtz Dam Road, which is currently used by pedestrians, cyclists, and wildlife; ensure continued access to RV Park

79 4. Resident on Plenty Hills in Horseshoe Bay Mapped • Concerned about traffic on 2147 and additional traffic to/from 71 and 281 Comment • Concerned about how the project will impact the area overall

5. Resident of Wilderness Cove • Not opposed to bridge Mapped • Concerned about 1000s of cars coming through each day; safety; other impacts on people Comment live there • Question: Is there a way to keep traffic from coming in front of Wilderness Cove on Wirtz Dam Road? 6. Resident on Fault Line in Horseshoe Bay Mapped • Comment: Horseshoe Bay and the surrounding areas are not getting smaller; new Comment infrastructure, including roads and bridges, are needed 7. Resident on Lakeview in Cottonwood Shores Mapped • Concerned about noise from road, trash, and cleanliness Comment • Additional concerns about the budget for the project Mapped 8. Resident of Cottonwood Shores Comment • Concerned about noise and wildlife disruption Mapped 9. Frequent traveler along 2147 Comment • Comment: Improve 2147 all the way to the bridge; convert to a four-lane road Mapped 10. Resident of Cottonwood Shores Comment • Question: Are you going to add a stoplight at 2147 and Wirtz Dam Road? 11. Truck in Marble Falls Mapped • Question: How much money would it cost to reroute trucks? Comment • Suggestions: reroute truck traffic to proposed bridge; 281 should be the local route Mapped 12. Resident of Marble Falls Comment • Suggestion: consider an alternate route, east of 281, to redirect traffic around Marble Falls 13. Resident of Wilderness Cove Mapped • Opposed to current routing of project Comment • Suggestion: flatten and shorten the route which currently veers towards Wilderness Cove on Wirtz Dam Road; move route/traffic away from Wilderness Cove 14. Resident of Cottonwood Shores Mapped • Concerned with the environmental impact on Lake Marble Falls; with two bridges crossing a Comment small lake; noise; migratory birds, etc. Mapped 15. Resident of Spicewood • River crossing at the narrows between 1431 and 71 thru Comment Spicewood would create a huge financial benefit for residents in the Spicewood area Emailed I believe the costs out weigh the benefits of this proposal and do not recommend the bridge comment get built. Another bridge crossing in the Marble Falls Metro area is inevitable at some point. We should be constructing a crossing at Wirtz Dam now, as opposed to later. The opportunity to be proactive with this project has Emailed passed. Given the current comment state of congestion at the intersection of 2147 and 281, we are now being reactive. Every day that goes by, the 2147-281 situation is going to get worse. This is the single most important project, that we should even be considering right now. Hopefully this gets done sooner rather than later.

80 I attended the public meeting this evening on the Wirtz Dam Road - in the very biased presentation by CAMPO it was noted that more than 80% of the 'survey' respondents (can't remember the exact percentage Emailed but it seemed very high). comment Where did this figure come from since the survey does not have a 'yes or no' response to a question of 'do you think the Wirtz Dam crossing is beneficial? What responses are you reporting to support the boasting that this high percentage 'wants' this crossing? Thank you in advance for your response. Emailed Can you tell me what the forecasted traffic would be from 1431 to Highway 71 if road behind comment the dam were constructed? Thank you Emailed What have you estimated the increased traffic would be through Horseshoe Bay from 1431 comment to Hwy 71 if the bridge were built? Strongly in favor of Wirtz Dam Road. Not only would it provide a needed alternate route for Emailed some 6000 residents of the Horseshoe Bay area, but would also alleviate a much overloaded comment Highway 281 through Marble Falls.

Appendix E: Materials xPublic Meeting Exhibits xPublic Meeting PowerPoint xFact Sheet xPublic Meeting Flyer xContact Cards

82 WIRTZ DAM ROAD Welcome! Community Outreach Program

Open House Purpose • Learn about the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program

• Ask questions about the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program

• Complete a survey and provide comments on the program

Thank you for being involved in the Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program!

83 WIRTZ DAM ROAD Program Goals Community Outreach Program

• Gather input on a potential new bridge crossing near Wirtz Dam Road • Create public awareness and participation • Share relevant information • Engage a variety of stakeholders • Maintain an open and transparent process • Provide an easily accessible program

84 WIRTZ DAM Get Involved and ROAD Community Outreach ProgramShare Your Thoughts

Community Events and Meetings Visit with our team in the community or invite us to your event.

Take a Survey Share General Participate Online Comments and Thoughts Available online and at all meetings. Visit the project website. Share the survey with your neighbors Complete a comment card at a www.CampoTexas.org/WirtzDam and friends! meeting or email any general comments and questions. Follow us and share information on Hard copies available. Facebook. *Comments always welcome, but due by November 27, 2016 to be included in the *The survey closes November 27, 2016. Sign up for email updates. report.

85 WIRTZ DAM Program Progress ROAD Community Outreach Program and Schedule

Progress • 2 Public Open Houses

• 10 Community Events • 500+ Surveys

• 7 Community Meetings • 500+ General Comments

Schedule = We are here

August September October November December

Project Begins OUTREACH Planning and Report Research Community Meetings • Surveys • Public Meeting Share What We Heard

86 WIRTZ DAM ROAD Next Steps Community Outreach Program

• October 26 and November 3 - Open Houses

• November 21 - Complete Final Round of Community Meetings

• November 27 - Survey Closes and Comments Due

• December - Share Report of All Public Input Gathered

CAMPO, Burnet County, and TxDOT will take public input into consideration along with the safety needs and mobility considerations in planning for the future.

87 OPEN HOUSE

Thursday, November 3, 2016 Lakeside Pavilion

88 AGENDA

Welcome

CAMPO Overview

Program Overview

Next Steps

Questions

89 CAMPO OVERVIEW

CAMPO Region

Six counties encompassing 5,302 square miles 2 million people 12,420 lane miles of roadway 44.6 million miles traveled by vehicles every day 31.2 million transit boardings each year

90 CAMPO OVERVIEW

MPO Highlights

Required in areas 50,000+ population Transportation Policy Board Develops a multi-modal, 20-year regional transportation plan

Sets policy and guides the Technical CAMPO Executive Advisory Executive transportation planning process Committee Committee Director Provides a forum for project selection by local officials for federal funds

91 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Highland Lakes Area considerations include: DISTANCE BETWEEN RIVER CROSSINGS Population growth Tourism growth and seasonal traffic Distance between crossings US 281 Traffic flow and circulation around Wirtz Dam Partnership with CAMPO, Burnet County, and TxDOT to gather input on a potential new bridge crossing near Wirtz Dam Road

92 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Community Outreach Activities

17 Community Meetings & Events 2 Public Meetings Online Engagement (online surveys, social media updates, email updates, and sharing on partner webpages) Collecting Input via Surveys and General Comments

All public input will be shared in a final report

93 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Over 500 Surveys and Almost 500 Comments

Initial Input: What is the greatest transportation need: o 35% Bridges and river crossing o 31% Roads Approximately 82% believe a new crossing near Wirtz Dam Road would be beneficial

94 PROGRAM OVERVIEW

August September October November December

Project Begins OUTREACH Planning and Report Research Community Meetings Ɣ Surveys Ɣ Public Meetings Share What We Heard

= WE ARE HERE

95 NEXT STEPS

Open House Meetings – October 26 and November 3 Final community meetings –November 21 Survey closes –November 27 Report on community input – December

96 QUESTIONS?

97 THANK YOU!

Stay engaged with the outreach team:

(512) 234-0204 www.campotexas.org/wirtzdam [email protected] Sign Up for Email Updates Follow CAMPO

98 WIRTZ FACT SHEET DAM ROAD Community Outreach Program HISTORY

The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program is a public engagement 1952: Wirtz Dam process to gather community input on an additional river crossing near Wirtz construction completed Dam Road. The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is leading this outreach program and working closely with other partners 1974: Wirtz Dam Road including Burnet County and TxDOT. Bridge included in the Burnet County Transportation Plan A FEW CONSIDERATIONS 2005: Feasibility Study Area partners are interested in taking advantage of this opportunity to plan completed indicating that a ahead for the growing needs of the community by considering growth bridge at Wirtz Dam would projections, growth in tourism and seasonal traffic, existing river crossings, be beneficial and traffic flow in the area. US 281 is a major north-south thoroughfare that will be limited in supporting the expected growth. An additional river 2015: Burnet County, crossing near Wirtz Dam Road could provide an alternative for local traffic in TxDOT, and CAMPO identify the future. need to evaluate an additional crossing by first gathering community input Distance Between River Crossings 2016: Community Outreach Kingsland Program NORTH SIDE BURNET 12 mi. / 18 min. 2900 COUNTY 1431 POPULATION Marble PROJECTED GROWTH Wirtz Dam Rd. Falls 73,673 64,268 2147 53,114 N SOUTH SIDE 71 42,739 24 mi. / 25 min.

= Wirtz Dam = Current River Crossings

2010 2020 2030 2040

The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is the agency that coordinates regional planning efforts and approves the use of federal transportationfunds in CAMPO’s six-county region – Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson counties. CAMPO is responsible for coordinating with regional agencies and local governments to develop a 20+ year long-range plan and a four-year program of projects. 99 HOW TO GET INVOLVED

Wednesday, October 26, 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. ATTEND A Thursday, November 3, 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. Quail Point Community Center PUBLIC Lakeside Pavilion 107 Twilight Lane OPEN 307 Buena Vista Drive Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657 Marble Falls, TX 78654 HOUSE *brief presentation at 6 p.m. *brief presentation at 6 p.m.

INVITE US TO YOUR COMMUNITY If you are affiliated with a group, neighborhood, or organization that meets regularly, we can give presentations, distribute information, or simply visit about the program.

RECEIVE UPDATES If you are interested in receiving program updates and meeting information, please share your email address.

SEND COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS Have questions or comments? Send them our way and we will do our best to provide additional information for you! All general comments received via email, at meetings, and in the survey will be included in our final report.

TAKE OUR SURVEY It takes less than 10 minutes and helps us understand your thoughts and preferences. Visit the project website to complete the survey.

August September October November December

Project Begins OUTREACH Planning and Report Research Community Meetings • Surveys • Public Meeting Share What We Heard

WHAT HAPPENS All input and comments will be gathered into a report that will be shared in late 2016. AFTER COMMUNITY Then CAMPO, Burnet County, and TxDOT will work together to determine the next steps. OUTREACH? If this study moves forward the next step would most likely be an environmental study.

If there is a need for another bridge, funding would most likely come from several WHO WILL FUND federal sources and local contributions. Depending how this moves forward, this most THIS BRIDGE? likely would not affect resident taxes.

WHO WILL Again, this is something that will have to be decided in the future. It most likely would MAINTAIN THIS be a combination of County and TxDOT maintenance. BRIDGE?

CONTACT INFORMATION (512) 234-0204 [email protected] www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad 100 WIRTZ LOS DATOS DAM ROAD El Programa de Alcance de la Comunidad LA HISTORIA El Programa de Alcance de la Comunidad de Wirtz Dam Road es un proceso 1952: Se terminó la para obtener las opiniones de la comunidad sobre la posibilidad de un nuevo construcción de la presa de cruce del Río Colorado cerca de Wirtz Dam Road. La Organización de Wirtz Planificación Metropolitana del Área del Capital (CAMPO) está liderando este programa y trabajando estrechamente con otros socios incluyendo el 1974: El puente de Wirtz Dam Road fue incluido en el plan de Condado de Burnet y TxDOT. transportación del condado de Burnet ALGUNAS CONSIDERACIONES Los socios locales están interesados de aprovechar esta oportunidad para 2005: Se completó un Estudio hacer planes sobre las necesidades crecientes de la comunidad. Están de Factibilidad que demostró que un puente cerca de Wirtz considerando las proyecciones de crecimiento, el crecimiento en el turismo y Dam Road sería beneficioso el tráfico de temporada, los cruces existentes del río, y el flujo de tráfico en la zona. US 281 es un paso mayor, norte a sur, que será incapaz de soportar el 2015: El condado de Burnet, crecimiento esperado en los años que vienen. Un nuevo cruce del río cerca TxDOT y CAMPO identificaron una necesidad de evaluar otro de Wirtz Dam Road puede proporcionar otra alternativa para el tráfico local cruce del río por primariamente en el futuro. recopilando las aportaciones de la comunidad

La Distancia entre Los Cruces Del Río 2016: El Programa de Alcance Kingsland LA POBLACIÓN de la Comunidad DEL CONDADO LADO NORTE 12 mi. / 18 min. DE BURNET 2900 EL CRECIMIENTO PROYECTADO 1431 Marble Wirtz Dam Rd. 73,673 Falls 64,268 53,114

2147 42,739 N LADO SUR 71 24 mi. / 25 min.

= Wirtz Dam = Cruces Existentes del Río 2010 2020 2030 2040

La Organización de Planificación del Metropolitana Área del Capital (CAMPO) es la agencia que coordina esfuerzos de planificación regional y aprueba el uso de fondos federales de transportación en su región de seis condados – Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, y Williamson. CAMPO es responsable para la coordinación de agencias regionales y gobiernos locales para desarrollar un planeo de largo vista para un periodo más de 20 años y un programa de proyectos de 4 años. 101 COMO PUEDE INVOLCARSE miércoles, el 26 de octubre, 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. ASISTA jueves, el 3 de noviembre, 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. Quail Point Community Center A UNA Lakeside Pavillion 107 Twilight Lane REUNION 307 Buena Vista Drive Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657 Marble Falls, TX 78654 PUBLICA *presentación breve a las 6 p.m. *presentación breve a las 6 p.m.

INVÍTENOS A SU COMUNIDAD Si usted está afiliado con un grupo, barrio, u organización que reúne regularmente, podemos dar presentaciones, distribuir información, o simplemente hablar con usteds sobre el programa.

RECIBA ACTUALIZACIONES Si usted está interesado en recibir actualizaciones del programa e información de reuniones, por favor comparte su dirección de correo electrónico con nosotros.

ENVÍE COMENTARIOS Y PREGUNTAS ¿Tiene preguntas o comentarios? ¡Envíelos a nosotros, e intentamos a proveer información adicional para usted! Todos los comentarios recibidos por correo electrónico, en las reuniones, y en la encuesta serán incluidos en nuestro reporte final.

TOME NUESTRA ENCUESTA La encuesta dura menos de 10 minutos y nos ayuda de entender sus preferencias y pensamientos. Visite el sitio web del proyecto para cumplir la encuesta. agosto septiembre octubre noviembre diciembre

Empieza el proyecto ALCANCE Planificación Reporte e investigación Reuniones de la comunidad • Encuestas • Reunión Pública Compartiendo lo que escuchamos

Todos los comentarios y aportaciones serán recopilados en un reporte que se compartirá al final ¿Qué pasa después del 2016. Luego CAMPO, el condado de Burnet, and TxDOT trabajarán juntos para determinar los del alcance de la siguientes pasos. Si este estudio progresará, el primer paso probablemente sería un estudio comunidad? ambiental.

Si haya una necesidad para otro puente, la fundación probablemente vendría de varias fuentes ¿Quién va a financiar federales y contribuidores privados. Dependiente en como progresa el proyecto, probablemente el puente? no se afectará los impuestos de los residentes.

¿Quién va a La responsabilidad de mantención será determinada en el futuro. Lo más probable es una mantener el puente? combinación de mantención por el condado y TxDOT.

INFORMACIÓN DE CONTACTO (512) 234-0204 [email protected] www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad 102 What do you think WIRTZ about a new bridge DAM ROAD at Wirtz Dam Road? Community Outreach Program

ATTEND A PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE

Wednesday, October 26 Thursday, November 3 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. Quail Point Community Center Lakeside Pavilion 107 Twilight Lane 307 Buena Vista Drive Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657 Marble Falls, TX 78654 *brief presentation at 6 p.m. for both meetings

THERE ARE SEVERAL WAYS TO GET INVOLVED

RECEIVE UPDATES If you are interested in receiving program updates and meeting information, please share your email address.

TAKE OUR SURVEY It takes less than 10 minutes and helps us understand your thoughts and preferences. Visit the project website to complete the survey.

CONTACT INFORMATION (512) 234-0204 [email protected] www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad 103 ¿Qué opina usted de WIRTZ un puente nuevo en DAM ROAD Wirtz Dam Road? Community Outreach Program

ASISTA A UNA REUNION PÚBLICA

miércoles, el 26 de octubre, jueves, el 3 de noviembre, 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. Quail Point Community Center Lakeside Pavillion 107 Twilight Lane 307 Buena Vista Drive Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657 Marble Falls, TX 78654

*presentación breve a las 6 p.m. para ambas reuniones

HAY VARIAS MANERAS DE INVOLCRARSE

RECIBA ACTUALIZACIONES Si usted está interesado en recibir actualizaciones del programa e información de reuniones, por favor comparte su dirección de correo electrónico.

TOME NUESTRA ENCUESTA La encuesta dura menos de 10 minutos y nos ayuda de entender sus preferencias y pensamientos. Visite el sitio web del proyecto para cumplir la encuesta.

INFORMACIÓN DE CONTACTO (512) 234-0204 [email protected] www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad 104 WIRTZ CONTACT WIRTZ CONTACT DAM CARD DAM CARD ROAD ROAD Community Outreach Program Community Outreach Program

The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program The Wirtz Dam Road Community Outreach Program is a public engagement process to gather is a public engagement process to gather community input on an additional river crossing community input on an additional river crossing near Wirtz Dam Road. The Capital Area Metropolitan near Wirtz Dam Road. The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is leading this Planning Organization (CAMPO) is leading this program and working closely with other partners program and working closely with other partners including Burnet County and TxDOT. including Burnet County and TxDOT.

WIRTZ CONTACT WIRTZ CONTACT DAM CARD DAM CARD ROAD ROAD Community Outreach Program Community Outreach Program

105 CONTACT INFORMATION CONTACT INFORMATION (512) 234-0204 (512) 234-0204 [email protected] [email protected]

Visit the website to take our survey and share your input. Visit the website to take our survey and share your input. www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad

CONTACT INFORMATION CONTACT INFORMATION (512) 234-0204 (512) 234-0204 [email protected] [email protected]

Visit the website to take our survey and share your input. Visit the website to take our survey and share your input. www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad

CONTACT INFORMATION CONTACT INFORMATION (512) 234-0204 (512) 234-0204 [email protected] [email protected]

Visit the website to take our survey and share your input. Visit the website to take our survey and share your input. www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad www.campotexas.org/wirtzdamroad

106

Appendix F: Media xAdvertisement xTear Sheets

107 Tell us what you think about a new bridge near Wirtz Dam Road

ATTEND A PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE

Both meetings are from 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. (brief presentation at 6:00 p.m.)

Wednesday, October 26 Thursday, November 3 Quail Point Community Center Lakeside Pavilion 107 Twilight Lane 307 Buena Vista Drive Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657 Marble Falls, TX 78654

TAKE OUR QUICK SURVEY

Available at www.campotexas.org/wirtzdam

(512) 234-0204 WIRTZ [email protected] DAM ROAD www.campotexas.org/wirtzdam Community Outreach Program

The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) is leading a Community Outreach Program to gather input on an additional river crossing near Wirtz Dam Road. Get involved and share your thoughts as we plan for the future. 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 Marble Falls, Texas The Highlander Tuesday, November 1, 2016 Page 3 News Free car seat inspections 0DNLQJ VXUH QR FKLOG LV LQMXUHGDQDXWRDFFLGHQWLVWKH JRDORIWKHFDUVHDWLQVSHFWLRQ HYHQW RI 0DUEOH )DOOV $UHD (PHUJHQF\ 0HGLFDO 6HUYLFH 0)$(06 RQ6DWXUGD\1RY 7KH0)$(06LVVFKHGXO- LQJ DSSRLQWPHQWV EHIRUH SP IRU FDU VHDW LQVSHFWLRQ DQG ¿WWLQJ DW WKHLU PDLQ VWD- WLRQ,QGXVWULDO%RXOHYDUG LQ0DUEOH)DOOV 7KHQXPEHUWRFDOOLV 7KH VHUYLFH LV IUHH DQG WKH 0)$(06 FDQ KHOS SURYLGHDVHDWIRUIDPLOLHVWKDW FDQQRWDIIRUGRQH Alexandria Randolph/Highland Lakes Newspapers (YHU\ FKLOG \RXQJHU WKDQ A Jeep rollover on Ranch to Market Road 1431 on Saturday, Oct. 29 at just before 10 p.m. DJH HLJKW DQG VKRUWHU WKDQ VHQWRQHPDQWRWKHKRVSLWDO0DUEOH)DOOV9ROXQWHHU)LUH'HSDUWPHQWRIÀFLDOVVDLG7KH IRXUIHHWQLQHLQFKHV WDOO \RXQJPDQLQKLVHDUO\WZHQWLHVVXIIHUHGDUHSRUWHGIUDFWXUHGVNXOOZKHQKHÁLSSHGKLV WUDYHOLQDIHGHUDOO\DSSURYHG vehicle after veering out of the eastbound lane, overcorrecting, and rolling into a deep FKLOGFDUVHDW)LQHVIURP ditch on the right-hand side of the roadway at a curve just a little past County Road 341. IRUWKH¿UVWRIIHQVHXSWR 2IÀFLDOV VDLG 0DUEOH )DOOV$UHD (06 WUDQVSRUWHG WKH PDQ WR 6W 'DYLG·V 6RXWK$XVWLQ IRUVXEVHTXHQWRIIHQVHVDUHOLW- Medical Center with a suspected head injury. His status is unknown at this time. WOHFRPSDUHGWRWKHKHDUWDFKH RILQMXU\RUGHDWKRIDFKLOG ‘Ford’ is the best in Texas Alexandria Randolph/ Highland Lakes Newspapers Ford Hall, a three-year-old from Spicewood, points out a painting of a Ford truck to JUDQGPD $QQH +DQQDÀQ DW the Spicewood Arts Round- Up on Saturday morning, Oct. 29. He’s seen !!(&)'*$(' # $(' ÀUH« #)% #% %'+"$ Alexandria Randolph/ Highland Lakes Newspapers Todd Westbrook, right, a Spicewood musician, serenaded visitors to the annual Spicewood Arts Round-up with songs by James Taylor on Saturday.

ZLOOEHRSHQORQJHUKRXUV “The machine gives a Thursday, November 3 D GD\ IURP DP SP ZDUQLQJ,WVD\V\RXKDYHMXVW Ballots GXULQJWKHVHFRQGZHHNRIHDU- XQVHOHFWHGDVWUDLJKWSDUW\YRWH Lakeside Pavilion From Page 1 O\YRWLQJ EXWYRWHUVDUHFRQIXVHGZKHQ No fraud WKH\ VHH WKH\ KDYHQ¶W YRWHG EHGLVDEOHGRUEHFRQ¿QHGWR )HUJXVRQKDV¿HOGHGDIHZ IRU3UHVLGHQWRQWKHVXPPDU\ 307 Buena Vista Drive MDLO EXW RWKHUZLVH HOLJLEOH WR IUDQWLFFDOOVDERXWYRWLQJ VFUHHQ´ YRWH )RUPDO DSSOLFDWLRQV IRU ³:KHQ SHRSOH ERRERRHG ³7KHQWKHUXPRUVÀ\´VDLG Marble Falls, TX 78654 DEDOORWE\PDLOFDQEHGRZQ- ORDGHGDQGVHQWWRFRXQW\HDUO\ RQ WKHLU RZQ EDOORW WKH\ )HUJXVRQ ZLWK D SDWLHQW VLJK YRWLQJFOHUNVE\ID[RUHPDLO WKRXJKWWKHPDFKLQHGLGLW´KH ³6RPH SHRSOH ZKR KDG QR open house 4:00 - 7:00 p.m. (brief presentation at 6:00 p.m.) $OO DSSOLFDWLRQV PXVW EH VDLG ³,Q HYHU\ VLQJOH FDVH LW WURXEOHZDQWWRKHDUDERXWWKH ZDVVRPHWKLQJWKH\GLG/XFN- VWRU\WKH\KHDUG´ UHFHLYHG QRW SRVWPDUNHG E\ LO\ LQ HYHU\ FDVH WKH\ DVNHG 7KH %XUQHW &RXQW\ (OHF 2FW9RWHUVZKRKDYHDS- - SOLHG EXW KDYH QRW UHFHLYHG IRUKHOS,WKLQN´ WLRQV 2I¿FH WKHLU EDOORW VKRXOG FDOO WKHLU 7KHPRVWFRPPRQHUURULV LVORFDWHGLQWKHUHFRUGVEXLOG- FRXQW\ HOHFWLRQ¶V RI¿FH DQG QRW QHZ WR WKLV HOHFWLRQ )HU- LQJ EHKLQG WKH %XUQHW &RXQ- VSHDNWRWKHHDUO\YRWLQJFOHUN JXVRQ H[SODLQHG ,W SHUWDLQV W\ &RXUWKRXVH 1RUWK $QQH[ SULPDULO\ WR WKRVH YRWLQJ D (DVW3RON6WUHHWLQ%XU- WRFKHFNWKHVWDWXV VWUDLJKWWLFNHW QHW ,W LV RSHQ DP SP 9RWHU LQIRUPDWLRQ FDQ ³:KHQ D SHUVRQ YRWHV D 0RQGD\)ULGD\ 7KH HPDLO EH IRXQG RQOLQH DW ZZZ9R- Available at WH7H[DVJRY RU E\ FDOOLQJ VWUDLJKW WLFNHW WKH PDFKLQH DGGUHVV LV HOHFWLRQV#EXUQ- 927( ZLOOLQVWDQWO\PDUNWKHZKROH HWFRXQW\WH[DVRUJ DQG FRP- www.campotexas.org/wirtzdam 7KHSROOVZLOOEHRSHQIRU EDOORW DQG MXPS EDFN WR WKH SOHWHYRWHULQIRUPDWLRQFDQEH HDUO\YRWLQJDW%XUQHW&RXQW\ SUHVLGHQWLDOEDOORW´KHVDLG IRXQGRQWKH³(OHFWLRQV´SDJH &RXUWKRXVH DQG 0DUEOH )DOOV ³3HRSOH ZDQW WR RU WKLQN XQGHUWKH³'HSDUWPHQWV´WDEOH &RXUWKRXVH $QQH[ RQ 6DWXU WKH\KDYHWRFOLFNRQFHPRUH RIWKH%XUQHW&RXQW\ZHEVLWH - %XW WKH VHFRQG WLPH LW XQ- ZZZ%XUQHW&RXQW\7H[DVRUJ GD\ IURP DP SP DQG FKHFNVWKHYRWH (512) 234-0204 WHUWKHFROOLVLRQ LQJWKDWOHDGWRWKHVHWWOHPHQW ³,W LV D YHU\ RGG FLUFXP- RIWKLVFDVH Young VWDQFH ZKHQ WKH GHIHQGDQW LQ ³,FHUWDLQO\DSSUHFLDWH3D From Page 1 - [email protected] D FDVH FDXVHV WKH GDPDJH WR WULFLDDQG7HG

129 Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Information

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Kelly Porter, Regional Planning Manager Agenda Item: 10 Subject: Presentation and Update on the 2045 Regional Active Transportation Plan

RECOMMENDATION None. This item is for informational purposes only.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2045 Regional Active Transportation Plan (RATP) seeks to provide a shared vision for the development of a functional, useful, and safe network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities for the CAMPO region. In early Fall 2016, CAMPO staff held local government outreach meetings throughout the region to gather input on bicycle and pedestrian facility needs, verify the existing networks, and identify dangerous intersections and crossings.

In December 2016, a Wikimap was released to provide an interactive mapping tool for the public to provide input on facility needs, and CAMPO staff is currently administering a survey through February 2017. This survey will generate an in-depth profile of bicycle and pedestrian facility users and provide a regional understanding of bicycle and pedestrian usage. CAMPO has received over 600 survey responses to date.

Government and community outreach meetings are scheduled for early 2017 and will allow another avenue for the public to comment on identified bicycle and pedestrian needs and dangerous intersections as well as confirm the accuracy of the current data on existing facilities.

FINANCIAL IMPACT None.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The purpose of the 2045 RATP is to provide a shared vision for the development of a functional, useful, and safe network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and amenities for the CAMPO Region. The plan will elaborate on concepts in the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan and inform development of the 2045 Regional Transportation Plan. Once completed, the RATP will include an inventory bicycle lanes and sidewalks; current data on safety, and related policies; a 2045 vision network; guidance and recommendations on facility design and policy; and an implementation plan with project and policy priorities for the next 25 years. The consultant team has completed a comprehensive review of existing studies, plans, and reports. They are currently working with CAMPO staff to gather information on bicycle and pedestrian needs through an online Wikimap, surveys, and government/community outreach meetings. This information will be used to develop the draft active transportation vision network and best practices guide.

A sub-component of the RATP is the Near Northwest Corridor case study, an analysis of the current pedestrian and bicycle connections along a ½ mile radius of the 183 Corridor stretching from MoPac in the south to Brushy Creek Road in the north. The plan incorporates input from stakeholder outreach, public meetings, and focus groups, and is steered by the Active Transportation Advisory Committee.

Next steps include: a series of public meetings during January and February 2017, completion of an existing conditions report, and development of a vision network. These components will help inform identification of best practices for a pattern book and an implementation plan. The final report will be completed by Summer 2017.

2017 Meeting Dates:

January 23 – Lakeside Pavilion, Marble Falls January 24 – Cedar Park Library, Cedar Park January 25 – Fleming Community Center, Elgin January 25 – Eugene Clark Library, Lockhart January 26 – Texas State University LBJ Student Center, San Marcos January 30 – ACC Highland Business Center Board Room, Austin January 31 – Taylor Public Library, Taylor February 1 – Wimberley Community Center, Wimberley February 2 – Travis County Fire & Rescue Station, Del Valle February 3 – Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Austin

All meetings are from 2pm to 3pm for local governments and 4pm to 7pm for the public. The meeting at the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired is from 10am to 2pm and Del Valle is from 2pm to 7pm. Those two meetings will not have a local government component.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS None Date: January 9, 2017 Continued From: N/A Action Requested: Information

To: Transportation Policy Board From: Mr. Jim Harvey, Alliance Transportation Group Agenda Item: 11 Subject: Presentation of the Bastrop County Transportation Plan

RECOMMENDATION None. This item is for informational purposes only.

PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to provide a brief overview and status report of the Bastrop County Transportation Plan (BCTP) being carried out by the County with support from CAMPO through a TxDOT advanced funding agreement. The BCTP planning process is designed to support local goals, but also closely tracks the CAMPO regional transportation planning process to better understand the County transportation system within the broader regional context and to ensure that the plan supports CAMPO regional goals.

FINANCIAL IMPACT The BCTP was funded through with $520,793 Surface Transportation Program-Metropolitan Mobility and $130,198 State Funds.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The Bastrop County Transportation Plan is being developed as a multimodal plan that balances preservation and wise use of existing assets with strategies for achieving the vision of growth, economic vitality and quality of place for current and future residents and business owners.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS None.