►
From YouTube: 12-17-18 Metropolitan Planning Organization
Description
12-17-18 Metropolitan Planning Organization
A
B
A
A
There's
a
motion.
Second,
let's
take
a
vote,
all
those
in
favor
aye,
okay,
the
motion
passes
it's
good
item
item
V
received
public
testimony
and
initiated
20
day
public
review
and
comment
period
on
the
proposed
adoption
of
the
pavement
bridge
and
travel
time,
reliability,
performance
measures
and
targets
established
by
Texas
Department
of
Transportation,
as
required
by
fixing
America's
Surface
Transportation
Act
of
2015
fast,
and
that
which
are
all
listed
here
so.
C
A
So
we're
now
receiving
public
testimony
on
on
items,
item
B.
We
all
like
to
move
to
also
receive
testimony
on
items
C
and
D,
so
moved.
Second,
all
right.
So
I
motion
as
amended.
Let's
take
a
vote
all
those
in
favor,
okay,
so
we're
now
receiving
public
testimony
on
items
B,
C
and
D.
Anyone
here
wish
to
provide
testimony.
B
B
B
A
B
A
There
a
motion:
loser
emotional,
moved.
Okay,
second,
is
there
a
second?
Second
all
right,
there's
a
motion,
a
second
all,
those
in
favor
all
right,
all
right!
So
moving
on
to
item,
let's
see
D
movie
on
item
item
D
it's
before
us,
but
it
is
a
motion
to
authorize
request
to
FHWA
for
the
reclassification
of
highway.
Fm
33
38
las
the
endless
Road
from
FM
1472
to
state
highway
255.
The
highway
must
be
reclassified
from
rural
minor
collector
to
rural
major
collector
in
order
to
qualify
for
federal
construction
funds.
A
B
C
A
B
I
have
an
update
on
it
on
July
16th,
the
resolution
number
28,
our
96
came
before
the
City
Council
and
was
approved,
and
it
authorized
the
city
manager
to
execute
a
380
agreement
relating
to
the
development
of
a
roadway
traversing,
approximately
5,000
135
acres,
located
west
of
I-35
at
the
Unitec
overpass
across
the
HR
trust
property
of
fm14
72,
that's
mines,
Road
and
providing
for
effective
date.
That
document
is
with
the
with
the
the
the
person
with
which
the
city
has
made
the
agreement
with
vet
tech
force.
B
D
Yes,
sir,
on
the
routier
section
of
the
road,
just
letting
you
know
that
we
please
I'm.
Sorry,
yes,
of
course,
Luis
Potosi,
yeah,
webb
county
engineer
allowed
the
record
just
letting
you
know
that
on
the
Reuther
side
of
this
project
that
we
have
also
received
notice
to
proceed
from
tech,
stop
accepting
our
proposed
responsible
person
in
charge
and
project
manager,
we're
doing
some
of
the
paperwork
required
on
the
checklists
and
the
various
different
things
to
make
sure
that
we're
going
forward.
We've
spoken
to
various
people
that
text
on
and
moving
forward
all.
B
D
C
D
D
One
three
or
four
months
ago
that
started
back
then
right,
we'll
move
the
projections
forward
for
the
period
of
time
that
it
took
to
get
to
that
point
you
should
be
receiving.
We
will
be
sending
the
text
not
a
an
adjusted
project
timeline
which
will
be
making
public
to
you
of
I
would
imagine
by
the
next
media.
We
can
have
okay.
C
D
C
A
F
Rodriguez
will
text
yeah?
Yes,
under
our
look,
we
have.
The
consultant
was
actually
hired
a
couple
of
months
ago
to
start
revisiting
our
schematic
that
we
have
right
now,
so
they
they
are
collecting
all
the
data
that
we
have
exists
in
all
our
records,
so
they
can't
compile
and
make
any
revisions
as
necessary.
F
E
F
We
had
one
before
done
about
2007
I
want
to
say
thousand
seven
thousand
eight,
but
then
that
will
project
the
probably
was
put
on
hold
and
and
now
they're
rebuilding.
That
is
schematic
that
alignment
and
making
sure
is
still
viable.
We
had
some
issues
on
the
South
portion
of
the
alignment.
Did
you
knew
all
the
wells,
and
so
we
got
to
revisit
that
and
get
back
with
the
property
owners
and.
H
E
F
F
F
H
Taking
that
in
consideration-
and
we
actually
have
some
lat/longs
as
to
where
bridge
4
or
5
is
being
proposed,
and
so
that
information
is
being
shared
with
Jacobs,
the
other
good
thing
is
that
you
know
now
we
have
a
federal
Lorado
and
we
have
a
lot
of
a
committee
mm-hmm.
There
are
monthly
conference
calls
and
projects
on
both
sides
of
the
border
are
being
shared
amongst
that
group.
H
With
both
you
know,
state
and
federal
officials
of
Mexico
state
and
federal
officials
in
the
United
States,
so
that
we
are
in
the
same
page
so
that
we're
not
blindly
developing
projects
without
the
other
country
knowing
and
other
state
agencies
and
federal
agencies,
knowing
what
we're
all
working
on
so
we're
we're
optimistic
that
the
and
I
know
mr.
Garcia
was
in
our
last
conference
call
so
we're
optimistic
that
this
monthly
coordination
is
going
to
do
just
that.
It's
gonna
have
that
communication.
You
know,
I
have
this
project
coming
up.
C
What
just
to
you,
but
anybody
in
this
room
who
thinks
they
might
have
the
answer,
this
question,
what
action
or
agenda
items
need
to
be
had
as
it
relates
to
you
know
what
should
this
NPO
be
doing
proactively
to
assist
this
Jacobs
outfit?
What
agenda
items
do
we
need
to
bring
forward?
What
sort
of
approval
do
we
need
moving
forward
so
that
where
we
are
in
fact
doing
what
you're
saying
that
they're
doing
right.
H
Now
you
know,
as
Jacobs
continues
to
develop.
You
know
the
study
of
slash
schematic.
Then
we
will
be
coming
to
the
MPO
with
with
updates
and
then
at
that
time.
I
guess
you
know
we're
relying
the
NPO
to
help
guide
the
project
and
make
sure
that
you
know
where
everything's
on
the
right
track.
If
you
think
any
revisions
need
to
be
made,
changes,
that's
sort
of
I
guess
that
that's
feedback
and
communication
is
what
we
need
for.
H
Footed,
if
eventually,
you
know
funding
the
outer
loop
and
you
know
we're
looking
at
could
be
you
know
if
we
if
it's
coincided,
if
we
wait
to
coincide
with
bridge
for
five
you're
looking
at
you
know
about
ten
years
out.
There
are
segments,
though
that
can
be
constructed
first
like
let's
just
say
the
second
second,
between
359
and
59.
Well,
that
segments
you
we
can
say
well.
If
there's
available,
funding
identified
construction
dollars,
then
perhaps
that
segment
can
be
constructed.
H
C
I
G
G
H
I
I
H
I
There's
a
sequence-
and
you
know
you
need
to
know
what
your
alignment
is
and
all
that
but
I
mean
you're
gonna.
Have
your
schematic
and
you're
gonna
have
your
environmental
and
so
forth?
You
know
you,
you
can
put
it
a
resolution
out
there,
I
mean
if
you
you
want
to
I,
mean
I.
Think
the
mayor
of
fact
that
you've
encouraged
TxDOT
to
do.
That
is
a
pretty
good
sign
that
you
know
you're
interested
in
that
the.
C
Reason
I
asked-
and
it
seems
kind
of
you
know
you
silly
question,
or
maybe
a
fool's
errand,
but
the
reason
I
ask
is
is
just
that.
Historically,
there
has
been
a
of
war
between
its
look,
the
location
and
whether
it
should
be
here
or
there,
and
just
to
kind
of
clear
the
air
that
you
know
unequivocally.
What
we're
saying
now
as
an
MPO
as
a
council
as
a
county,
is
that
we
get
it
the
best
location
would
would
be
somewhere
other
than
the
already
beleaguered.
I
B
I
80%
of
the
of
that
is
outside
the
MPO
boundaries.
It's
in
the
county,
so
at
a
minimum
I
think
the
nvo
has
to
text
off
hey.
Can
we
get
this
study
done?
I?
Think
that's
in
process
once
that
alignment
comes
up,
then
I
think
you're
gonna
have
an
issue
of
everybody
wanting
to
look
at
it
and
there
may
be
tweaks
where
hey
I,
don't
want
to
go
in
here.
I
want
to
move
over
here,
and
this
may
be
better.
This
means
because
remember
you're
gonna
come
up
with
a
bill.
I
I
B
I
Gonna
have
new
public
process
and
all
of
that,
so
until
that
happens,
you
don't
even
have
a
verified
aligned.
Okay,
so
you're
gonna
put
a
resolution
out
there
saying
what
we
we
support
this
thing.
Well,
it's
obvious:
once
you
get
that
alignment,
then
the
resolutions
are
gonna.
Kick
in
cuz,
you're
gonna
want
to
go
to
the
county
and
say
County.
What
do
you
think
City?
What
do
you
think,
but
I
peel?
What
do
you
think
landowners?
What
do
you
think
so
I
think
at
that
point
you
start
your
your
process.
C
C
C
I
Was
a
second
point
that
was
a
little
bit
farther
south
that
was
a
83
and
the
junction
there
I
believe
and
then
down
at
the
bottom.
It's
it's
kind
of
been
either
of
those
two
easy
old
proposed
side
for
the
bridge
and
the
current
one.
Those
have
all
been
fairly
static,
I
mean
they
haven't
changed,
but
I
mean
if
you
want
a
general
resolution,
I
mean
there's
nothing
wrong
with
it.
I
Just
be
careful
with
the
specifics
you
put
into
it,
because
I've
seen
it
happen
to
where
you
put
something
in
there
and
then
you,
you
know
you're
eating
crow
at
the
end
of
the
day,
because
you
too
far
in
your
resolution,
keep
it
general
very
if
you
gonna
do
that.
But
at
this
point
it's
just
kind
of
extra
work,
mm-hmm
I,
think
when
you
get
closer
to
that
alignment
you
get
some
more
reports,
then
you're
gonna
be
one
to
do.
That
that'd
be
my
solution,
but
that's
appeal.
A
B
Unfortunately,
our
application
was
unsuccessful,
I've
included
in
your
packet,
the
package
that
was
sent
out
from
the
build
grant
team
and
if
you
notice
the
first
page,
there's
a
map-
and
there
were
five
projects
that
were
that
were
awarded
funds
in
Texas,
none
anywhere
near
the
border.
Those
projects.
B
A
G
C
A
A
C
C
I
H
I
A
E
B
Regard
to
the
vseo
they
report
that
they
met
with
a
kill'em
company
in
october
and
are
moving
forward
with
a
draft
interlocal
agreement
that
the
Army
is
currently
developing
upon
receipt
of
the
graph.
They
will
begin
reviewing
the
contents
and
the
interlocal
agreement,
there's
a
still
under
development
for
distribution,
and
they
anticipate
final
release
of
the
draft
this
month.
That's
good!
B
It's
what
we
had
those
two
Concord
Hills.
They
report
that
the
RMA
has
drafted
the
interlocal
agreement,
the
engineer
for
Webb
County
damaged
it
has
we
reviewed
and
provided
comments.
They
anticipate
release
of
the
graph
to
the
city
and
Webb
County
drainage
district.
This
month,
very
good.
The
Killam
Industrial
Boulevard
turn
lanes.
They
report
that
they
met
with
a
Killam
company
to
discuss
the
project
last
month
and
we
see
verbal
commitment
to
dedicate
the
right
away
from
this
project.
The
interlocal
agreement
is
still.
B
B
Texas
Department
Transportation
has
provided
an
initial
draft
or
the
advance
funding
agreement
on
Monday
11th
and
that's
November
12th
text.
Our
legal
is
working
to
provide
a
final
draft
to
submit
to
the
RMA
upon
race,
see
the
our
main
legal
advisor
will
review
the
draft
AFA
and
will
return
comments
at
X
dot
within
a
couple
of
days.