REGULAR MEETING OF THE URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2026, AT 5:00 P.M. CITY HALL, ROOM 1101 301 WEST SECOND STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS Some members of the Urban Transportation Commission may be participating by videoconference. The meeting may be viewed online at: http://www.austintexas.gov/page/watch-atxn-live Public comment will be allowed in-person or remotely via telephone. Speakers may only register to speak on an item once either in-person or remotely and will be allowed up to three minutes to provide their comments. Registration no later than noon the day before the meeting is required for remote participation by telephone. To register to speak remotely, contact [Name of Liaison, Phone, Email]. CURRENT COMMISSIONERS: Susan Somers, Chair Daniel Kavelman, Parliamentarian Deshon Brown Heather Buffo Kevin Chen Nathan Fernandes Justin Jacobson Varun Prasad Joshua Sorin Spencer Schumacher, Vice Chair AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: GENERAL The first 5 speakers signed up prior to the meeting being called to order will each be allowed a three- minute allotment to address their concerns regarding items not posted on the agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the Urban Transportation Commission Regular meeting on 1/6/2026. DISCUSSION ITEMS 2. 3. 4. Long Range Population Forecasting. Presentation by Lila Valencia, City Demographer, Austin Planning. Curb Management Study. Presentation by Joseph Al-Hajeri, Parking Enterprise Manager, Austin Transportation and Public Works. Sixth Street Design. Presentation by Anna Martin, Assistant Director, Austin Transportation and Public Works. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 5. 6. 7. 8. Approve a recommendation to Council on Sixth Street Rebuild. Approve a recommendation to Council regarding the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA) South Mopac project. Approve proposed changes to Urban Transportation Commission By-laws. Approve the creation of a working group to produce a recommendation regarding the 2027 Austin Transportation and Public Works budget. COMMITTEE UPDATES 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Update from Commissioner Chen from the Downtown Commission regarding actions taken at the January 21, 2026, meeting. Update from Commissioner Prasad from the Joint Sustainability Committee regarding actions taken at the January 28, 2026, meeting. Update from Commissioner Schumacher from the Bicycle Advisory Council regarding actions taken at the January 20, 2026, meeting. Update from Chair Somers from the City Council Mobility Committee regarding actions taken at the January 15, 2026, meetings. Update from Chair Somers from the Community Advisory Committee for Austin Transit Partnership Board regarding actions taken at the January 8, 2026, meetings. FUTURE …
URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, January 6, 2026 The Urban Transportation Commission convened in a regular meeting on Tuesday, January 6, 2026, at Austin City Hall, Boards and Commissions Room 1101, Austin, Texas. Chair Somers called the Commission Meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Heather Buffo - (District 1) Nathan Fernandes – (District 2) Susan Somers, Chair - (District 4) Daniel Kavelman - (District 5) Commissioners in Attendance Virtually: Kevin Chen - (District 6) Varun Prasad - (District 7) Justin Jacobson - (District 8) Spencer Schumacher, Vice Chair - (District 9) PUBLIC COMMUNICATION No Public Communication APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Approve the minutes of the URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING on December 2, 2025. The minutes from the meeting of 12/2/2025 were approved on a motion from Commissioner Fernandes and a second from Commissioner Kavelman on a 7-0 vote, with Commissioners Brown, Chen, and Sorin absent. STAFF BRIEFING 2. Staff briefing regarding the Corridor Construction Program. The commission received a presentation from Genest Landry, Assistant Director, Austin Capital Delivery Services. 3. Staff Briefing regarding Annual Right-of-Way Asset Management Plan (RAMP). The commission received a presentation from Adam Bailey, Asset Manager, Austin Transportation and Public Works. 4. Staff briefing regarding State of Bridges. The commission received a presentation from Angela Johnson, Managing Engineer, Austin Transportation and Public Works. 1 URBAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS 5. Approve an Urban Transportation Commission Public Comment to Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA) regarding the South Mopac project. Amendment: On a motion from Commissioner Buffo, and a second from Commissioner Chen, the amendment was approved with an 8-0 vote, with Commissioners Brown and Sorin absent. On a motion from Vice Chair Somers, and a second from Commissioner Buffo, approved as amended with an 8-0 vote, with Commissioners Brown and Sorin absent. 6. Approve proposed changes to Urban Transportation Commission By-laws. Postponed to February 3, 2026, on a motion from Vice Chair Schumacher, and a second from Commissioner Fernandes, an 8-0 vote, with Commissioners Brown and Sorin absent. COMMITTEE UPDATES 7. Update from Commissioner Chen from the Downtown Commission regarding actions taken at the September 17, 2025, October 15, 2025, November 19, 2025, and December 17, 2025, meetings. The commission received an update from Commissioner Chen. 8. Update from Commissioner Schumacher from the Bicycle Advisory Council regarding actions taken at the December …
RECOMMENDATION Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number 20260203-006: Mopac South WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP) sets a goal that by 2039, 50% of commutes will not be non-single occupancy vehicles; WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plans sets a target to achieve a 20% reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 2039; WHEREAS, vehicle miles traveled per capita, congestion levels, commute times, and crashes in the Austin region have been increasing, and the region is not meeting the safety targets recommended in the Texas Transportation Institute’s (TTI) Regional Traffic Safety Plan; WHEREAS, expanding highways leads to developmental sprawl, increases in traffic, air pollution, and per-capita vehicle miles traveled, while failing to relieve congestion; WHEREAS, the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA) recommended build alternative 2C for Mopac South proposes to add two tolled express lanes to Mopac Boulevard between Barton Skyway and 6th Street; WHEREAS, the CTRMA recommended build alternative additionally widens the bridge over Lady Bird Lake to five non-tolled general purpose lanes in both directions; WHEREAS, the CTRMA recommended build alternative includes significant elevated ramping of the highway between Barton Skyway and Rollingwood, while community feedback has consistently requested no elevated ramps; WHEREAS, City Council Resolution 20241212-066 directed the City Manager to work with CTRMA to align the Mopac South proposal with the ASMP, Austin Climate Equity Plan, and Project Connect Plan; WHEREAS, that same resolution called for a refined Mopac South project that would “reduce or not increase vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions, reduce or minimize increases in impervious cover, minimize the loss of tree canopy, and minimize the widening of the existing roadway,” yet it is at best unclear that the recommended build alternative would meet these goals; WHEREAS, Council Member Ellis, the resolution’s sponsor and council-district representative of the project area, followed up with a letter requesting that the Mopac South project include no more than one additional lane in each direction, but the recommended build alternative does not align with this request; WHEREAS, the Travis County Commissioners Court requested that CTRMA produce an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with a thorough study of alternatives before moving forward with the project, yet CTRMA has indicated they hope to conduct only an Environmental Assessment (EA); WHEREAS, Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation 20250401-003 built on the groundwork laid by City Council and requested that the Mopac South Project be removed from the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization …
Curbside Management Plan Staff Update Austin Transportation Public Works Department | Urban Transportation Commission February 3, 2026 Agenda • Background • Study Scope • Milestones Achieved • Preliminary Draft of Curb Typology Framework • Next Steps / Timeline 2 Background Preliminary Council request to conduct a study in 2024 Contract executed: May 2025 Project kick-off: June 2025 Timeline: ~12 Months Final deliverable: Curb Management Plan that helps guide operational decision-making 3 Study Scope of Work Task 1: Literature review and stakeholder input Task 2: Develop curb typology framework Task 3: Inventory of existing conditions and analyze utilization data Task 4: Comprehensive curb management plan document Example from City of Atlanta Curbside Management Study 4 Milestones Achieved Literature + Peer City Review (Task 1) City policies, agency policies, case studies Internal Stakeholder Input (Informing Task 2) Individual Stakeholder meetings Curbside Management Summit (Informing Task 2) Targeted invites with business and organization representatives Data collection (Informing Task 3) 8 study locations based on curb typologies Public Engagement Online & Intercept Surveys 5 Preliminary Draft of Austin Curb Typology Method / Reasoning for Defining Curb Types Draft Curb Types District or activity driven types. Unique parcel ownership / neighborhoods / local knowledge of districts / level of activity are a large driver of defining these types. Requires robust, actively managed curb strategies both on these streets and on adjacent side streets. Mobility-focused streets. Transit, vehicles, bike and pedestrian uses with little on street parking. Adjacent side streets important to manage. Land use-driven types. The intensity of uses at different types of land uses are the defining factor of allocation and management. Downtown State or Private Adjacent Side Streets Entertainment or Dining High Activity Mobility Corridors Moderate Activity Mobility Corridors Adjacent Side Streets Parks / Open Space Neighborhood Avenues Local Streets 6 Preliminary Example of Mapping Typology 7 Next Steps/ Timeline Review of community feedback - February Public survey closed 2/2/26 Finalize existing conditions analysis - February Refinement of typologies - February/March Initial draft of plan expected - April/May Final draft – June 8 Questions and Discussion Thank you! 9
6th Street Preliminary Engineering Austin Transportation & Public Works | February 3, 2026 Agenda Safety Pilot Overview PER Process Review of Alternatives Public Feedback Staff Recommendation Next Steps 2 6th Street Safety Pilot • Multi-department initiative to improve safety in the District • ATPW assisted with temporary materials to “test” new widened sidewalks, change in vehicle lanes • Signal timing changes to promote slow speeds, increase ped x-ing times • Close monitoring of pedestrian safety and traffic operations 3 6th St PER – Study of Long-Term Improvements Study Area: 6th Street (IH-35 to Congress Avenue). Purpose: Identify transportation and mobility improvements to form the long- term vision for the street. Goal: Develop a set (1) of recommended improvements with their associated costs. Build on lessons learned during pilot phase Schedule: Conclude PER by end of 2025; begin design in 2026 4 Alternative 1 5 Alternative 2 6 Alternative 3 7 Public Feedback Preserving character and supporting local businesses Pedestrianization and car-free street Greenery, shade and trees Protected bike lanes Loading zones and delivery access Safety and cleanliness 8 Staff Recommendation: Alternative 3 9 Next Steps Publish final Preliminary Engineering Report for 6th Street – PENDING Initiate design process for 6th Street – In Progress Explore opportunities to add/improve east-wide bike lanes in downtown – In Progress 10
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number 20260203-005: Changes to East 6th Street Design WHEREAS, Old 6th Street is a major destination in Austin with restaurants, bars, entertainment, and historic landmarks; and WHEREAS, the nearest active transportation counter at East 4th Street and Waller Creek counted 521,445 pedestrians and cyclists traveling in 2025; and WHEREAS, 6th Street between Mopac and Interstate 35 is on the City of Austin’s High Injury Network; and WHEREAS, The 2001 Great Streets Master Plan envisioned 6th Street as a “Bicycle & Local Access Street;” and WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan and 2023 Austin Bicycle Plan envisioned 6th Street as a part of the All Ages and Ability Bicycle Network with one-way protected bike lanes in each direction; WHEREAS, there is currently only one East-West protected bicycle facility in Downtown, and 6th Street is the only street between 6th & 11th Street that could have a continuous on-street bicycle facility across both North Lamar and IH 35 after the I-35 CapEx Project; and WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan sets a goal of 50% non-single occupancy vehicle mode share by 2039; and WHEREAS, protected bike lanes accommodate not only conventional bicycles and ebikes but also provide appropriate infrastructure for micromobility users (such as dockless scooters), which should not be ridden on sidewalks crowded with pedestrians; WHEREAS, the absence of clear separation between pedestrians and cyclists/micromobility users on sidewalks increases the risk of collisions and diminishes the experience for both user groups; DRAFT WHEREAS, in Recommendation 20251201-007 the Bicycle Advisory Council and Pedestrian Advisory Council issued a joint recommendation strongly recommending Alternative 1 and opposing Alternative 2; WHEREAS, the Sixth Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found 63% of the 3,723 responses supported Alternative 1, which included bicycle/scooter lanes on both sides of Sixth Street as well as curb insets for vehicle access; WHEREAS, the Sixth Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found only 27% of the 3,706 responses supported Alternative 3, which included no bicycle/scooter lanes with vehicle curb access on one side; WHEREAS, City Staff recommended Alternative 3 be advanced to final design; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that Austin Transportation and Public Works (ATPW) advance Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 as its preferred street design on the Sixth Street Mobility and Revitalization Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends …
ARTICLE 7. MEETINGS. (A) The board meetings shall comply with Texas Government Code Chapter 551 (Texas Open Meetings Act). (B) Board meetings shall be governed by Robert’s Rules of Order. (C) The board may not conduct a closed meeting without the approval of the city attorney. (D) The board shall meet monthly. In November of each year, the board shall adopt a schedule of the meetings for the upcoming year, including makeup meeting dates for the holidays and cancelled meetings. (E) The chair may call a special meeting, and the chair shall call a special meeting if requested by three or more members. The call shall state the purpose of the meeting. A board may not call a meeting in addition to its regular scheduled meetings as identified in its adopted meeting schedule, more often than once a quarter, unless the meeting is required to comply with a statutory deadline or a deadline established by Council. (F) Six members constitute a quorum. (G) If a quorum for a meeting does not convene within one-half hour of the posted time for the meeting, then the meeting may not be held. (H) To be effective, a board action must be adopted by affirmative vote of the number of members necessary to provide a quorum. (I) The chair has the same voting privilege as any other member. (J) The board shall allow public communication to address the board on agenda items and during a period of time set aside for public communications. The chair may limit a speaker to three minutes. (K) The staff liaison shall prepare the board minutes. The minutes of each board meeting must include the vote of each member on each item before the board and indicate whether a member is absent or failed to vote on an item. (L) The city clerk shall retain agendas, approved minutes, internal review reports and bylaws. The Austin Transportation & Public Works Department shall retain all other board documents. The documents are public records under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 552 (Texas Public Information Act). (M) The chair shall adjourn a meeting not later than 10 p.m., unless the board votes to continue the meeting. (N) Each person and board member attending a board meeting should observe decorum pursuant to Section 2-1- 48 of the City Code. (O) A member of the public may not address a board at a meeting on …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number 20260203-005: Changes to East 6th Street Design WHEREAS, Old 6th Street is a major destination in Austin with restaurants, bars, entertainment, and historic landmarks; and WHEREAS, the nearest active transportation counter at East 4th Street and Waller Creek counted 521,445 pedestrians and cyclists traveling in 2025; and WHEREAS, 6th Street between Mopac and Interstate 35 is on the City of Austin’s High Injury Network; and WHEREAS, the 2001 Great Streets Master Plan envisioned 6th Street as a “Bicycle & Local Access Street,” and WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan and 2023 Austin Bicycle Plan envisioned 6th Street as a part of the All Ages and Ability Bicycle Network with one-way protected bike lanes in each direction; WHEREAS, there is currently only one East-West protected bicycle facility in Downtown, and 6th Street is the only street between 6th & 11th Street that could have a continuous on-street bicycle facility across both North Lamar and IH 35 after the I-35 CapEx Project; and WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan sets a goal of 50% non-single occupancy vehicle mode share by 2039; and WHEREAS, protected bike lanes accommodate not only conventional bicycles and ebikes but also provide appropriate infrastructure for micromobility users (such as dockless scooters), which should not be ridden on sidewalks crowded with pedestrians; WHEREAS, the absence of clear separation between pedestrians and cyclists/micromobility users on sidewalks increases the risk of collisions and diminishes the experience for both user groups; WHEREAS, in Recommendation 20251201-007 the Bicycle Advisory Council and Pedestrian Advisory Council issued a joint recommendation strongly recommending Alternative 1 and opposing Alternative 3; WHEREAS, the Sixth Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found 63% of the 3,723 responses supported Alternative 1, which included bicycle/scooter lanes on both sides of Sixth Street as well as curb insets for vehicle access; WHEREAS, the Sixth Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found only 27% of the 3,706 responses supported Alternative 3, which included no bicycle/scooter lanes with vehicle curb access on one side; WHEREAS, City Staff recommended Alternative 3 be advanced to final design; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that Austin Transportation and Public Works (ATPW) advance Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 as its preferred street design on the Sixth Street Mobility and Revitalization Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that …
RECOMMENDATION Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number 20260203-006: Mopac South WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP) sets a goal that by 2039, 50% of commutes will not be non-single occupancy vehicles; WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plans sets a target to achieve a 20% reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by 2039; WHEREAS, vehicle miles traveled per capita, congestion levels, commute times, and crashes in the Austin region have been increasing, and the region is not meeting the safety targets recommended in the Texas Transportation Institute’s (TTI) Regional Traffic Safety Plan; WHEREAS, expanding highways leads to developmental sprawl, increases in traffic, air pollution, and per-capita vehicle miles traveled, while failing to relieve congestion; WHEREAS, the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority (CTRMA) recommended build alternative 2C for Mopac South proposes to add two tolled express lanes to Mopac Boulevard between Barton Skyway and 6th Street; WHEREAS, the CTRMA recommended build alternative additionally widens the bridge over Lady Bird Lake to five non-tolled general purpose lanes in both directions; WHEREAS, the CTRMA recommended build alternative includes significant elevated ramping of the highway between Barton Skyway and Rollingwood, while community feedback has consistently requested no elevated ramps; WHEREAS, City Council Resolution 20241212-066 directed the City Manager to work with CTRMA to align the Mopac South proposal with the ASMP, Austin Climate Equity Plan, and Project Connect Plan; WHEREAS, that same resolution called for a refined Mopac South project that would “reduce or not increase vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions, reduce or minimize increases in impervious cover, minimize the loss of tree canopy, and minimize the widening of the existing roadway,” yet it is at best unclear that the recommended build alternative would meet these goals; WHEREAS, Council Member Ellis, the resolution’s sponsor and council-district representative of the project area, followed up with a letter requesting that the Mopac South project include no more than one additional lane in each direction, but the recommended build alternative does not align with this request; WHEREAS, the Travis County Commissioners Court requested that CTRMA produce an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with a thorough study of alternatives before moving forward with the project, yet CTRMA has indicated they hope to conduct only an Environmental Assessment (EA); WHEREAS, Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation 20250401-003 built on the groundwork laid by City Council and requested that the Mopac South Project be removed from the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization …
RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL Urban Transportation Commission Recommendation Number 20260203-005: Changes to East 6th Street Design WHEREAS, Old 6th Street is a major destination in Austin with restaurants, bars, entertainment, and historic landmarks; and WHEREAS, the nearest active transportation counter at East 4th Street and Waller Creek counted 521,445 pedestrians and cyclists traveling in 2025; and WHEREAS, 6th Street between Mopac and Interstate 35 is on the City of Austin’s High Injury Network; and WHEREAS, the 2001 Great Streets Master Plan envisioned 6th Street as a “Bicycle & Local Access Street;” and WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan and 2023 Austin Bicycle Plan envisioned 6th Street as a part of the All Ages and Ability Bicycle Network with one-way protected bike lanes in each direction; WHEREAS, there is currently only one East-West protected bicycle facility in Downtown, and 6th Street is the only street between 6th & 11th Street that could have a continuous on-street bicycle facility across both North Lamar and IH 35 after the I-35 CapEx Project; and WHEREAS, the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan sets a goal of 50% non-single occupancy vehicle mode share by 2039; and WHEREAS, protected bike lanes accommodate not only conventional bicycles and ebikes but also provide appropriate infrastructure for micromobility users (such as dockless scooters), which should not be ridden on sidewalks crowded with pedestrians; WHEREAS, the absence of clear separation between pedestrians and cyclists/micromobility users on sidewalks increases the risk of collisions and diminishes the experience for both user groups; WHEREAS, in Recommendation 20251201-007 the Bicycle Advisory Council and Pedestrian Advisory Council issued a joint recommendation strongly recommending Alternative 1 and opposing Alternative 23; WHEREAS, the Sixth Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found 63% of the 3,723 responses supported Alternative 1, which included bicycle/scooter lanes on both sides of Sixth Street as well as curb insets for vehicle access; WHEREAS, the Sixth Street Survey Results and Public Engagement Report found only 27% of the 3,706 responses supported Alternative 3, which included no bicycle/scooter lanes with vehicle curb access on one side; WHEREAS, City Staff recommended Alternative 3 be advanced to final design; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that Austin Transportation and Public Works (ATPW) advance Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 as its preferred street design on the Sixth Street Mobility and Revitalization Project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Urban Transportation Commission recommends that …
