WEBVTT 00:00:01.826 --> 00:00:12.909 - This meeting will come to order with the wrapping of the commemorative Scott Robinson gavel. This is 00:00:12.909 --> 00:00:24.102 - a meeting of the Transportation Commission for September 2025. Can we please have a call of the roll? 00:00:24.102 --> 00:00:31.454 - Copic here Stramitis Volin here Flaherty here Davis Stossburg here 00:00:32.514 --> 00:00:39.234 - We have a quorum and I note that Shelly's tremendous is here for John Connell on behalf of Bloomington 00:00:39.234 --> 00:00:45.823 - Transit Just to review the agenda We're going to have approval of minutes reports and communications 00:00:45.823 --> 00:00:52.803 - from commissioners several reports from staff including an update on 190 day orders on the City Commission 00:00:52.803 --> 00:00:59.262 - parking study on the quick build project at 12th of Monroe and the 2026 proposed budget update and 00:00:59.650 --> 00:01:07.176 - We'll also hear four cases, a TCR 2505 parking on North Illinois Street, TCR 2506 parking on West 8th 00:01:07.176 --> 00:01:14.776 - Street from Maple to Rogers, TCP 2507, a 2025 resident-led traffic calming program on West 11th Street 00:01:14.776 --> 00:01:22.671 - between Monroe and Maple, and TCR 2508, Hopewell West and related code updates. We'll then have discussion 00:01:22.671 --> 00:01:28.574 - of topics not on the docket, general public comment on items not on the docket, 00:01:28.674 --> 00:01:38.728 - adjournment Let's move now to approval of minutes We need a motion for approval of the minutes of July 00:01:38.728 --> 00:01:48.684 - 21st the previous meeting a Motion to approve the minutes. Is there a second second? We have a motion 00:01:48.684 --> 00:01:57.566 - a second. Are there any? Corrections comments or to other fixes to the minutes to my right 00:01:58.882 --> 00:02:05.486 - Mr. Flaherty Yes, only briefly just a question an opinion I guess with respect to narrative minutes 00:02:05.486 --> 00:02:12.421 - and if those are particularly owners for staff, I don't know if I Personally feel like they're necessary 00:02:12.421 --> 00:02:19.224 - I don't this is something that you could also ask the the city clerk about but I don't think generally 00:02:19.224 --> 00:02:25.960 - We're required to produce full narrative minutes, especially when there are video, you know videos of 00:02:25.960 --> 00:02:28.734 - the meeting and that kind of thing and so 00:02:29.442 --> 00:02:37.403 - more of like by way of summary and You know actions taken that kind of thing might be suitable just 00:02:37.403 --> 00:02:45.523 - for consideration Is that a question directed to staff or just a comment in general? Just opinion and 00:02:45.523 --> 00:02:54.120 - a comment Thanks Does staff have any care to respond? I Recognized that the meetings minutes were extensive 00:02:54.120 --> 00:02:56.190 - and that was not possible 00:02:57.282 --> 00:03:04.912 - done purposefully it was I Started with a program of would someone know that this is in the packet. 00:03:04.912 --> 00:03:12.695 - Oh, this is not in the packet I should write it down to some degree. I did try to be brief, but there 00:03:12.695 --> 00:03:20.326 - were some questions that folks asked That I felt I might want to be able to search for one day, but 00:03:20.326 --> 00:03:26.430 - it is my prerogative to try to be more brief Mr. Flair. Yeah, just briefly that 00:03:27.106 --> 00:03:33.715 - I don't have like a strong preference that we do one way or the other just noting that I have comfort 00:03:33.715 --> 00:03:40.714 - with Like I think there is value in in the more extensive and thorough Set of minutes to assist trade-offs. 00:03:40.714 --> 00:03:47.453 - So I'm just noting that I don't have I don't I don't see that as like a strict requirement By any means 00:03:47.453 --> 00:03:52.766 - and just my opinion as one commissioner Other comments to my right to my left and 00:03:54.818 --> 00:04:02.593 - Will add to mr. Flaherty's comment. I thought the minutes were great and very thorough a Couple of amendments 00:04:02.593 --> 00:04:09.802 - like to make first of all The first sentence says the first meeting was held and it was a copy of the 00:04:09.802 --> 00:04:14.750 - meeting from the actual first minutes this was the second meeting and 00:04:15.074 --> 00:04:22.454 - So that should be changed accordingly. I don't know what you need to number every meeting from now on, 00:04:22.454 --> 00:04:30.192 - but just I would fix that. I'd also ask that the time of adjournment be included at the end of the minutes. 00:04:30.192 --> 00:04:37.428 - And as for other changes, I have some thoughts about formatting to make it more optimal. I would say 00:04:37.428 --> 00:04:42.014 - that one of the benefits of narrative minutes, however long, is 00:04:42.178 --> 00:04:49.114 - Allowing people to quickly get the gist of what was discussed and if they want to they can use it as 00:04:49.114 --> 00:04:56.050 - a supplement to a video To help them reference what was talked about One other thing I might suggest 00:04:56.050 --> 00:05:03.260 - might be noting the time that An item listed on the agenda was started that also helps people find there 00:05:03.260 --> 00:05:07.518 - because most videos don't get bookmarked the way that the PDF 00:05:07.810 --> 00:05:15.806 - Packet does so but I'm happy to sit with staff and talk about ways that we can tweak the minutes format 00:05:15.806 --> 00:05:23.648 - so that it's more practical, but I do prefer airing on the side of completeness it's just a matter of 00:05:23.648 --> 00:05:31.337 - how to reference it and I want to note also that in addition to the the packet or the minutes being 00:05:31.337 --> 00:05:33.182 - thorough the packet and 00:05:33.314 --> 00:05:41.822 - very thorough and Bookmarks in the PDF very much appreciated. So thank you for that Without if there's 00:05:41.822 --> 00:05:50.826 - no other corrections to the minutes. I just wanted to correct the second meeting and the time of adjournment 00:05:50.826 --> 00:05:59.334 - All in favor of approving the minutes as proposed please signify by saying aye aye Opposed say nay All 00:05:59.334 --> 00:06:02.142 - right, these minutes are approved 00:06:02.978 --> 00:06:11.118 - Let's move on now to reports from commissioners. Is there any report from a commissioner on my right? 00:06:11.118 --> 00:06:19.658 - I wanna encourage you to report on anything if you have it. To my right. Okay. Let me make a brief report. 00:06:19.658 --> 00:06:27.798 - We are still in the process of inventing a commission from scratch. This is our third meeting and our 00:06:27.798 --> 00:06:31.070 - second one with any stuff on the agenda. 00:06:31.202 --> 00:06:38.317 - We are still working on our procedures So and we're taking over from three different commissions that 00:06:38.317 --> 00:06:45.572 - had different ways of doing things I'm gonna once again exhort my colleagues to ask questions no matter 00:06:45.572 --> 00:06:52.758 - how rudimentary We still are trying to figure out how this commission works I know that the bylaws are 00:06:52.758 --> 00:07:00.222 - on the website, but they're the initial ones adopted at our first meeting in June and not the ones that we 00:07:00.354 --> 00:07:09.168 - Approved in July. So hope that those will be corrected soon And I just want to say so generally to the 00:07:09.168 --> 00:07:18.067 - public sorry that we didn't have coverage at our Previous meeting and it because cats couldn't be here. 00:07:18.067 --> 00:07:21.918 - So there was a limited visibility for anyone 00:07:22.530 --> 00:07:28.672 - The only thing you could see that meeting was the day is because we didn't have the benefit of camera 00:07:28.672 --> 00:07:35.115 - operators So I'm glad they're here now should make the meetings easier to watch But it shows how important 00:07:35.115 --> 00:07:41.257 - The own presence of cats is for the public to be able to take part from afar and to understand what's 00:07:41.257 --> 00:07:47.278 - happening here If there are no other reports from commissioners Let's go to staff. Let's start with 00:07:47.278 --> 00:07:51.614 - an update on 180 day orders Andrew Seabor director of engineering Hello 00:07:54.626 --> 00:08:02.303 - City engineer just wanted to continue the trend as as or if there are new 180 day orders that we keep 00:08:02.303 --> 00:08:10.432 - this commission updated Since our last meeting to there's been action on two orders one was the essentially 00:08:10.432 --> 00:08:18.035 - renewal or extension of a prior order that was nearing Expiration that was regarding for always stop 00:08:18.035 --> 00:08:23.454 - intersections on 7th Street so just extending that another 180 days and 00:08:24.002 --> 00:08:29.995 - And then a new 180-day order regarding action that you took at your last meeting regarding stop signs 00:08:29.995 --> 00:08:36.106 - on two intersections of 13th Street at the Woodlawn and Indiana intersection. So I just heard from this 00:08:36.106 --> 00:08:41.981 - commission and then also just wanted to implement those changes before students were here to reduce 00:08:41.981 --> 00:08:48.033 - changes to the population. So it's just what they are accustomed to when they arrived. Happy to answer 00:08:48.033 --> 00:08:53.086 - any questions you have on these orders. Okay, are there any questions for Mr. Seabor? 00:08:53.474 --> 00:09:04.474 - 180 D orders to my right To my left I do wanted to ask I wanted to ask how many orders are currently 00:09:04.474 --> 00:09:15.691 - in force right now The most recent one I issued was 25-08 so I believe eight So How I mean do you have 00:09:15.691 --> 00:09:21.790 - a what's a record number of 180 the orders you've had I 00:09:22.562 --> 00:09:29.685 - Calendar year I'd have to go through but my gut is eight is on the very high side Is there a complete 00:09:29.685 --> 00:09:36.807 - list of 180 orders available somewhere there are I guess if you went between this meetings packet and 00:09:36.807 --> 00:09:44.000 - our last meetings packet they should all be Of the current ones in those packets. Okay, that's helpful 00:09:44.000 --> 00:09:51.262 - Can we also make that available as a web page or is it you know, are those online? They are the packets 00:09:51.262 --> 00:09:52.030 - are online 00:09:52.706 --> 00:09:59.513 - Okay, but you don't you don't put up a hundred day order as a web page as a matter of course No, I don't 00:09:59.513 --> 00:10:06.126 - think it's people something I've heard people asking for from the public But it is something we could 00:10:06.126 --> 00:10:12.609 - entertain if we feel there's a need to put that Out there. I would definitely like to see that I'll 00:10:12.609 --> 00:10:19.157 - put my two cents in yes I'd like to see it would be a simple thing to upload the order as a Separate 00:10:19.157 --> 00:10:22.334 - web page. You can find it as a URL separate from 00:10:22.978 --> 00:10:29.668 - Any packet having to go digging so and if we can connect it to the Transportation Commission site, I 00:10:29.668 --> 00:10:36.292 - think that would be useful We'll think about that in and follow up with you on that idea. Okay, I'm 00:10:36.292 --> 00:10:43.314 - gonna keep asking till you do it. So that's fair Also, can you include the date of issuance of the order? 00:10:43.314 --> 00:10:48.414 - in references to it from now on as well as the date that it takes effect and 00:10:48.834 --> 00:10:55.283 - Because you you refer to it in the narrative But it'd be nice if those two items like when was it issued 00:10:55.283 --> 00:11:01.549 - and when did it take effect? And we know that we can add 180 days. I I can they are on the subsequent 00:11:01.549 --> 00:11:07.752 - pages actually lists when they are issued and when they're in effect for but if it needs to be added 00:11:07.752 --> 00:11:14.017 - in another spot I'm just like in the title or in any listing of it just so people can see when it was 00:11:14.017 --> 00:11:17.150 - issued. Okay Any other mr. Flaherty Yes, thank you 00:11:18.562 --> 00:11:24.276 - The memo at the top notes that the practice has been to submit changes to the City Council 00:11:24.276 --> 00:11:30.619 - for the consideration as an ordinance that modifies applicable section of Bloomington Municipal Code 00:11:30.619 --> 00:11:36.961 - I'm sure you recall Sometime in the last year corporate Corporation Council Rice was opining that in 00:11:36.961 --> 00:11:43.806 - fact the City Council has no role to play legally in a lot of infrastructure things including stop signs and 00:11:43.970 --> 00:11:49.751 - And others and I never I don't think we've reached a resolution on that point necessarily if this is 00:11:49.751 --> 00:11:55.589 - better deferred for Someone else to answer or for a future meeting. That's perfectly appropriate. I'm 00:11:55.589 --> 00:12:01.541 - just curious if there are any updates by way of the administration's legal position, I guess on Whether 00:12:01.541 --> 00:12:07.494 - or not these types of things will be coming to council at all whether or not we are seeking a different 00:12:07.494 --> 00:12:13.790 - type of code overhaul that would remove them from city code and leave it purely in the kind of administrative 00:12:14.114 --> 00:12:20.130 - Responsibilities of the city engineer any updates on that front. No that great question I don't think 00:12:20.130 --> 00:12:26.323 - there are any significant updates to that. I think the City Corporation Council's opinions are out there 00:12:26.323 --> 00:12:32.339 - That being said it is somewhat unresolved on how things will move forward in the grand scheme If this 00:12:32.339 --> 00:12:38.237 - Commission would like we can certainly reach out to the legal department to see if they are able to 00:12:38.237 --> 00:12:43.486 - come to a future meeting and that be a topic on the agenda But that that's a possibility 00:12:46.338 --> 00:12:53.546 - Thank you Thank you. Yeah, we'll entertain that Let's move on now to one more question. Mr. Flaherty. 00:12:53.546 --> 00:13:00.825 - Sorry one more on the on 7th Street specifically Are we tracklet tracking and cycling volumes? Is that 00:13:00.825 --> 00:13:09.022 - something we're still tracking on 7th Street with respect to the 7 line, you know, I have to double-check but we do 00:13:09.186 --> 00:13:15.259 - Have a permanent bicycle counter on 7th Street, but I want to say I don't know the status because it 00:13:15.259 --> 00:13:21.333 - did have a malfunction Several months ago, and I'm not sure if that's been resolved. So I don't know 00:13:21.333 --> 00:13:27.346 - if we're actively getting data Currently, but we can always do short-term data points, but we don't 00:13:27.346 --> 00:13:33.540 - have anything right now But I'll look into the status of that permanent counter. Yeah, if you wouldn't 00:13:33.540 --> 00:13:38.110 - mind letting us know Yeah, if it's being resolved or not, I'd be curious of 00:13:38.690 --> 00:13:49.306 - If there's been an impact at all on a usership. Yeah, absolutely Further comments on this item or questions 00:13:49.306 --> 00:13:59.234 - Seeing none. Thank you. Mr. Seabour. We will move on now to an update on the City Commission parking 00:13:59.234 --> 00:14:04.542 - study who is here to present on this Is while welcome 00:14:10.562 --> 00:14:38.206 - Very distant, which one which one are you? Hello. Thanks for waving All right, well, please go ahead I 00:14:38.306 --> 00:14:47.134 - I will introduce them now. The first one is John and Mark, and the second one is Lauren all around. 00:14:47.134 --> 00:14:55.962 - If anyone wanna go ahead and take over, unmute, and go on camera, they're going to be providing you 00:14:55.962 --> 00:15:04.967 - with an update of the parking rate study that was started in March of this year. John and Lauren, are 00:15:04.967 --> 00:15:07.262 - you there? Yes, yes, yes. 00:15:07.586 --> 00:15:17.761 - I tried to undo my camera, but I can't share it. So you can't see me, but that's okay. Okay. I'm going 00:15:17.761 --> 00:15:27.838 - to share my screen. I'm going to leave it to them. Thank you. Can you guys see my screen? Okay. Okay. 00:15:36.706 --> 00:15:45.866 - Thank you. I'm Lauren Algram with Walker Consultants. I will jump right in. For some of the tasks that 00:15:45.866 --> 00:15:55.204 - we have completed, we have done a 32 question survey in collaboration with Bloomington Parking Services. 00:15:55.204 --> 00:15:58.494 - We did receive about 1,500 responses 00:15:58.594 --> 00:16:08.375 - and had 483 open comments. Additionally, we've held multiple stakeholder engagement sessions with 19 00:16:08.375 --> 00:16:18.253 - participants. We've also done a benchmarking analysis of five peer cities, as well as IU Bloomington. 00:16:18.253 --> 00:16:23.870 - We did select the cities based on population, region, and 00:16:24.002 --> 00:16:33.297 - proximity to a university. We've also done various site visits in spring, summer, as well as IU's move-in 00:16:33.297 --> 00:16:42.328 - week. We've observed the various parking facilities operations as well as utilization and had meetings 00:16:42.328 --> 00:16:47.326 - with parking services staff and the city clerk's office. 00:16:48.738 --> 00:16:56.884 - We did ask survey respondents to choose the option that they best identified with. You can see we got 00:16:56.884 --> 00:17:04.870 - a lot of other responses. Many of those were Bloomington residents. They just did not identify as a 00:17:04.870 --> 00:17:09.182 - downtown resident as well as Monroe County residents. 00:17:12.162 --> 00:17:18.846 - Some of the comments we received on the survey was that people felt that enforcement hours should be 00:17:18.846 --> 00:17:25.662 - reduced and that parking should be free on the evenings and weekends. People also really like the coin 00:17:25.662 --> 00:17:32.345 - option for paying for the meters and do not want to see that be taken away. And they feel that there 00:17:32.345 --> 00:17:36.382 - should be designated loading zones for the delivery drivers. 00:17:39.522 --> 00:17:50.015 - More than 77 percent of the respondents stated that they visited downtown at least once a week for dining 00:17:50.015 --> 00:18:00.903 - and retail purposes. Most respondents reported being in downtown Bloomington for one to two hours. Ninety-six 00:18:00.903 --> 00:18:08.030 - percent of downtown Bloomington visitors utilize their private vehicle. 00:18:08.258 --> 00:18:16.875 - And people mostly try to park on street at the meters and they pay for parking through all the various 00:18:16.875 --> 00:18:26.078 - methods credit card coins and park mobile that question did allow for respondents to choose multiple answers. 00:18:29.314 --> 00:18:37.023 - For the user experience, 35% of respondents felt that their experience and time to find a space was 00:18:37.023 --> 00:18:45.040 - good to excellent for on-street parking. For the city garages, that went up to 45%. We felt it's really 00:18:45.040 --> 00:18:52.903 - important to note that 28% of respondents do not utilize the city-owned garages. Many people reported 00:18:52.903 --> 00:18:57.374 - that they didn't know that the city-owned parking garages 00:18:57.570 --> 00:19:06.043 - and they did not know that the city garages were cheaper than on-street. John will talk about some of 00:19:06.043 --> 00:19:14.433 - the stakeholder findings. Sure. Thank you, Lauren. These are the in-person meetings that we had with 00:19:14.433 --> 00:19:23.322 - stakeholders, just summarizing the comments that were brought up. One, it was a common theme that everyone 00:19:23.322 --> 00:19:24.734 - acknowledged and 00:19:24.962 --> 00:19:33.364 - the importance of parking, public parking on the businesses. If there was a lack of accessible short-term 00:19:33.364 --> 00:19:41.290 - parking, it would be impactful on the customers. Some of the comments we heard were that ticketing, 00:19:41.290 --> 00:19:49.771 - the citation issuing, some people thought it was aggressive and they felt like if that could be a negative 00:19:49.771 --> 00:19:52.862 - experience to someone that's visiting, 00:19:53.058 --> 00:20:00.915 - they would not likely want to come back because of that. We did hear examples of that at some of the 00:20:00.915 --> 00:20:08.694 - meetings. It was also expressed that businesses are generally under some strain. Over the next five 00:20:08.694 --> 00:20:16.862 - years, there's some turnover, the potential turnover that was expressed and they felt like parking could 00:20:16.862 --> 00:20:21.918 - be a contributing factor to these businesses if they don't stay. 00:20:22.018 --> 00:20:31.858 - Um, and then just finally, uh, just kind of the, sorry, the, the, um, just some concerns about enforcement 00:20:31.858 --> 00:20:41.790 - and, and policies regarding rates and the benefit to the, uh, to the community. And some of the perceptions 00:20:41.790 --> 00:20:51.998 - we are, we kind of looked at that and said, okay, they were about profit. It's about making money, it's fines. 00:20:52.162 --> 00:21:04.689 - Parking is kind of a hassle, maybe confusing. And then kind of across the board, I use academic calendar. 00:21:04.689 --> 00:21:16.980 - That is definitely a factor. And I think that kind of sums those perceptions. Get the next slide. Okay, 00:21:16.980 --> 00:21:18.398 - here we go. 00:21:19.138 --> 00:21:25.819 - Um, and I think the, you know, some of the comments about policy enforcement, again, this, this picked 00:21:25.819 --> 00:21:32.435 - up on the, uh, how Bloomington may be different because the community, uh, with the, with the college 00:21:32.435 --> 00:21:39.052 - campus, the flexibility and in times, uh, and that aggressive enforcement, some people commented more 00:21:39.052 --> 00:21:45.538 - than one person commented about getting more than one citation a day. That was, that was definitely 00:21:45.538 --> 00:21:47.614 - perceived as negative. Um, and, 00:21:47.746 --> 00:21:55.675 - They've looked at the enforcement times. They thought they should be reconsidered. They felt they were 00:21:55.675 --> 00:22:03.528 - longer than they needed to maybe end at five or six instead of I think nine o'clock off the top of my 00:22:03.528 --> 00:22:11.534 - head. And then that overall transparency. So they wanted more information to be public facing. And then 00:22:11.534 --> 00:22:15.614 - as far as the infrastructure goes, we did hear some, 00:22:15.746 --> 00:22:22.187 - some messages were about the mobile app. The park mobile app was maybe inconvenient or inaccessible 00:22:22.187 --> 00:22:29.014 - to maybe older citizens or lower income residents. We heard that. Um, and then a lot of times they might, 00:22:29.014 --> 00:22:35.776 - they indicated the meters don't always work. That was seemed to be frustrating. They're the single space 00:22:35.776 --> 00:22:40.478 - meters that they're, they're definitely getting, uh, they've been around 00:22:40.706 --> 00:22:47.603 - since it was restarted, so their age is a factor. The garages, we heard that, hey, some people would 00:22:47.603 --> 00:22:54.977 - say, oh, we didn't even know that were garages. We already heard that in the survey. But maybe the signage, 00:22:54.977 --> 00:23:02.010 - maybe some concern of safety and unawareness of the cost. So the $0.50 an hour, that was not something 00:23:02.010 --> 00:23:07.678 - people were aware of. And then they talked about, we heard about the bike removal, 00:23:08.322 --> 00:23:17.782 - the parking for bike lanes on 7th Street that that was, didn't go over well. People weren't happy about 00:23:17.782 --> 00:23:27.060 - that. Okay. And then some of their ideas were maybe to have some free period. They talked about 15 to 00:23:27.060 --> 00:23:34.974 - 30 minutes or maybe a little longer. So some free period of parking, they talked about 00:23:35.618 --> 00:23:44.570 - Maybe some in the summertime when IU students aren't in session actively to have some different rates, 00:23:44.570 --> 00:23:53.262 - lower rates, and maybe some kind of promotions, improving garage signage, and kind of mention maybe 00:23:53.262 --> 00:24:01.953 - a circulator to maybe improve circulation within the downtown. And then again, that data and making 00:24:01.953 --> 00:24:04.126 - that publicly available. 00:24:08.066 --> 00:24:17.626 - Thank you, John. I will review some of the findings from the benchmarking analysis. So the cities included 00:24:17.626 --> 00:24:27.365 - Ames, Iowa, Lawrence, Kansas, West Lafayette, Indiana, Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Iowa City, Iowa. Bloomington 00:24:27.365 --> 00:24:36.478 - is the hashed lines on the graph. So population and enrollment is similar to these comparison cities. 00:24:39.042 --> 00:24:47.622 - Similarly the number of parking spaces Ann Arbor is a larger city they do have significantly more garage 00:24:47.622 --> 00:24:53.342 - spaces but otherwise Bloomington falls in line with the other cities. 00:24:55.842 --> 00:25:06.141 - Here are the enforcement hours. You can see Bloomington at the top in red has longer enforcement hours 00:25:06.141 --> 00:25:16.139 - than any of the other cities and just a couple hours shorter than IU Bloomington. The garage hourly 00:25:16.139 --> 00:25:25.438 - stay for average length of stay being two hours. Bloomington is lower than any of the piers. 00:25:25.602 --> 00:25:35.472 - The exception of Ames, Iowa is they do not have any garage spaces. Similarly, the off-street hourly 00:25:35.472 --> 00:25:45.342 - rate, Bloomington is lower. Again, with the exception of Iowa City, they do offer the first hour of 00:25:45.342 --> 00:25:52.350 - parking free and then it goes to $2 an hour. The off-street daily max, 00:25:52.738 --> 00:26:06.624 - Bloomington is higher than Lawrence and Ames, but lower than Ann Arbor and Iowa City for off-street 00:26:06.624 --> 00:26:20.926 - parking. If you were to park during the entire time of enforcement hours when a city requires parking, 00:26:24.002 --> 00:26:35.417 - Some cities do have a daily maximum. If you stay to a certain period of time, they wouldn't charge you 00:26:35.417 --> 00:26:47.053 - past that max. Or monthly garage rates. City of Bloomington does offer various monthly permits depending 00:26:47.053 --> 00:26:51.486 - on if you want to reserve space or not. 00:26:52.162 --> 00:27:00.596 - So you can see how they compare to these other cities. Again, Ames doesn't have any garage spaces, so 00:27:00.596 --> 00:27:09.029 - Bloomington has higher monthly rates than Lawrence, Kansas and West Lafayette, or sorry, higher rates 00:27:09.029 --> 00:27:14.238 - than those cities and then lower than Iowa City and Ann Arbor. 00:27:18.882 --> 00:27:28.102 - The monthly rates for surface lots, Bloomington only offers these monthly permits in lot five. West 00:27:28.102 --> 00:27:37.874 - Lafayette does not offer surface lot permits and you can see how the rates compare to the various cities. 00:27:37.874 --> 00:27:45.342 - Bloomington is a little bit higher than some and a little bit lower than others. 00:27:49.410 --> 00:28:00.455 - Or the on-street hourly rates, the dollar an hour. That's the same rates as Ames, Lawrence, and West 00:28:00.455 --> 00:28:11.391 - Lafayette, but is lower than Ann Arbor, Iowa City, and IU Bloomington. Citation fees for an expired 00:28:11.391 --> 00:28:17.406 - meter. Bloomington does have the highest citation fee. 00:28:17.794 --> 00:28:27.768 - Iowa City does offer a warning for your first violation and then has an escalated fee scale where the 00:28:27.768 --> 00:28:37.841 - more violations someone has, the higher the ticket price goes up. Our tasks in progress, we are almost 00:28:37.841 --> 00:28:45.566 - complete with the policy review, which includes looking at Title 15, comparing 00:28:46.210 --> 00:28:54.224 - Title 15 to these peer cities municipal codes, finding the best practices and that will allow us to 00:28:54.224 --> 00:29:02.718 - form our recommendations. We are working on a financial review to look at the parking services, revenues, 00:29:02.718 --> 00:29:10.812 - and expenses to identify areas of improvement and see where there's opportunities to enhance revenue 00:29:10.812 --> 00:29:11.774 - generation. 00:29:12.642 --> 00:29:20.879 - and providing cost estimates to implement the changes that we do recommend. Additionally, we're working 00:29:20.879 --> 00:29:28.878 - through an operations review for the various parking facilities, including the surface lots, garages 00:29:28.878 --> 00:29:36.956 - and on-street. We are reviewing the existing parking equipment and looking at the alternatives as the 00:29:36.956 --> 00:29:41.470 - parking meters are nearing the end of their useful life. 00:29:41.634 --> 00:29:50.466 - and doing an overall general operations review of the parking services department. And looking ahead, 00:29:50.466 --> 00:29:59.384 - we will complete the in-progress tasks this month. Next month, we will submit our recommendations, our 00:29:59.384 --> 00:30:08.390 - implementation plan and review the findings, and we'll finalize the report before the end of this year. 00:30:08.390 --> 00:30:09.342 - Thank you. 00:30:12.322 --> 00:30:21.758 - Report Yes All right, are there any comments or questions from commission members, I know I have some 00:30:21.758 --> 00:30:31.009 - Councilmember Flaherty sure first just could presentation slides be made available I suppose online 00:30:31.009 --> 00:30:40.537 - as well as sent to commissioners. That'd be helpful a second question just about the and thank you for 00:30:40.537 --> 00:30:42.110 - the presentation 00:30:43.042 --> 00:30:50.042 - What happens after the report's submitted? Will it be presented to this body as well? Will there be 00:30:50.042 --> 00:30:57.042 - some type of endorsement or approval sought? Will there be opportunities for feedback and potential 00:30:57.042 --> 00:31:04.182 - rounds of edits? What's anticipated following completion of the work underway? Yeah, I can take that. 00:31:04.182 --> 00:31:11.392 - I mean, it's issued as a draft, and then the process with the city, that's up to the city. We'll issue 00:31:11.392 --> 00:31:12.862 - it to Michelle Wall, 00:31:13.314 --> 00:31:22.740 - at the parking, that's who we report our findings to. And then that process is kind of, that's how it 00:31:22.740 --> 00:31:31.981 - gets reviewed, that's an internal process. But I would anticipate typically, we would have meetings 00:31:31.981 --> 00:31:42.238 - and discuss it, and certainly address questions that will come up. I guess, thank you, and I guess to clarify, 00:31:42.370 --> 00:31:48.495 - If staff want to weigh in on any of the questions I'm asking, if they are in a better position to answer 00:31:48.495 --> 00:31:54.328 - the question, please feel free. Yeah. Hi, this is Michelle again. Yeah, what will happen is this is 00:31:54.328 --> 00:32:00.220 - just like an interim report. And so once they give me more information with the financial on all the 00:32:00.220 --> 00:32:06.462 - other reviews that they're doing with our organization, then we will come back and update you. Absolutely. 00:32:09.890 --> 00:32:18.955 - I'm sorry. Can you clarify by internal report? Like will we see the final report and get a presentation 00:32:18.955 --> 00:32:27.846 - on it? Well that what's that? I'm sorry. I didn't hear Yes, okay. Thank you Questions other questions 00:32:27.846 --> 00:32:36.563 - from members Let me ask a couple first of all With respect to what mr. Flaherty just asked Can this 00:32:36.563 --> 00:32:39.614 - commission expect to have literal? 00:32:39.970 --> 00:32:50.497 - Input before the report is finalized or are you saying that this is a report of the parking services 00:32:50.497 --> 00:33:01.128 - department? As well Yes, so what will happen is this is an interim report once we get the next report 00:33:01.128 --> 00:33:07.486 - we will come to Come to you guys again Let you ask questions 00:33:07.746 --> 00:33:15.186 - And then, of course, there will be a review period that we will come to you before and discuss all these 00:33:15.186 --> 00:33:22.626 - concerns, if there's any concerns or issues, and then finally, if we agree on the recommendations, we'll 00:33:22.626 --> 00:33:30.208 - go to council. So you're saying that there will in fact be an opportunity for this body to have meaningful 00:33:30.208 --> 00:33:35.806 - input and make meaningful changes to the report before it goes to the council? 00:33:36.738 --> 00:33:44.860 - meaningful input I don't know about. It depends on what the changes you're requesting. Well, that remains 00:33:44.860 --> 00:33:52.829 - to be seen, I suppose. Correct. All right. Well, let's talk also about the individual stakeholders that 00:33:52.829 --> 00:34:00.721 - were consulted on this. You had a meeting on March 24th. Can you describe the individual stakeholders? 00:34:00.721 --> 00:34:03.326 - Can you characterize them at all? 00:34:05.122 --> 00:34:14.500 - Is there a list of the people you consulted? There is a list and it was all department heads and directors. 00:34:14.500 --> 00:34:22.922 - And clerks from the appeals office and I can supply you with the list. That's not an issue. Yes, 00:34:22.922 --> 00:34:31.779 - in fact, in addition to that list. I'd also like to ask that those slides be sent as soon as possible 00:34:31.779 --> 00:34:33.950 - to already online Steve. 00:34:34.402 --> 00:34:46.432 - They're under the webpage, our webpage under the parking review. What's that? Okay, very good, 00:34:46.432 --> 00:34:59.221 - thank you. You're welcome. Sorry? You're welcome. Okay. Does this commission count as a stakeholder? 00:34:59.221 --> 00:35:01.374 - Just to clarify. 00:35:02.466 --> 00:35:07.963 - Yeah, hey, Mr. Bowlin, Adam Ways and Public Works Director. I'm sorry, I couldn't be there in person 00:35:07.963 --> 00:35:13.569 - tonight at a high school athletic obligation for my daughter, but can you hear me okay? I'm going over 00:35:13.569 --> 00:35:19.175 - right now. Yes. Yeah, perfect. Hey, so yes, the Transportation Commission is absolutely a stakeholder. 00:35:19.175 --> 00:35:24.726 - It's why we came here tonight to give an interim update. We knew we had made some meaningful progress 00:35:24.726 --> 00:35:27.230 - on data collection, on peer community review, 00:35:27.394 --> 00:35:34.309 - and then wanted to let you all know what those next steps that Lauren outlined were as far as these 00:35:34.309 --> 00:35:41.431 - next phases. So we'll issue out any of the information up to this point. We do expect that you'll have 00:35:41.431 --> 00:35:47.723 - meaningful input and such. This is gonna make some big recommendations on technology uses, 00:35:47.723 --> 00:35:50.558 - on rate structures, on things like that. 00:35:50.722 --> 00:35:57.331 - Not everyone's going to agree on what is probably going to be presented as final information, but we 00:35:57.331 --> 00:36:03.875 - certainly value the Transportation Commission. Their input and you know, over these next 30 to 4560 00:36:03.875 --> 00:36:06.558 - days is a real big period of time where. 00:36:06.754 --> 00:36:13.102 - a lot of this information is going to come to light on the operations study on the financial impacts 00:36:13.102 --> 00:36:19.449 - of the financial review of the recommendations on different technologies and payment options and all 00:36:19.449 --> 00:36:25.860 - those different sorts of things. So we'll plan to come back probably not at your next meeting because 00:36:25.860 --> 00:36:32.208 - that agenda looks pretty full but then probably maybe in the November meeting and in the meantime be 00:36:32.208 --> 00:36:34.910 - sharing out the information that Walker is 00:36:35.106 --> 00:36:42.921 - able to so that you have the ability to start reviewing that and thinking about what input you want 00:36:42.921 --> 00:36:50.814 - to provide. I appreciate that context. I will point out that this body in its first two meetings has 00:36:51.010 --> 00:36:57.086 - Conceived for having three different types of items before it petitions resolutions and what planning 00:36:57.086 --> 00:37:03.222 - staff is called transportation inquiries or what we've together named and This seems to fall into that 00:37:03.222 --> 00:37:09.298 - third category and we're still talking about how to conduct a meeting to hear it But effectively it's 00:37:09.298 --> 00:37:16.030 - like a steering committee meeting or a if you recall the old committees of the whole I think that such a meeting 00:37:16.130 --> 00:37:23.221 - We would be more than happy to schedule a special meeting to address this because the topic is so big. 00:37:23.221 --> 00:37:30.105 - So if it would be amenable to us creating a meeting just to talk about this issue, I think it would 00:37:30.105 --> 00:37:37.058 - be in order. How do you feel about that? We certainly will take that under consideration, try to get 00:37:37.058 --> 00:37:38.366 - it scheduled soon. 00:37:38.498 --> 00:37:44.832 - We'll look at all the schedules and where we're at with the information from Walker and their next steps 00:37:44.832 --> 00:37:51.106 - and how far along they are and try to figure out the best time to make something like that happen Well, 00:37:51.106 --> 00:37:57.440 - we also have to schedule ourselves as well. So I hope that we'll do that in consultation with each other 00:37:57.440 --> 00:38:03.774 - That's what I mean. That's exactly what I mean. Great. All right. Thank you One last question for Walker 00:38:04.546 --> 00:38:12.826 - I noted that you had charts with the five peer cities that all had major universities. You also listed 00:38:12.826 --> 00:38:21.670 - IU Bloomington data. Did you study the data of the universities in those cities as well? It seems incongruous 00:38:21.670 --> 00:38:29.870 - to include IU if you don't also include the universities of the peer cities as well. Do you have that 00:38:29.870 --> 00:38:33.246 - data? No, we were looking at peer cities. 00:38:33.698 --> 00:38:40.000 - And then we were asked to include IU because it's right there on the campus. So we went ahead and did 00:38:40.000 --> 00:38:46.364 - that. We did not specifically go into details of each of the universities, only the, only the, we were 00:38:46.364 --> 00:38:52.605 - really focused on municipalities. That was the intent, but we were asked to go ahead and include the 00:38:52.605 --> 00:38:58.969 - IU campus since it's right here. Cause that would, oh, we knew that would come like a question because 00:38:58.969 --> 00:39:01.502 - it's right, right here in the same area. 00:39:03.810 --> 00:39:09.523 - and it's a missed opportunity, can we expand their remit slightly to have them go back and check the 00:39:09.523 --> 00:39:15.406 - status of the universities so that we can? I'm not sure that we'll be able to change the contract terms 00:39:15.406 --> 00:39:21.289 - and things like that to do that right now. We can talk with Walker, see what data points they collected 00:39:21.289 --> 00:39:26.945 - from IU and see if the information's readily available and see where it goes, but I can't commit to 00:39:26.945 --> 00:39:33.054 - anything right now in terms of changing the project scope without really digging deeper on what that means. 00:39:33.378 --> 00:39:43.717 - Okay, are there any other questions from members before we move on Mr. Coppock Is there is that broken 00:39:43.717 --> 00:39:53.856 - down into times of day and is that gonna be data that's available to us And when you say times a day 00:39:53.856 --> 00:40:01.886 - as far as the question goes I'm sorry like how much money do you bring in from? 00:40:02.018 --> 00:40:11.680 - seven o'clock to nine o'clock at night, say. Was that data that will be available? Like for each of 00:40:11.680 --> 00:40:21.341 - the peer cities? Just by Bloomington's. Oh, well, we're not necessarily doing a financial analysis. 00:40:21.341 --> 00:40:31.486 - This was, those comparisons were really just to focus in on how that rate compares. So again, we're not, 00:40:32.674 --> 00:40:40.171 - We're not necessarily doing a financial analysis, so that was not directly part of the scope. Rick, 00:40:40.171 --> 00:40:47.669 - this is Adam again. Mr. Coppock, we can definitely pull information from our own system and provide 00:40:47.669 --> 00:40:55.316 - that out, though, on how much the meters bring in different times of days and such. We can definitely 00:40:55.316 --> 00:41:00.414 - extrapolate that information. Thank you. We can make that part of a 00:41:00.706 --> 00:41:07.212 - the conversation at the special meeting we convene further questions from commissioners One 00:41:07.212 --> 00:41:14.354 - more councilmember Flaherty, thank you It sounds like I mean this is there were things in the slides 00:41:14.354 --> 00:41:21.708 - and in the presentation indicating I mean essentially this is a set of policy recommendations That will 00:41:21.708 --> 00:41:28.638 - be coming from this so there was mention of identifying best practices making recommendations and 00:41:29.282 --> 00:41:35.828 - Implicitly all of those things are underpinned by a set of value choices and I'm wondering where Specifically 00:41:35.828 --> 00:41:41.958 - those values if at all if those values are articulated our goals are articulated for what we're trying 00:41:41.958 --> 00:41:47.909 - to achieve with any policy changes I'm certainly familiar with the comprehensive plan and other You 00:41:47.909 --> 00:41:53.979 - know formal policy documents that define some of those things but often we need to go further the the 00:41:53.979 --> 00:41:56.478 - now defunct parking commission did have a 00:41:57.122 --> 00:42:03.369 - Policy framework that it adopted and used for a number of years as well. For example So yeah, just curious 00:42:03.369 --> 00:42:09.324 - a little bit more for a little bit more either from staff or the consultants are both about How we're 00:42:09.324 --> 00:42:15.163 - making those recommendations, I mean they don't They all follow from some value framework. What are 00:42:15.163 --> 00:42:21.118 - we trying to optimize for? Etc. So could someone please speak a little bit more to that? Thank you. I 00:42:26.498 --> 00:42:33.618 - Yeah I'll jump in here just to start and ask that Walker or Michelle and her team but yeah we can certainly 00:42:33.618 --> 00:42:40.210 - try to provide that framework of what we're trying to do here generally but I think it's to have an 00:42:40.210 --> 00:42:47.000 - efficient parking system that values all users and does it at a fair cost and tries to do it equitably 00:42:47.000 --> 00:42:52.670 - and all those things you know we can certainly make sure that that's part of a set of 00:42:52.834 --> 00:42:58.892 - how we frame where we come with these recommendations from, you know, we want to look at all the different 00:42:58.892 --> 00:43:04.610 - users and user types and try to balance that with the different needs of all the users. And so, yes, 00:43:04.610 --> 00:43:10.612 - we can certainly try to articulate that more formally as part of our reporting back and the conversations 00:43:10.612 --> 00:43:16.330 - with the Transportation Commission, even in those one in those, you know, stakeholder meetings we'll 00:43:16.330 --> 00:43:17.406 - have with you all. 00:43:21.058 --> 00:43:26.953 - Thank you and maybe for Walker and are you all familiar with all the formal policy statements of the 00:43:26.953 --> 00:43:33.081 - city of Bloomington with respect to parking policy like are those things you have in hand to help inform 00:43:33.081 --> 00:43:39.035 - your review of best practices and recommend any any policy recommendations Yeah, I think I think part 00:43:39.035 --> 00:43:44.930 - of what we know we've done is we have definitely reviewed, you know the code we've reviewed previous 00:43:44.930 --> 00:43:45.630 - reports and 00:43:46.114 --> 00:43:52.933 - I think some of the recommendations that we have kind of evolved around, let's make sure that that value 00:43:52.933 --> 00:43:59.491 - is documented and a clear statement. I think the findings that from the stakeholders that input that 00:43:59.491 --> 00:44:06.050 - a lot of the things we heard and in the survey too, we heard what people understood and how they use 00:44:06.050 --> 00:44:12.804 - the system, what they appreciated, what they liked. So we gained knowledge that way. And that then some 00:44:12.804 --> 00:44:14.622 - of the things that we heard 00:44:15.010 --> 00:44:22.569 - were didn't necessarily line up with what we thought we would say, hey, these are not issues. So the 00:44:22.569 --> 00:44:30.127 - comments that when we got in the stakeholder meetings about being aggressive, meaning the technology 00:44:30.127 --> 00:44:37.686 - doesn't work, that doesn't necessarily surprising because the age of the equipment. I will say, I do 00:44:37.686 --> 00:44:41.054 - personally, I focus on technology at Walker. 00:44:41.218 --> 00:44:48.286 - The equipment in the garages is the useful life for that line of equipment is ending, I think in 2027 00:44:48.286 --> 00:44:55.492 - is when the support ends. So there definitely needs to be a change. That's something that I don't think 00:44:55.492 --> 00:45:02.698 - it's a surprise, but if you're not in the parking technology realm, you may just look at that equipment 00:45:02.698 --> 00:45:05.054 - and say, oh, it looks okay to me. 00:45:05.218 --> 00:45:12.630 - But yeah, the company that sells it is not supporting it after 2027. So we know that this is gonna be 00:45:12.630 --> 00:45:20.477 - a change and the age of the single space meters, I followed the stories of over the years of the equipment, 00:45:20.477 --> 00:45:28.180 - because I've been at Walker 22 years, I was involved in a study, I don't know, 2007 maybe in Bloomington. 00:45:28.180 --> 00:45:32.830 - So I've definitely followed the story and I find it interesting 00:45:32.994 --> 00:45:41.411 - to see how it's evolved. So those comments are very helpful and in our report, the draft report will 00:45:41.411 --> 00:45:50.078 - definitely outline recommendations and policies in line with what we've read and understand. Thank you. 00:45:52.354 --> 00:45:59.484 - I'd like to just point out that in the packet for the Transportation Commission are a number of items 00:45:59.484 --> 00:46:06.543 - brought to us by staff that we'll be considering later. And each one comes with a staff report that, 00:46:06.543 --> 00:46:13.673 - and I just want to read to you the items, the way that staff, planning and engineering staff consider 00:46:13.673 --> 00:46:20.732 - each item is consistent with the city code that defines this commission. It calls for us to consider 00:46:20.732 --> 00:46:22.270 - four things in order. 00:46:22.370 --> 00:46:28.539 - They have to see if the proposed change is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other applicable 00:46:28.539 --> 00:46:34.769 - city adopted plans That's the first item Secondly is consistent with the best practices for eliminating 00:46:34.769 --> 00:46:40.759 - all transportation related fatalities and serious injuries within the city That's probably a lesser 00:46:40.759 --> 00:46:45.790 - concern for parking but still a concern number three is consistent with advancing a 00:46:46.370 --> 00:46:53.289 - a sustainable transportation system and equitable access to all transportation facility users while 00:46:53.289 --> 00:47:00.415 - prioritizing non-automotive modes. And that precedes the final concern, which has adequately conducted 00:47:00.415 --> 00:47:07.472 - public engagement and considered community-centric design tied to targeted outcomes. I note that this 00:47:07.472 --> 00:47:14.875 - presentation started with public opinion about parking, which is important, but it's not the sole concern, 00:47:14.875 --> 00:47:16.190 - and I believe that 00:47:16.290 --> 00:47:25.182 - this order which we're here to observe and act under would be useful to Walker as they continue their 00:47:25.182 --> 00:47:34.597 - study. We hope that the study takes into account all four of those items in that order. I see that Director 00:47:34.597 --> 00:47:41.310 - of Engineering, Andrew Seaborg, has come to the microphone. Please go ahead. 00:47:44.322 --> 00:47:49.858 - The way just to organize things for the Commissioner's sake and then and then I'll certainly follow 00:47:49.858 --> 00:47:55.394 - up with with parking services that their team is prepared but With that we're when we're just doing 00:47:55.394 --> 00:48:01.096 - staff reports. We haven't followed that outline, but when we ultimately are taking things that request 00:48:01.096 --> 00:48:06.078 - Action or vote by this Commission. We will be following that all things in your packet so 00:48:06.242 --> 00:48:12.008 - When this this parking study is likely to result in title 15 changes, which is certainly something that 00:48:12.008 --> 00:48:17.551 - will require action or a recommendation from this board So that packet would have to follow that so 00:48:17.551 --> 00:48:23.372 - I'll provide it to Walker and parking And there will certainly be more dialogue as they work to finalize 00:48:23.372 --> 00:48:29.193 - their report and then ultimately if there are recommendations this body will definitely have that chance 00:48:29.193 --> 00:48:34.238 - I appreciate that. I also just want to point out that it's not too soon to be asking for a 00:48:34.402 --> 00:48:42.489 - Everyone to be thinking in this way. That's why we're here. Absolutely. I appreciate you highlighting 00:48:42.489 --> 00:48:50.734 - that I'd also like to point Walker to the last complete study of the parking commission from 2018 which 00:48:50.734 --> 00:48:59.138 - goes into some more detail than I've heard I might expect from this report up to an including a financial 00:48:59.138 --> 00:49:03.102 - analysis not just of You know budgets but also of 00:49:03.298 --> 00:49:10.274 - You know meter transactions even in 2018 2019 Cash was dropping as a use and park mobile was booming 00:49:10.274 --> 00:49:17.389 - as a use. It's only gotten I mean, I've seen the data as all the way through 2022 and I know that that 00:49:17.389 --> 00:49:24.365 - was a consistent trend even during the pandemic so I think that they would find it interesting and I 00:49:24.365 --> 00:49:29.822 - recommend that they take a look at it while they're preparing their report and 00:49:30.914 --> 00:49:37.786 - If there are no other comments on this, we can move on. Any other comments? Thank you for the presentation. 00:49:37.786 --> 00:49:44.149 - Appreciate everyone being here. We hope to see you at a special meeting that we schedule as soon as 00:49:44.149 --> 00:49:50.703 - it can make it community for everybody. Let's move on now to a staff report on the quick build project 00:49:50.703 --> 00:49:57.130 - at 12th Monroe. I see Hank Duncan. Hello, my name is Hank Duncan, bicycle and pedestrian coordinator 00:49:57.130 --> 00:49:59.166 - in planning and transportation. 00:49:59.682 --> 00:50:05.755 - This is one of the fun projects we're working on in May of this year the Indiana Department of Health 00:50:05.755 --> 00:50:11.829 - division of nutrition and physical activity Awarded the city of Bloomington a $10,000 grant For their 00:50:11.829 --> 00:50:18.021 - tactical urbanism and demonstration grant to support a quick build project at the 12th in Monroe Street 00:50:18.021 --> 00:50:24.273 - intersection This project is designed to improve safety of children walking to and from Tri-North Middle 00:50:24.273 --> 00:50:28.798 - School the Boys and Girls Club of Bloomington and other nearby destinations 00:50:29.602 --> 00:50:36.712 - Identified as a priority corridor in the city's safe streets for all action plan The project will reduce 00:50:36.712 --> 00:50:43.484 - pedestrian crossing distances through the installation of curb extensions Using delineated post and 00:50:43.484 --> 00:50:50.594 - parking blocks the city street department plans to complete installation This fall in 2025 and I'm happy 00:50:50.594 --> 00:50:57.366 - to answer any questions or comments you may have Are there any questions from mr. Duncan on my left 00:50:57.366 --> 00:50:59.262 - is Davis? Could you explain 00:50:59.874 --> 00:51:08.373 - little bit more about what the what curb ins what curb extensions and delineator posts and parking blocks 00:51:08.373 --> 00:51:16.552 - Look like sure, of course actually Kindle Kenoki our project engineer has been working on the concept 00:51:16.552 --> 00:51:24.650 - I don't know if you would like to come up and explain it a little bit more Sure thing Kendall Kenoki 00:51:24.650 --> 00:51:26.494 - engineering department 00:51:26.626 --> 00:51:33.306 - We have some park it parking blocks in storage that we've been trying to utilize and We first put them 00:51:33.306 --> 00:51:39.791 - out on East 3rd Street They didn't hold up super well in that environment. Mr. Kenoki. Can you what 00:51:39.791 --> 00:51:46.536 - is it? What is a parking block a parking block is? When you go and pull into a parking space This stops 00:51:46.536 --> 00:51:53.215 - you from moving all the way forward your tires. That's its primary design and use they have other uses 00:51:53.215 --> 00:51:55.550 - these are rubber parking blocks and 00:51:55.874 --> 00:52:02.148 - So in this case, we're using a combination of rubber parking blocks and delineator posts Which you also 00:52:02.148 --> 00:52:08.241 - see out on East 3rd Street right now about half of them been knocked down But there are they are out 00:52:08.241 --> 00:52:14.394 - there and this basically creates a space in the roadway that used to be Allocated to vehicles that is 00:52:14.394 --> 00:52:19.582 - now an area where pedestrians can occupy and vehicles have to slow down and go around 00:52:20.098 --> 00:52:30.350 - So in this case, it's a quick build more of an interim setup until a more permanent concrete Bump out 00:52:30.350 --> 00:52:40.802 - solution might happen or they can all be removed and the road can go back to what it was before so Miss 00:52:40.802 --> 00:52:47.838 - Davis, did you have a follow-up? Further questions I Have a basic one 00:52:48.066 --> 00:52:54.456 - Define quick build project. What does that mean? Sure, of course. So Essentially, this is any type of 00:52:54.456 --> 00:53:00.909 - project that is not made with permanent materials not concrete So there are different versions of this 00:53:00.909 --> 00:53:07.487 - some demonstration projects may last months three to six months quick build may last three to five years 00:53:07.487 --> 00:53:14.066 - essentially it provides that first step of seeing what this type of project will do in terms of changing 00:53:14.066 --> 00:53:17.950 - behavior changing safety along the street or intersection and 00:53:18.306 --> 00:53:24.569 - So if and when we have funding for a more permanent project, we have the answer already in hand We can 00:53:24.569 --> 00:53:30.710 - go in and do it without having to study it Wait, did you say that the quick build can last 35 years? 00:53:30.710 --> 00:53:37.216 - Sorry, three to five years Okay, but the permanent project supposed to last only six months So demonstrate 00:53:37.216 --> 00:53:43.358 - some demonstration projects depending on what type of material you use could last months. This could 00:53:43.358 --> 00:53:46.398 - last years Thank you. We got it further questions 00:53:49.282 --> 00:53:56.965 - Not thank you for the report. We appreciate it Let's move on now to the 2026 proposed budget update 00:53:56.965 --> 00:54:05.032 - who is presenting this item. Mr. Seabor I Guess I'll introduce myself again Andrew with city engineering 00:54:05.032 --> 00:54:13.406 - Just wanted to take this opportunity to provide the Commission an update on the city's draft budget for 2026 00:54:13.538 --> 00:54:19.145 - Really presenting this as you review the Commission's, you know, why does it exist? It's to review all 00:54:19.145 --> 00:54:24.697 - projects and to make recommendations about things like capital planning and program implementation So 00:54:24.697 --> 00:54:29.814 - just thought this was important to highlight Also just for those not into the weeds this year 00:54:29.814 --> 00:54:35.257 - the administration and City Council are working to rethink how the budget is presented it's kind of 00:54:35.257 --> 00:54:38.142 - an interim step as we work forward to the future and 00:54:38.274 --> 00:54:44.806 - But one of the major priority areas or buckets that the budgets being presented in is the transportation 00:54:44.806 --> 00:54:51.275 - bucket And so roughly that part of the city's budget comprises you could see roughly 33 million dollars 00:54:51.275 --> 00:54:57.683 - spread out between multiple departments and divisions within departments As in the pie chart that I've 00:54:57.683 --> 00:55:01.726 - taken much more is in the City Council's budget packet materials 00:55:01.890 --> 00:55:08.529 - And and within the transportation priority area multiple departments work together to develop a list 00:55:08.529 --> 00:55:15.233 - of projects that are basically underway this year in 2025 and then also projects that are anticipated 00:55:15.233 --> 00:55:21.938 - in 2026 Assuming the budget as presented was is approved. So Just wanted to provide this opportunity. 00:55:21.938 --> 00:55:28.511 - I know this Commission. This is our third meeting just wanting to at least put out there what we're 00:55:28.511 --> 00:55:29.694 - working on and if 00:55:29.826 --> 00:55:37.337 - Just give an opportunity to identify projects or topics that this commission wants us to go deeper into 00:55:37.337 --> 00:55:44.777 - I'm happy to answer any questions that you have Thank you for the report. Are there any questions from 00:55:44.777 --> 00:55:51.999 - commissioners? Am I the only one who's going to ask questions? All right. Well, first of all, could 00:55:51.999 --> 00:55:59.294 - we get something as simple as just a table of actual dollars and not just a percentage of things and 00:55:59.490 --> 00:56:06.418 - You say it's $33 million roughly, you know, where is the bulk of that money going? Which projects is 00:56:06.418 --> 00:56:13.346 - there any kind of breakdown like that? I think at least I think in the report had a link to the more 00:56:13.346 --> 00:56:20.343 - full packet that was presented to city council so that would get a more of a table format of Specific 00:56:20.343 --> 00:56:27.614 - dollars to departments and types of programs So so some of that is is embedded within there right now and 00:56:28.034 --> 00:56:35.896 - And does staff have any opinion about the next budget process and to what extent? This commission will 00:56:35.896 --> 00:56:43.834 - be involved in the setting of priorities. I Think at this point, we're just we're wanting to share this 00:56:43.834 --> 00:56:51.467 - information and curious for for Comments and questions as we move forward That's I guess my initial 00:56:51.467 --> 00:56:57.726 - answer I mean but you can understand why we might be interested in taking part in 00:56:58.370 --> 00:57:03.476 - Absolutely. And ultimately the the budget and the projects that are selected from my perspective are 00:57:03.476 --> 00:57:08.936 - Should be focused on implementing adopted plans that this commission would also be viewing. So so hopefully 00:57:08.936 --> 00:57:14.244 - there aren't major surprises But just to make sure that's that's the direction we're going forward Okay. 00:57:14.244 --> 00:57:19.603 - Well, I look forward to digging further into the budget packet to find the data. It's you say it's linked 00:57:19.603 --> 00:57:24.911 - here in the packet Yeah, I think it's that where it's a page we're seeing on that blue. I think it would 00:57:24.911 --> 00:57:26.782 - take you there. Okay, I see it great 00:57:28.130 --> 00:57:41.076 - Any further comments or questions? Let's move on. Thank you very much. Let's now move on to cases. Let's 00:57:41.076 --> 00:57:54.022 - start with resolution TCR 2505 parking on North Illinois Street. Is there someone who wants to introduce 00:57:54.022 --> 00:57:57.598 - it? Good evening, everybody. 00:57:58.370 --> 00:58:07.162 - My name is great style with the city engineering Jason who? Dries thank you Nice and close to the mic 00:58:07.162 --> 00:58:15.782 - appreciate it this time with the city engineering department, so We received multiple Concern about 00:58:15.782 --> 00:58:24.747 - illegal parking on the west side of Illinois Street between 12 and 15 Street and one of the main issues 00:58:24.747 --> 00:58:27.678 - was vehicle blocking the stop and 00:58:28.290 --> 00:58:38.027 - the bus stop, which creates problems for buses and for riders trying to board safely. And the current 00:58:38.027 --> 00:58:47.764 - situation is on the west side. Signed no parking, but drivers still park there frequently. And on the 00:58:47.764 --> 00:58:57.310 - east side, parking is legal, but cars often park too close to the intersection blocking sight line. 00:58:57.794 --> 00:59:06.805 - Enforcement in the neighborhood is limited. So the current restriction are not working as Intended so 00:59:06.805 --> 00:59:15.640 - that's why we proposed on the west side the blunt No parking signs and alone when parking except at 00:59:15.640 --> 00:59:25.093 - the bus stop Where new no parking sign will be installed like like it's shown on the west side of Illinois 00:59:25.093 --> 00:59:27.390 - Street in the plane there 00:59:28.386 --> 00:59:37.564 - and on the east side we will keep parking legal but Add short no parking buffers at intersections to 00:59:37.564 --> 00:59:47.105 - improve visibility for the traffic so and the benefits of that this will improve safety at intersections 00:59:47.105 --> 00:59:56.282 - at the bus stop and it provides more legal parking for residents and it might also help with traffic 00:59:56.282 --> 00:59:57.918 - calming sense and 00:59:58.178 --> 01:00:07.745 - Cars park on both sides can visually narrow the roadway and slow the driving drivers down So and I also 01:00:07.745 --> 01:00:17.495 - want to highlight something to the commissioners so When it comes to parking restrictions when we install 01:00:17.495 --> 01:00:23.934 - no parking sign It requires an ordinance update this by city cool and 01:00:24.642 --> 01:00:34.656 - So it's reflected in the city code, Title 15. But when we install or extend the yellow curve, that doesn't 01:00:34.656 --> 01:00:44.389 - go through council and it's not COVID-19. So anyway, I will go back to that. From resident perspective, 01:00:44.389 --> 01:00:50.846 - signs are more effective because curves can fade or covered by snow. 01:00:51.042 --> 01:01:00.356 - by snow so while signs are visible year-round and clearly communicate the rules and this Illinois project 01:01:00.356 --> 01:01:09.670 - Is a good example where both yellow curb and Signs will work together, but signage provides the long-term 01:01:09.670 --> 01:01:18.457 - Clarity needed for residents and for the enforcement. I will stop here, and I'm happy to answer any 01:01:18.457 --> 01:01:20.478 - questions may you have 01:01:22.690 --> 01:01:29.021 - Thank you. Are there questions for this case? Mr. Midas not a question just a comment that this has 01:01:29.021 --> 01:01:35.352 - been reported for us for a few years So I really appreciate staff looking at it if and then if this 01:01:35.352 --> 01:01:41.810 - is not the ultimate solution I know there's a possibility for also installing some sort of bus island 01:01:41.810 --> 01:01:48.647 - That would potentially provide more parking in the future, but I'm very happy with this as a as a solution. 01:01:48.647 --> 01:01:49.470 - Thank you. I 01:01:52.322 --> 01:01:59.327 - We're still on questions here. Any questions from commissioners? Mr. Flaherty yet to thank you. Thank 01:01:59.327 --> 01:02:06.676 - you for the presentation. First is em this My assumption is this will increase the number of Legal parking 01:02:06.676 --> 01:02:14.094 - spaces on the street or is that right? Correct and the west side there's no parking right legally currently 01:02:14.094 --> 01:02:21.374 - but alright in practice Yes, but that's if we do that project. Maybe we'll give more spaces parking legal 01:02:21.602 --> 01:02:28.722 - Yeah, even with the additional yellow line extensions for sight distance. Yes side Excuse me. Do you 01:02:28.722 --> 01:02:35.772 - want me to? Why we extended on the east side. Oh, I don't think I think I understand the rationale. 01:02:35.772 --> 01:02:42.962 - I was just confirming the net Gain of parking. The second question was just is this based on like the 01:02:42.962 --> 01:02:50.224 - street with Does this make it function a bit more like a queuing street where you wouldn't necessarily 01:02:50.224 --> 01:02:51.422 - be able to fit a 01:02:51.970 --> 01:03:00.453 - Parked-car two cars passing and another parked car all at the same time Like I'm guessing is that has 01:03:00.453 --> 01:03:08.937 - that something that has come up has been looked at so These were measured in the field by engineering 01:03:08.937 --> 01:03:18.085 - staff so the length correspond to intersections side distance or the best clearance for from our measurement, 01:03:18.085 --> 01:03:20.830 - so I'm pretty sure the road it's 01:03:21.890 --> 01:03:29.116 - Will be like Can to traffic or to vehicle pass fine there? Gotcha, I'm not sure I 100% followed but 01:03:29.116 --> 01:03:36.704 - Isn't that the definition of a queuing Street? Oh, maybe I just misunderstood. I don't maybe you someone 01:03:36.704 --> 01:03:44.003 - could define queuing Street I Do I colloquially define killing the street as maybe we should have an 01:03:44.003 --> 01:03:51.518 - engineer definition instead as one where it's uncomfortable potentially impossible for two cars to pass 01:03:51.714 --> 01:03:58.594 - one another if fully parked out and so that you have to wait a moment for your oncoming neighbor to 01:03:58.594 --> 01:04:05.542 - to pass Prior to it like like how street is one that I'm familiar with which is functions a bit like 01:04:05.542 --> 01:04:12.697 - a queuing street Based on a relatively narrow width for instance Which is generally positive for safety 01:04:12.697 --> 01:04:15.518 - and speeds Yeah, I think so again Andrew 01:04:15.810 --> 01:04:21.338 - I think there is a fair likelihood that where parking exists on both sides It will feel very narrow 01:04:21.338 --> 01:04:26.866 - and likely would function as a queuing street Given there's some back and forth on each side of the 01:04:26.866 --> 01:04:32.505 - street and with driveways that those pinch points will be pretty narrow or limited but but ultimately 01:04:32.505 --> 01:04:38.089 - We are supportive of having that is that people are already parking there now but also We think it's 01:04:38.089 --> 01:04:42.622 - it has that safety benefit from a traffic calming perspective. Okay. Thank you. I 01:04:45.378 --> 01:04:54.478 - further questions on this case Okay, I don't have any others should we go to public comment on this 01:04:54.478 --> 01:05:03.943 - it's time for let's go open the floor to public comment on case number TCR 2505 if If you want to speak 01:05:03.943 --> 01:05:13.316 - you must sign in before being recognized by the chair and you're limited to one three-minute term turn 01:05:13.316 --> 01:05:14.590 - per issue and 01:05:14.818 --> 01:05:22.761 - Direct dialogue or questions are not permitted. All remarks must remain respectful. Zoom participants 01:05:22.761 --> 01:05:30.548 - may use the raise hand feature to be called on to speak. Is there anyone in the room who would like 01:05:30.548 --> 01:05:37.868 - to speak to this case? Is there anyone online? No? Last call for public comment on this case. 01:05:37.868 --> 01:05:44.798 - Seeing none, we'll come back to the commission for debate. If there's any final comment. 01:05:44.898 --> 01:05:55.404 - This might have started weighed in on behalf of transit to anyone who has any thought to my left to 01:05:55.404 --> 01:06:06.331 - my right Seeing none. Let's call the question on case TCR 2505, please call the roll I'll have the vice 01:06:06.331 --> 01:06:14.526 - chair do it from now on go to just make a motion to adopt this recommendation 01:06:16.354 --> 01:06:35.415 - Second second we have motion to second, please call the roll Bowlin yes Flaherty yes Davis. Yes Stossburg. 01:06:35.415 --> 01:06:43.966 - Yes Copic yes Sturmitis. Yes That's adopted 6-0 01:06:45.954 --> 01:06:54.739 - We now move on to the next item I've moved to introduce the next item TCR 2506 parking on West 8th Street 01:06:54.739 --> 01:07:03.855 - Maple Street to Roger Street Second I Appreciate that you actually don't have to do that one But I appreciate 01:07:03.855 --> 01:07:12.143 - well, we're gonna do it now anyway, so yeah, that's fine. Please present mr. Robling Thank You Ryan 01:07:12.143 --> 01:07:14.878 - robing planning services manager 01:07:15.842 --> 01:07:23.543 - Planning and Transportation Department the city received a request from the second Baptist Church Which 01:07:23.543 --> 01:07:31.169 - is 321 North Rogers to extend the limited parking zone on West 8th Street from two hours to four hours 01:07:31.169 --> 01:07:38.944 - You can see that here on the map. Hopefully everybody can see that. Oh, it didn't do it the way I wanted 01:07:38.944 --> 01:07:41.758 - to So from two hours to four hours so 01:07:41.858 --> 01:07:49.926 - This would be on the 500 and 600 blocks of West 8th Street between North Roger Street and North Fairview 01:07:49.926 --> 01:07:57.764 - Street there again currently a two-hour on-street parking from 8 a.m. To 5 p.m. Monday through Friday 01:07:57.764 --> 01:08:05.448 - with an exception for residents who own Hold a zone 10 residential permit and they would be able to 01:08:05.448 --> 01:08:11.518 - mark park 24 7 regardless of the rule change so the Proposal here would change 01:08:11.746 --> 01:08:20.345 - roughly It would sorry it would modify the two-hour limit to a four-hour limit on the north side of 01:08:20.345 --> 01:08:29.203 - West 8th Street between Rogers and Jackson and on the south side for the entirety between North Rogers 01:08:29.203 --> 01:08:37.974 - and Fairview we reached out to the Elementary school and have not heard comment back so we did we did 01:08:37.974 --> 01:08:40.382 - receive that they heard our 01:08:40.482 --> 01:08:46.660 - But haven't heard any comment one way or the other So with that we have some proposed findings 01:08:46.660 --> 01:08:53.229 - the transportation plan identifies this portion of West 8th Street as a neighborhood residential And 01:08:53.229 --> 01:08:59.992 - gives guidance to allow for unmarked on-street parking the comprehensive plan in currency it encourages 01:08:59.992 --> 01:09:06.691 - the expansive use of on-street parking in the downtown in mixed urban or mixed urban residential areas 01:09:06.691 --> 01:09:08.382 - of which this is both and 01:09:08.962 --> 01:09:15.599 - It is consistent with the best practices for eliminating all transportation related fatalities and serious 01:09:15.599 --> 01:09:21.987 - injuries within the city well utilized on street parking Has a traffic calming effect by creating side 01:09:21.987 --> 01:09:28.562 - friction that narrows travel lanes as we were just kind of speaking about this portion of West 8th Street 01:09:28.562 --> 01:09:34.827 - is approximately 34 feet wide and accounts which accounts for 20 foot travel away and seven to seven 01:09:34.827 --> 01:09:38.238 - foot parking lanes so while this typical cross-section 01:09:38.466 --> 01:09:44.806 - Is up for it is a typical cross-section for neighborhood resident residential streets. It is unusual 01:09:44.806 --> 01:09:51.396 - for streets without consistent on-street parking So this change will allow for more consistent on-street 01:09:51.396 --> 01:09:57.987 - parking as it will not have to turn over every two hours It is consistent with advancing the sustainable 01:09:57.987 --> 01:10:04.703 - transportation system and equitable access to all transportation facility users So while on-street parking 01:10:04.703 --> 01:10:08.030 - does not directly advance sustainable transportation 01:10:08.226 --> 01:10:14.479 - or prioritize non-automotive modes of transportation. It does provide for safety benefits through traffic 01:10:14.479 --> 01:10:20.437 - calming and providing buffering between travel ways and integral sidewalks, or occasionally referred 01:10:20.437 --> 01:10:26.395 - to as monolithic sidewalks. So this will provide an additional buffer between people on the sidewalk 01:10:26.395 --> 01:10:32.590 - and the roadway. And finally, has adequate, has this petition has adequately conducted public engagement 01:10:32.590 --> 01:10:36.542 - and considered community-centric design tied to targeted outcomes. 01:10:36.642 --> 01:10:45.062 - Again staff contacted Fairview Elementary, but have not heard back and then oh of note though 20 neighborhood 01:10:45.062 --> 01:10:52.716 - resident residential permits are allotted for Fairview Elementary Employees and that's not proposed 01:10:52.716 --> 01:11:00.447 - to change with these rules and the proposed changes will not affect portions adjacent to residential 01:11:00.447 --> 01:11:04.734 - properties only to the commercial and Elementary school 01:11:05.122 --> 01:11:12.671 - So with that staff recommends the Transportation Commission adopt the proposed findings and forward 01:11:12.671 --> 01:11:20.598 - the resolution for an amendment to section 15 32 0 8 0 Related to the four-hour limit on West 8th Street 01:11:20.598 --> 01:11:28.147 - with a positive recommendation and I can answer any questions Thanks for the presentation are there 01:11:28.147 --> 01:11:33.054 - questions from commissioners on this case Mr. Flaherty Thank you 01:11:33.666 --> 01:11:39.654 - I believe you just articulated some proposed findings, but if I'm not mistaken, I don't think those 01:11:39.654 --> 01:11:45.702 - are in our packet They there was an updated packet. There was an error in the packet. If you refresh 01:11:45.702 --> 01:11:51.750 - it, it should work now Okay, I think I did see that email go out this afternoon and I will I will do 01:11:51.750 --> 01:11:57.918 - that now I do have a second question if that's okay which is Have we just thought about removing these 01:11:57.918 --> 01:12:02.110 - sections of street from zone 10 neighborhood and parking zone which I 01:12:02.818 --> 01:12:10.264 - Best of my recollection is like sort of massively undersubscribed relative to the available spaces already 01:12:10.264 --> 01:12:17.223 - Great question. We did not in this petition. It is something we are considering long term though We 01:12:17.223 --> 01:12:24.321 - it did spark a conversation about zone 10, but we haven't resolved that we wanted to address this one 01:12:24.321 --> 01:12:31.349 - As the church has been waiting a bit for a while now Got it. Thank you Further questions to my right 01:12:31.349 --> 01:12:32.254 - to my left I 01:12:33.826 --> 01:12:43.439 - Did did you look at the? Performance of the block of West HG that has meters on it like just west just 01:12:43.439 --> 01:12:53.052 - east of Rogers is a tiny meter zone Because that might also give you an indication of how much is used 01:12:53.052 --> 01:13:01.918 - in the block to the west of it We did not look at that for this petition no that was there any 01:13:02.082 --> 01:13:09.577 - Data collected like any Spot checks of how many cars were parked at a given place at a given day. Yes 01:13:09.577 --> 01:13:16.999 - staff did go out and look for vehicles We did not it was unfortunate that it was not school year. So 01:13:16.999 --> 01:13:24.641 - we had a handful of residential but didn't see any along the elementary school or Commercial properties 01:13:24.641 --> 01:13:30.814 - just to be clear you saw no use of the parking at all during went out to look at it 01:13:31.106 --> 01:13:38.694 - Yes during the two spot checks again, that was not during the school year. So I don't know how reliable 01:13:38.694 --> 01:13:46.209 - that is long term Further questions before we go to public comment Seeing none, let's go to the public 01:13:46.209 --> 01:13:50.878 - if you'd like to speak Please sign in you'll have three minutes 01:14:03.970 --> 01:14:11.492 - Hello, my name is Daniel Pierce I'm not here for this topic, but I do have children who attend Fairview 01:14:11.492 --> 01:14:18.942 - Elementary and I can say that that stretch of 8th Street is used for the drop-off line and pick up and 01:14:18.942 --> 01:14:26.609 - drop-off line And there is I personally do use the parking along that street when picking up and dropping 01:14:26.609 --> 01:14:33.118 - off my children So I know there is no response from the school, but I know that that is a 01:14:33.506 --> 01:14:42.345 - the state of things there Thank you Thank you Is there further public comment if there's somebody online 01:14:42.345 --> 01:14:50.847 - who would like to speak you may use the raise hand feature in zoom to be called on to speak I See no 01:14:50.847 --> 01:14:59.517 - other speakers in the room. That's anybody online last call for public comment on Case number TCR 2506 01:14:59.517 --> 01:15:01.790 - Seeing none, let's move on 01:15:02.434 --> 01:15:13.787 - Debate are there any final comments on this case is presented To my left To my right I'll say a couple 01:15:13.787 --> 01:15:25.360 - things first of all I Think it's safe to say that we would like to see data If you have data that should 01:15:25.360 --> 01:15:31.422 - be part of the staff report any data and if data isn't 01:15:31.874 --> 01:15:39.962 - I mean, in the case of a neighborhood parking where it's not easy to get data because we don't have 01:15:39.962 --> 01:15:48.454 - meters tracking it, some kind of collection. I know that we collect traffic speeds, and I mean, we might 01:15:48.454 --> 01:15:56.542 - want to talk about what would be a simple, pragmatic way for staff to collect data, but it's better 01:15:56.542 --> 01:16:00.990 - than ANIC data. Nevertheless, I also take to heart the 01:16:01.378 --> 01:16:09.506 - of this particular neighborhood zone. I mean, the neighborhood zones all were started in reaction to 01:16:09.506 --> 01:16:17.634 - people commuting to IU, and zone 10 was the first zone that skipped over downtown, and it might have 01:16:17.634 --> 01:16:25.923 - been an overreaction. And something that I think that we need to think about, the commission and staff 01:16:25.923 --> 01:16:30.430 - need to think about how to evaluate neighborhood zones. 01:16:30.658 --> 01:16:38.630 - The last I knew from the parking commission five of the ten remaining neighborhood zones were undersubscribed 01:16:38.630 --> 01:16:46.239 - and five were oversubscribed and it might lead to an assumption that we should change the price in those 01:16:46.239 --> 01:16:53.921 - zones that are Undersubscribed to be lower and the ones that are oversubscribed to be higher so Something 01:16:53.921 --> 01:16:59.646 - to think about when we take that I take that it was a transportation inquiry I 01:17:00.738 --> 01:17:07.916 - Having said that, if there's no other comment, can we please call the roll on TCR 2506? You still have 01:17:07.916 --> 01:17:15.372 - to make a motion. Sorry. We did that at the beginning. No, you have to make a motion to adopt the proposed 01:17:15.372 --> 01:17:22.829 - findings, if that's what your goal is. Sorry. I move that the Transportation Commission adopt the proposed 01:17:22.829 --> 01:17:30.494 - findings and forward the resolution for an amendment to section 16 to council with a positive recommendation. 01:17:30.786 --> 01:17:44.339 - Second there's your motion. Thank you. I appreciate it Clerk, please call the roll Flaherty, yes Davis 01:17:44.339 --> 01:17:57.498 - Yes Stossberg, yes Copic yes Sturmitis. Yes Boland. Yes That is adopted six zero Do I hear a motion 01:17:57.498 --> 01:17:59.998 - for the next item? 01:18:05.378 --> 01:18:15.172 - I move that we hear the TCP 2507 for Resident led traffic calming program on West 11th Street Second 01:18:15.172 --> 01:18:25.160 - we have motion in a second here to present apparently is Hank Duncan Hi again, Hank Duncan bicycle and 01:18:25.160 --> 01:18:27.390 - pedestrian coordinator 01:18:28.514 --> 01:18:34.257 - The resident-led traffic calming program provides Bloomington residents with the opportunity to request 01:18:34.257 --> 01:18:39.889 - and shape traffic calming measures in their neighborhoods. Applications require signatures of support 01:18:39.889 --> 01:18:45.742 - from adjacent residents and letters of support from neighborhood associations or community organizations. 01:18:45.742 --> 01:18:51.374 - Applications for 2025 were reviewed and scored using the program's criteria, which prioritize safety, 01:18:51.374 --> 01:18:52.478 - demand, and equity. 01:18:53.250 --> 01:18:59.459 - Out of the four complete applications the West 11th Street corridor received the highest score and was 01:18:59.459 --> 01:19:05.667 - therefore the highest priority location for the 2025 program After sending mailers to nearby residents 01:19:05.667 --> 01:19:11.876 - hosting a public meeting at the boys and girls club Publishing an online comment form and coordinating 01:19:11.876 --> 01:19:17.964 - with other stakeholders like try North Middle School EMS and Bloomington Transit City staff narrowed 01:19:17.964 --> 01:19:22.846 - on a concept that reduces the posted speed limit from 30 to 25 miles an hour and 01:19:23.714 --> 01:19:30.348 - which will implement three sets of speed cushions along the project area to slow motor vehicle speeds 01:19:30.348 --> 01:19:36.851 - and encourage safer pedestrian crossings. Staff recommends that the Transportation Commission adopt 01:19:36.851 --> 01:19:43.940 - the proposed findings, approve this project concept, and forward the proposed amendment to section 15.24.020 01:19:43.940 --> 01:19:50.573 - of title 15 related to the posted speed limit on West 11th Street to the City Council with a positive 01:19:50.573 --> 01:19:51.614 - recommendation. 01:19:51.714 --> 01:20:04.904 - I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you, Mr. Duncan. Are there questions on this item from commissioners? 01:20:04.904 --> 01:20:17.127 - To my left. To my right. I have one question. I see a bump out for a mid-block crossing there, and I 01:20:17.127 --> 01:20:18.942 - wonder if that 01:20:19.106 --> 01:20:26.744 - I mean, this is a neighbor with monolithic sidewalks Can that bump out be made big enough to put a tree 01:20:26.744 --> 01:20:34.308 - in? So the bump out that you're describing at Blair Street Currently so that currently exists that was 01:20:34.308 --> 01:20:38.494 - a part of a crosswalk program a couple of years back and 01:20:38.818 --> 01:20:45.881 - Essentially what this project attempts to enhance is the pedestrian crossing at that specific crosswalk 01:20:45.881 --> 01:20:52.944 - You have a lot of children and students walking to and from China North Middle School at that crosswalk 01:20:52.944 --> 01:20:59.871 - and so with this project two of the three sets of speed cushions are Alongside that crosswalk to slow 01:20:59.871 --> 01:21:06.526 - down traffic there That tree plot exactly. I don't know the width of it, but it looks to be about 01:21:06.754 --> 01:21:13.506 - Three-feet wide maybe for max which would be too narrow for a tree that said I can still talk to our 01:21:13.506 --> 01:21:20.458 - senior environmental planner to Discuss that possibility. I guess what I meant was can we is it perhaps 01:21:20.458 --> 01:21:27.477 - possible to make it policy that tree plots added to monolithic sidewalks be widened enough that it could 01:21:27.477 --> 01:21:32.958 - conceivably have trees in them because it's not actually a tree plot as it is and 01:21:33.442 --> 01:21:41.369 - Yes, so in general, yes, absolutely. We support that for this specific location Again, this was a project 01:21:41.369 --> 01:21:48.996 - that was done before I came into this position but I believe the width was of this mid-block crossing 01:21:48.996 --> 01:21:56.624 - was designed to allow for Narrowest streets but not so narrow that it detracts from EMS accessibility 01:21:56.624 --> 01:21:58.942 - transit service, etc Thank you 01:21:59.074 --> 01:22:05.897 - The other question I had was about can you in the prioritization scores for the different blocks that 01:22:05.897 --> 01:22:12.921 - applied? You have an item called walk potential. Can you please define walk potential? Yes, and actually 01:22:12.921 --> 01:22:19.677 - I might pass this off to Commissioner Stossberg who developed this Commissioner Stossberg, I believe 01:22:19.677 --> 01:22:26.768 - you have something to contribute to this discussion. Yes so this walk potential metric defines Pedestrian 01:22:26.768 --> 01:22:28.574 - demand throughout the city 01:22:28.866 --> 01:22:36.780 - by looking at 20 different categories of interesting destinations which you might want to walk to. Could 01:22:36.780 --> 01:22:44.844 - be a barbershop, church, various things. And the more categories of interesting amenities that are nearby, 01:22:44.844 --> 01:22:53.059 - the higher your walk potential. This is not a metric for comfort, for walk, what you might call walkability. 01:22:53.059 --> 01:22:57.054 - So it's useful in a planning context because you can 01:22:57.154 --> 01:23:03.254 - Use it to locate places where you say this has a lot of potential There's a lot of things that 01:23:03.254 --> 01:23:09.931 - are interesting nearby to walk to but yet the sidewalk is missing or it's in poor condition or so forth 01:23:09.931 --> 01:23:16.673 - so the there were four given here two of them including the block we're considering Where it had a score 01:23:16.673 --> 01:23:23.158 - of four point six seven one had a score of eleven point six seven one at a score of fourteen What is 01:23:23.158 --> 01:23:25.726 - the maximum possible walk potential? so 01:23:26.114 --> 01:23:33.406 - If you use the wrong number of categories, there's about 20 In some in some context you might scale 01:23:33.406 --> 01:23:40.843 - it to 100% So I don't know in which well, I mean how was this used was it used as out of 20 or out of 01:23:40.843 --> 01:23:48.354 - 100 or what? This was used. Let me look at the rubric if I can pull that up because every category has 01:23:48.354 --> 01:23:52.510 - a specific weight to it and Essentially if that block is 01:23:52.642 --> 01:23:59.933 - Had a walk potential of a hundred that it would have received the full weight of that category. Yeah, 01:23:59.933 --> 01:24:07.225 - oh The blue in ten-minute walk score rubric and it's up to 14 points. Yes, so the highest score is 14 01:24:07.225 --> 01:24:14.445 - points if that project area had a walk score of a hundred and The entire partition score is out of a 01:24:14.445 --> 01:24:19.806 - hundred points. Yes. Okay, very good. So this one scored at 86 percent and 01:24:20.162 --> 01:24:27.072 - Seven versus 1752 and it was a pretty easy choice. Yes The last one was only scored at 21 percent. Is 01:24:27.072 --> 01:24:33.846 - that because there were no measurement of motor vehicle speeds there? Because it says motor vehicle 01:24:33.846 --> 01:24:40.891 - speeds of zero on North Woodburn Avenue between 17th and Vaughn Clipway Yes, so that was an interesting 01:24:40.891 --> 01:24:47.326 - case where? actually half of the street is privately owned half of it is publicly owned and so 01:24:48.386 --> 01:24:55.051 - While we would like to Implement some type of traffic calming that it's just not a feasible street in 01:24:55.051 --> 01:25:01.650 - this process to do so got it But that people applied to have that street be calmed. Mm-hmm. What did 01:25:01.650 --> 01:25:08.315 - you advise them about? I mean they must have been dismayed by this very low score so essentially what 01:25:08.315 --> 01:25:15.306 - I recommended them and I actually did this myself a couple of years ago when they first applied is attempt 01:25:15.306 --> 01:25:16.286 - to contact the 01:25:16.802 --> 01:25:23.080 - that multifamily complex along the street that takes care of a maintains the street and I wasn't able 01:25:23.080 --> 01:25:29.358 - to actually reach anybody with influence in that After many phone calls quite honestly, but that that 01:25:29.358 --> 01:25:35.574 - would have been my right that was my recommendation to those residents to Contact them about traffic 01:25:35.574 --> 01:25:41.790 - calming on that part of the street. Thank you Any further questions before you go to public comment? 01:25:43.906 --> 01:25:51.973 - Seeing none, let's go to the public for comment on case TCP 2507. If there's anyone in the room who'd 01:25:51.973 --> 01:26:00.278 - like to speak, please come to the mic, sign in. If you're online, please raise your hand in Zoom. You'll 01:26:00.278 --> 01:26:08.266 - have three minutes. Seeing nobody in the room, there's anybody online. Last call for public comment. 01:26:08.266 --> 01:26:10.718 - Coming back to the commission, 01:26:10.818 --> 01:26:20.211 - Are there any is there any debate on TCP 2507? Am I right? On my left Seeing none is there a motion 01:26:20.211 --> 01:26:29.697 - I Move that the Transportation Commission adopt the proposed findings and for the proposed amendment 01:26:29.697 --> 01:26:38.526 - to section 15 To counsel with a positive recommendation second a motion and a second will the 01:26:38.978 --> 01:26:51.579 - Whoever is acting as the clerk, please call the roll Secretary secretary. Sorry. No, you're okay Davis 01:26:51.579 --> 01:27:03.935 - Yes Stossberg, yes Copic. Yes Sturmitis. Yes Boland. Yes Flaherty. Yes TCP 2507 is adopted six zero. 01:27:03.935 --> 01:27:08.094 - Let's move on to the next item. I 01:27:14.978 --> 01:27:23.360 - I move to discuss TCR 2508, Hopewell West and related code updates. Second. We have a motion and a second. 01:27:23.360 --> 01:27:31.115 - Here to present is Mr. Kenoki. Thank you, commissioners. Good evening. Kendall Kenoki, engineering 01:27:31.115 --> 01:27:39.575 - department. So I'm here to present to you the Hopewell West Jackson and Rogers Street project, specifically 01:27:39.575 --> 01:27:42.238 - under your consideration tonight. 01:27:42.498 --> 01:27:50.333 - Amendments to the Bloomington Municipal Code. So first is to amend schedule a of 15 12 10 to add a stop 01:27:50.333 --> 01:27:58.018 - sign on the new Jackson Street and then the second item is to amend the 15 32 100 schedule Oh loading 01:27:58.018 --> 01:28:05.778 - zone to add a loading zone on Jackson Street, but wanted to give you a overview of the project so this 01:28:05.778 --> 01:28:10.750 - is the first phase of the build out of the Hopewell West site and 01:28:10.914 --> 01:28:17.550 - Which is the site of the former IU Health Bloomington Hospital. This is the Site where the main hospital 01:28:17.550 --> 01:28:23.933 - building was if you remember the old hospital site the primary purpose of this phase of construction 01:28:23.933 --> 01:28:30.569 - is to build infrastructure to support the redevelopment of the former core administration building which 01:28:30.569 --> 01:28:36.446 - is now redeveloped into the core community flats, which is an affordable housing project and 01:28:36.898 --> 01:28:43.592 - A ready grant was received from the Indiana Economic Development Council or committee or something the 01:28:43.592 --> 01:28:50.221 - IEDC 1.8 million dollars so a large portion of our construction and design costs were covered by that 01:28:50.221 --> 01:28:56.851 - grant which was great and this includes the construction of a new block of Jackson Street adjacent to 01:28:56.851 --> 01:29:01.790 - the core building so just west of the Project there you see that new street 01:29:01.922 --> 01:29:08.312 - Within the orange outline that is the new section of Jackson Street There's also a new alley to the 01:29:08.312 --> 01:29:15.021 - north of the core building. It goes about halfway That's part of this project and then the entire length 01:29:15.021 --> 01:29:21.411 - of South Roger Street So everything's being built per the current transportation plan standards. So 01:29:21.411 --> 01:29:24.542 - Roger Street is getting protected bike lanes and 01:29:24.642 --> 01:29:31.730 - A new 10-foot wide sidewalk and five foot wide tree plot on the west side, which is where the subdivision 01:29:31.730 --> 01:29:38.416 - is First street was recently reconstructed in accordance with their transportation plan and Jackson 01:29:38.416 --> 01:29:45.170 - Street is a new street It's being constructed in accordance with their transportation plan. So Again 01:29:45.170 --> 01:29:52.057 - the item for you all tonight is those two changes to the Bloomington municipal code so I will go ahead 01:29:52.057 --> 01:29:52.926 - and read the 01:29:53.890 --> 01:30:11.198 - Recommendation here. Excuse me, give me a moment here. There we go. 01:30:11.586 --> 01:30:18.994 - Staff recommends that the Transportation Commission adopt the proposed findings and forward the resolution 01:30:18.994 --> 01:30:26.402 - for an amendment to schedule a Stop intersections and schedule Oh loading zones of title 15 to the council 01:30:26.402 --> 01:30:33.533 - with a positive recommendation Happy to answer any questions. Thank you Thank you for the presentation 01:30:33.533 --> 01:30:40.318 - Are there questions from commissioners on? the measure under consideration To my right To my left 01:30:42.690 --> 01:30:51.112 - So just to be clear, these are streets that are being, I'm looking at the diagram, this is a street 01:30:51.112 --> 01:30:59.871 - that's being added, right? Yes, South Jackson Street and the alley are new streets. And they don't have 01:30:59.871 --> 01:31:08.293 - any controls on them yet and you're just asking for the controls to be put in? That's correct, yes. 01:31:08.293 --> 01:31:10.398 - Thank you. Mr. Flaherty. 01:31:10.786 --> 01:31:18.214 - Further the rationale with the alley not extending through to Rogers the East West alley there Yeah, 01:31:18.214 --> 01:31:25.569 - I that was a decision that was made before my time at the city But I believe there were issues with 01:31:25.569 --> 01:31:33.145 - the grading to get that to connect at the time I can find out more for you if you'd like the as in the 01:31:33.145 --> 01:31:39.838 - differential in height between Rogers and we're okay. Yes. Thank you Any further questions 01:31:41.762 --> 01:31:49.383 - Seeing none, we'll go to the public for a comment on TCR 2508. If there's anyone in the room who'd like 01:31:49.383 --> 01:31:57.151 - to speak, please come to the mic, sign in. If you're on Zoom, please raise your hand and you'll be called 01:31:57.151 --> 01:32:04.479 - on. You'll have three minutes. I see no takers in the room. Do you see any takers online? Last call 01:32:04.479 --> 01:32:11.294 - for public comment on TCR 2508. Seeing none, we'll come back to the commission for a debate. 01:32:13.250 --> 01:32:20.887 - Any comments to my left? To my right. Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. I move that the Transportation 01:32:20.887 --> 01:32:28.096 - Commission adopt the proposed findings and forward the resolution for an amendment to Schedule A for 01:32:28.096 --> 01:32:35.733 - stop intersections and Schedule O for loading zones of Title 15 to counsel with a positive recommendation. 01:32:35.733 --> 01:32:42.942 - Second. Motion and a second. There's no objection. Will the secretary call the roll? Stossberg. Yes. 01:32:43.554 --> 01:32:54.281 - Topic. Yes. Strabitis. Bowlin. Yes. Flaherty. Yes. Davis. Yes. That's adopted 6-0. That completes our 01:32:54.281 --> 01:33:05.218 - cases for tonight. We now move to discussion of topics not on the docket. Does any member have any item 01:33:05.218 --> 01:33:09.214 - they'd like to bring up? Mr. Coppock. 01:33:14.370 --> 01:33:21.197 - Asked Andrew maybe about if they've ever looked at the intersection of third and college for traffic 01:33:21.197 --> 01:33:28.024 - accidents Someone asked me to bring it up because they have quite a few accidents there And wondered 01:33:28.024 --> 01:33:34.919 - if that had ever been looked at for any possible way to remediate those Yeah, I feel like I've gotten 01:33:34.919 --> 01:33:41.882 - that question before and I wish I had a better memory than I do but I know that intersection is is has 01:33:41.882 --> 01:33:43.166 - been looked at and 01:33:43.426 --> 01:33:49.456 - I also know I have a great team that almost every day checks to see any note significant crashes that 01:33:49.456 --> 01:33:55.486 - have happened throughout the city I also know there's a lot of changes coming at that location Beyond 01:33:55.486 --> 01:34:01.517 - the convention center. There's there's also the college and walnut corridor study. So so really right 01:34:01.517 --> 01:34:07.606 - now from my perspective Looking forward to further discussion on that that upcoming course already and 01:34:07.606 --> 01:34:12.158 - expect this commission to get an update in the coming months on that as well 01:34:14.914 --> 01:34:23.504 - Thank you. I must confess. I thought he said third in college mall and so I thought that's a that's 01:34:23.504 --> 01:34:32.438 - another state state highways, but is there a handy list of Crash like data like the top ranking crashes 01:34:32.438 --> 01:34:41.458 - easily found There is the city or excuse me the Bloomington Metro Bloomington Monroe County Metropolitan 01:34:41.458 --> 01:34:44.894 - Planning Organization recently launched 01:34:45.282 --> 01:34:51.656 - A crash dashboard which has a map of all the crashes that have taken place in the last five years It 01:34:51.656 --> 01:34:58.030 - also has a bunch of interesting data like highest risk intersections So you can look on that online. 01:34:58.030 --> 01:35:04.593 - I'll link it to the Transportation Commission website. I'll also send it to you all and that's not just 01:35:04.593 --> 01:35:11.156 - state roads That's all roads in the city every road in the county. Well, that's wonderful. Yeah, that's 01:35:11.156 --> 01:35:15.006 - wonderful Any other items for discussion I've got one or two 01:35:15.874 --> 01:35:21.709 - Mr. Flaherty just briefly when we were speaking about parking earlier and and some other things we were 01:35:21.709 --> 01:35:27.487 - talking about to head occasion to revisit city code for that authorizes this commission and spells out 01:35:27.487 --> 01:35:33.098 - its duties and just wanted to remind us to that we've got an Item d7 which is to produce or oversee 01:35:33.098 --> 01:35:39.157 - an annual analysis of parking asset management Including when I limited to reporting all costs and revenues 01:35:39.157 --> 01:35:44.094 - for city-owned structured parking surface parking meter parking neighborhood zones, etc 01:35:44.418 --> 01:35:50.575 - Documenting real utilization rates including longitudinal trends conducting or contracting for parking 01:35:50.575 --> 01:35:56.672 - data analytics and recommending changes to that system based on our city goals And I did have to miss 01:35:56.672 --> 01:36:02.949 - a meeting earlier of this Commission So I don't know if we've discussed this at all yet, but like that's 01:36:02.949 --> 01:36:08.927 - a big undertaking. It's probably one that will entail some resourcing to have Consultant support is 01:36:08.927 --> 01:36:13.470 - my guess that we don't have that in house capacity necessarily or expertise 01:36:13.698 --> 01:36:20.555 - but this was an important part of the formation of this this Commission to make sure that we weren't 01:36:20.555 --> 01:36:27.411 - going to lose Some of the really valuable data that the parking Commission produced an analysis Even 01:36:27.411 --> 01:36:34.472 - if had we had fallen behind based on the the sheer magnitude of that Work to produce it. So just wanted 01:36:34.472 --> 01:36:40.446 - to bring that to our attention. I know we got started halfway through the year here and 01:36:40.898 --> 01:36:48.369 - Maybe it's not feasible this year. I don't know but we do need to be thinking about it and proactively 01:36:48.369 --> 01:36:56.130 - planning for how we're gonna get there. Thanks Is there any discussion of this item? Does any commissioner 01:36:56.130 --> 01:37:03.456 - have a new thought? I'll just want to echo mr. Flaherty then I note that it sounded it did not sound 01:37:03.456 --> 01:37:09.694 - like the Walker study was going to do as much as what mr. Flaherty just described and 01:37:10.114 --> 01:37:18.359 - and so we are a little late to their show and I hope that we can still get them to Consider some of 01:37:18.359 --> 01:37:26.686 - the things that is our remit But I appreciate you bringing that to our attention and I would like to 01:37:26.686 --> 01:37:35.096 - you know to talk with staff administratively about how we can organize to produce that kind of report 01:37:35.096 --> 01:37:37.982 - Any other items from commissioners 01:37:38.690 --> 01:37:45.918 - Mr. Oh, how about the well ahead before you do that? I think mr. Robling had something to say about 01:37:45.918 --> 01:37:53.291 - all this. Oh Let's go to let's go to mr. Coppock first mr. Coppock you reference it close to the mic, 01:37:53.291 --> 01:38:01.098 - please you reference the 2018 study on parking is that available online? it's on the old parking Commission 01:38:01.098 --> 01:38:06.302 - website, we will endeavor to make sure that it and other items from the 01:38:06.882 --> 01:38:14.091 - Preceding commissions the traffic and the bikebed Commission get linked onto the Transportation Commission 01:38:14.091 --> 01:38:21.030 - site as soon as possible Again another thing for an administrative session to try to get all this data 01:38:21.030 --> 01:38:28.036 - planned Mr. Robling Yeah, I just we planning and transportation is having a couple of upcoming meetings 01:38:28.036 --> 01:38:34.302 - the noteworthy one before the next meeting is the 10th Street safety improvement project and 01:38:34.722 --> 01:38:43.435 - We will be meeting at 530 on 10th Street at mr. Copy if you're familiar with that It is 501 East 10th 01:38:43.435 --> 01:38:51.978 - Street. It'll start at 530. We'll have some proposed designs Engineered designs to go over with the 01:38:51.978 --> 01:39:00.862 - public. So if you're interested come on out, thank you Thank you other items for discussion of topics I 01:39:01.474 --> 01:39:08.245 - One question I have is is there a master list of all the corridor studies that are currently? That have 01:39:08.245 --> 01:39:14.951 - been done or being done and if so, we're the ones that are done available. Are they on the engineering 01:39:14.951 --> 01:39:21.526 - website or Planning corridor studies would be on the planning and transportation website. We haven't 01:39:21.526 --> 01:39:27.646 - completed any as of yet, but once we get that Completed they'll start to come online on there 01:39:27.970 --> 01:39:33.283 - How about past studies? I think there was a self-wallet study for example years ago Oh sure, we could 01:39:33.283 --> 01:39:38.543 - go back that far. Absolutely. We could link those actually that would already be on the planning and 01:39:38.543 --> 01:39:43.908 - transportation plan or excuse me planning and transportation department Clearing house page, but I can 01:39:43.908 --> 01:39:49.168 - update that and link it on the Transportation Commission webpage Finally I wanted to ask I know that 01:39:49.168 --> 01:39:54.533 - I spoke with Commissioner drama Johnny before this meeting and I had a similar request both of us have 01:39:54.533 --> 01:39:55.262 - observed that 01:39:55.490 --> 01:40:04.015 - Near where we live an example of a place that could use attention in the way that we had with case TCR 01:40:04.015 --> 01:40:12.292 - 2505 tonight there's a block that could use a sign not just a yellow curb that there's a Visibility 01:40:12.292 --> 01:40:20.735 - problem where there's a lack of a crosswalk or something and we both had the same sort of Loathing to 01:40:20.735 --> 01:40:24.542 - to put it forward because we live near it and 01:40:25.250 --> 01:40:32.952 - And yet we also want other people to bring forward such ideas. So I don't know if there's any discussion 01:40:32.952 --> 01:40:40.288 - to be had except maybe administratively how to do it, but I'd like to propose that somebody look at 01:40:40.288 --> 01:40:47.770 - the corner of University and Henderson. He'd like to propose somebody look at Smith Road near Hoosier 01:40:47.770 --> 01:40:54.078 - Acres and Gentry, that there's no crosswalk there. These are not formal requests yet. 01:40:54.338 --> 01:41:01.838 - We don't know how to proceed or what staff has in mind for Addressing such concerns and how can we then 01:41:01.838 --> 01:41:09.050 - teach the public to use this process? We have yet to create Mr. Seabor Yeah, I think the the answer 01:41:09.050 --> 01:41:16.334 - I usually give is I encourage the public to use the city's you report system that's I think the best 01:41:16.334 --> 01:41:21.310 - weight for the public and for staff to be able to track requests and 01:41:21.442 --> 01:41:29.254 - And to initiate discussion and in some of the cases I think that you saw today started as a you report 01:41:29.254 --> 01:41:36.989 - so so that so that's my first thing then where I would point most folks to as commissioners, I'd also 01:41:36.989 --> 01:41:44.725 - suggest that We are staff here to support you and so you're more than welcome to shoot us an email as 01:41:44.725 --> 01:41:50.110 - well And we'll follow up with that Okay. Thank you very much Any other 01:41:50.562 --> 01:41:57.533 - Discussions for the topics of topics not on the docket. I Just asked for I can report that I submitted 01:41:57.533 --> 01:42:04.437 - the you report yesterday and before 9 a.m. Today I had an initial reply and by 11 it was resolved and 01:42:04.437 --> 01:42:11.408 - my experience was submitting your reports over the year has has always been positive in their received 01:42:11.408 --> 01:42:18.718 - prompt attention, so Our government is working well for us in that regard and I I second the recommendation 01:42:18.718 --> 01:42:20.478 - to use your report if you 01:42:20.674 --> 01:42:30.820 - find something in our city that needs fixed. Thank you. Ms. Davis. Mr. Robling, I wonder if you could 01:42:30.820 --> 01:42:40.866 - say again what exactly is happening at Mr. Copy on 10th Street. Also, and I'm asking because I don't 01:42:40.866 --> 01:42:49.022 - believe Mr. Copy is accessible if one had to go inside for whatever is happening. 01:42:50.402 --> 01:42:57.333 - Okay, great question. It is outside so it should be accessible and there will be no cars in the parking 01:42:57.333 --> 01:43:04.131 - lot I mean you can park in the parking lot is what I mean It'll be after the minister copy closes. We 01:43:04.131 --> 01:43:11.062 - are that there's a 10th Street Safety improvement project that is taking place. It is between Kendall's 01:43:11.062 --> 01:43:18.526 - not here so I can't double-check with him park and let's say Rogers, but that's not right. It must be Morton so 01:43:18.722 --> 01:43:24.824 - There is a it's a high priority stretch in the safe streets in roads for all safety action plan So we've 01:43:24.824 --> 01:43:30.926 - prioritized this as a potential project and so we have some improvements that We are looking to complete 01:43:30.926 --> 01:43:37.145 - and this is the second public meeting So this is the first where we come with a roughly engineered design. 01:43:37.145 --> 01:43:42.782 - It's not a hundred percent design It's more of a thirty percent design of what we're thinking is 01:43:42.978 --> 01:43:50.541 - To get feedback from the public and like I said that will be on September 22nd at 530 in the mr. Carver 01:43:50.541 --> 01:43:57.959 - copy parking lot Okay, did you have any follow-up I Guess no. No, you're good. All right Let's go now 01:43:57.959 --> 01:44:05.523 - to general public comment on items not on the docket if there's any member of the public who would like 01:44:05.523 --> 01:44:12.286 - to speak to the Commission on a topic we've not already brought up today, please sign in and 01:44:12.642 --> 01:44:26.674 - And you'll have three minutes Good evening, my name is James Ferguson. I am representing the petition 01:44:26.674 --> 01:44:40.981 - for the Blue Ridge Community the last meeting We discussed this petition which was originally Presented 01:44:40.981 --> 01:44:42.494 - to the old 01:44:42.626 --> 01:44:53.260 - Commission which was dissolved immediately after We presented this and I know there was interest from 01:44:53.260 --> 01:45:03.895 - this Commission to See the minutes and possibly somehow get those approved but in barring that I have 01:45:03.895 --> 01:45:10.046 - brought the copy of the petition and the proposals for the 01:45:10.626 --> 01:45:19.579 - the changes to North Walnut Street that we are asking for it Came to our attention that Planning or 01:45:19.579 --> 01:45:29.158 - engineering department had done a study and determined that the light was not something that was necessary 01:45:29.158 --> 01:45:38.469 - Although we're still hopeful and pushing towards that goal because there are the speeds on North Walnut 01:45:38.469 --> 01:45:39.454 - Street and 01:45:39.778 --> 01:45:50.391 - Excessive there have been well, let's see just from the data one of our constituents found for the last 01:45:50.391 --> 01:46:00.697 - four years there was three rear-end accidents one side swipe and One person ran off the road. That's 01:46:00.697 --> 01:46:02.942 - in the last from 2019 01:46:04.098 --> 01:46:12.175 - Previous to that, there have been multiple other accidents in that region, which I presented a list 01:46:12.175 --> 01:46:20.414 - of accidents, et cetera, et cetera, and there had been at least one fatality at that intersection. So 01:46:20.414 --> 01:46:28.976 - we are very concerned about the safety of this intersection. We've noted the changes that the engineering 01:46:28.976 --> 01:46:33.822 - has come up with as far as adding two dedicated turn lanes. 01:46:34.466 --> 01:46:43.655 - to that intersection, although in our proposal we are requesting for two more dedicated. One is a shared 01:46:43.655 --> 01:46:52.668 - right turn lane which would share the current bicycle lane that turns into Blue Ridge. This would make 01:46:52.668 --> 01:47:00.894 - it much safer for people to turn into Blue Ridge because right now people are illegally using 01:47:00.994 --> 01:47:08.182 - Bike lane as a turn lane because they're afraid they're going to get rear-ended and I don't know how 01:47:08.182 --> 01:47:15.442 - many times I Personally have had people honking and road rage kind of situations while trying to turn 01:47:15.442 --> 01:47:22.630 - into our neighborhood And the other one is a dedicated turn lane into the chiropractic center, which 01:47:22.630 --> 01:47:30.174 - is just north of the visitor center And that is because they too have had accidents and near misses quite 01:47:30.274 --> 01:47:38.539 - Often in that location. So if you would like I will present you with this information give to the secretary 01:47:38.539 --> 01:47:46.344 - and thank you for it and let me just say that for anyone who might want to present a petition in this 01:47:46.344 --> 01:47:54.150 - way that that that he's done it in the proper way and that Commissioners can can take up the petition 01:47:54.150 --> 01:47:59.966 - and ask to put it on the agenda as they see fit. We have 134 signatures now 01:48:00.066 --> 01:48:07.703 - Voting age residents. Thank you. Thank you for your thank you very much your comment. Is there any other 01:48:07.703 --> 01:48:15.340 - public comment? Please come to the podium sign in and state your name If you've already signed in that's 01:48:15.340 --> 01:48:22.904 - okay, okay Yes, my name is Dana Pierce. Hello again I'm here in support of the safety improvements that 01:48:22.904 --> 01:48:29.886 - mr. Ferguson was just talking about walnut and Blue Ridge I'm a resident of Blue Ridge petition 01:48:30.594 --> 01:48:38.365 - My experience with that intersection is that, in particular, turning towards Bloomington out of Blue 01:48:38.365 --> 01:48:46.289 - Ridge does not feel safe. And it has become routine for me to not use that intersection when traveling 01:48:46.289 --> 01:48:54.060 - into Bloomington, even at times when that would be the most convenient and the most expedient way to 01:48:54.060 --> 01:49:00.446 - get to my destination. For example, when taking my children to school at Fairview, 01:49:02.146 --> 01:49:10.024 - Taking the route that goes on North Dunn Street adds at least two minutes, if not more, to the travel 01:49:10.024 --> 01:49:17.902 - time and an additional half mile of distance, but I don't feel safe, especially at rush hour times of 01:49:17.902 --> 01:49:25.703 - the day to drive with my children trying to turn left at the intersection. So yeah, I support safety 01:49:25.703 --> 01:49:30.878 - improvements at the intersection, particularly when turning out of 01:49:31.458 --> 01:49:40.352 - Blue Ridge heading towards Bloomington. Thank you Thank you. So any other public comment on items that 01:49:40.352 --> 01:49:49.332 - are not already on the docket? Please come to the podium sign in and state your name. You'll have three 01:49:49.332 --> 01:49:58.139 - minutes Hello, my name is Carrie Floyd my husband if you could please bring the mic down close to it. 01:49:58.139 --> 01:49:59.262 - Thank you. I 01:49:59.586 --> 01:50:04.886 - Okay. Hello. My name is Carrie Floyd My husband Kevin and I live in the Blue Ridge neighborhood and 01:50:04.886 --> 01:50:10.292 - we are concerned over the safety of the intersection of North Walnut Street and East Blue Ridge Drive 01:50:10.292 --> 01:50:15.805 - Walnut Street is heavily traveled and the cars are often going very fast This makes turning onto Walnut 01:50:15.805 --> 01:50:21.529 - Street from Blue Ridge Drive dangerous at times, especially when making left turns Kevin and I are cyclists 01:50:21.529 --> 01:50:24.126 - and we use the existing bike lanes on Walnut and 01:50:24.546 --> 01:50:34.969 - It's challenging and scary sometimes to make a left turn onto Walnut Street going across two lanes of 01:50:34.969 --> 01:50:45.188 - traffic. I hope you all consider putting in a traffic light and make this intersection safe. It's a 01:50:45.188 --> 01:50:54.078 - dangerous place for cyclists as well as cars. Thank you. Kevin Floyd, Kerry's husband. 01:50:54.434 --> 01:51:03.772 - Yeah, we do cycle out of Blue Ridge, and it's quite challenging to get across. I don't know how pedestrians 01:51:03.772 --> 01:51:11.986 - would get across there. I guess there's no way for a pedestrian to get across the street. Now, 01:51:11.986 --> 01:51:20.806 - on game day, that's a whole other story. This Walnut gets just clogged up, and it's almost impossible 01:51:20.806 --> 01:51:23.486 - to get out onto Walnut safely. 01:51:24.226 --> 01:51:34.102 - on game days. Usually if I know there's a game, I just plan on just staying home during that time. The 01:51:34.102 --> 01:51:43.882 - proposal they've got now of putting in a double turn lane on Walnut, that only encourages the traffic 01:51:43.882 --> 01:51:54.142 - to keep flowing, so it doesn't do anything for people making a left turn out of Blue Ridge. A stoplight or 01:51:54.242 --> 01:52:04.108 - or some kind of at least signage saying there's a street there and traffic coming out because there's 01:52:04.108 --> 01:52:13.878 - nothing and a stoplight would be the safest thing. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any public comment 01:52:13.878 --> 01:52:23.454 - from people watching online? Please raise your hand in Zoom and staff will call on you. This is on 01:52:23.906 --> 01:52:33.857 - Items not on the docket Any takers last call for general public comment Seeing none this period is closed. 01:52:33.857 --> 01:52:43.716 - We now go to just matters of schedule the next meeting of the Transportation Commission is Monday October 01:52:43.716 --> 01:52:49.854 - 20th at 530 in this room and I want to encourage anyone who has a 01:52:50.146 --> 01:52:56.401 - Done like the residents of Blue Ridge to make their concerns known to an individual commissioner if 01:52:56.401 --> 01:53:03.156 - they know them can send email to transportation.commission at Bloomington.in.gov to contact this commission 01:53:03.156 --> 01:53:09.724 - generally with any concerns they might have and we will consider it in forming the next agenda. Is there 01:53:09.724 --> 01:53:15.166 - any other any other announcements from members? Seeing none this meeting is adjourned.