We have a quorum. This meeting will come to order. This is the regular session of the city of Wilmington
Transportation Commission. Will the secretary please call the roll. Here. Here. Here. Davis here. Stossberg here.
And we have a quorum. Uh, this is the, uh, agenda for the regular hearing. We'll hear approval of minutes.
We'll hear reports and communications from commissioners and staff, including, uh, communications from
deputy clerk crossley on commissioner required training, a staff memo on the Smith morning side compliance
report, a staff memo on the update of college mall and covenant or a staff memo on updating speed limit
signs to be consistent with existing city code and update on 180 day orders.
and staff memo on agenda item tracking under cases. We'll hear TCP 26 18 a petition to implement roadway
improvements along Walnut College and done TCP 26 20 a petition to implement roadway improvements on
Rogers Road and TCR 26 19 a resolution to accept the 20 26 Walker parking rate study and comprehensive
review review report.
We'll hear discussion of topics not of the docket including the scheduling of a special hearing to review
the college and walnut corridor study And then general public comment on items not on the docket then
we'll adjourn Why don't we start with the approval of minutes? Is there a motion to approve the minutes
of July 27th? Second we have a motion in a second. Is there any discussion on the minutes for the July
meeting? Seeing none
We can just do a voice vote on this all in favor say aye aye Opposed say nay The ayes have it the minutes
are approved. We go now to reports from commissioners to any commissioners have a report to my left
To my right Okay, no reports from commissioners. Let's go to reports from staff Let's start with the
memo from deputy clerk clerk cross Lee who's here to present and
If anybody I can present on her behalf. I just wanted to clarify these were communications from Deputy
Clerk Crossley not necessarily a memo we were just emphasizing the receipt the receipt of the Message
from Commissioner Crossley to ensure that commissioners were aware that there is a required training
that they have been asked to schedule attendance for and
This is scheduled for Wednesday of this week September 30th. It'll be in council chambers from 530 to
7 Just to clarify all members are required to attend and If you have any questions, please reach out
to Jennifer directly Okay, are there any questions or comments from commissioners? Let's move on to
the staff memo on everything. Okay, I
30 second pause sorry this zoom is not up yet. Okay we're going to realize it was put a pause in the
meeting for a minute to make sure that people can attend remotely. We're going to debate it. We're going
to debate each item now. Yeah or they're going to fill it in for us.
recording in progress Apologies for that disruption clearly out of track out of practice Are we in fact
online again now we are online yes, okay This meeting will resume we are on item 3b 2 of the agenda
the staff memo
on the Smith Morningside compliance report who's here to present on that. Hi this is John Garzi traffic
engineer for engineering. So for Smith and Morningside there was a collision on the Greenway and after
that the community brought it to our attention and raised issues about safety and stop sign compliance.
In March at the commission
we were asked to look into this location and see what kind of improvements we could make. And so in
May, we came back and we shared some options, our plan, as well as our plans to do some evaluation just
to see if our changes were effective. And so now in September, we're coming back and we're sharing some
evaluation data as well as some next steps. So our findings from our improvements, which were to add
an additional stop sign in both directions on Smith, as well as
advanced warning markings or advanced warning signs and installing high visibility crosswalks just to
draw more attention to the crossing. The findings for this was that the stop sign compliance has increased.
If we can share the table with some of those data. We measured the difference between people coming
to a full stop
how many people were rolling the stop sign, as well as how many people were not stopping at all for
the stop sign. And so before and after, I'm just going to read the change in percentage. So what we
found is after we made our improvements, the number of people that came to a full stop increased by 7.5%.
The number of people that were still rolling through the stop went down by 5%. And the number of people
that did not stop went down by 2.5%.
Um, I will just note that these percentages are not a growth or decrease like overall. It's just like
the percentages difference from before and after. So like the actual difference is 12% for people that
are coming to a full stop. 14% for rolling stop. And then the number of people that are not stopping
has decreased by 62%.
One of the things I like to point out is that even though we made these improvements, there is still
a good percentage of people that are rolling through the stop sign. And that's about 30% of drivers
that are not coming to a complete stop. And when we looked at this intersection, we believe that this
is because of the higher volume of vehicle traffic on Smith compared to Morningside.
This intersection doesn't support having a stop sign based on the three main criteria, which is cross
traffic volume, crash history, and site distance. The intersection has proper site distance. The cross
volume is not equal. And so because of that, there are a lot of times that you come up to the intersection
at Morningside, and there's no one on the side street. And so people get used to that, and they start
rolling the stop sign.
Stop signs are intended to designate right-of-way and not necessarily act as a traffic calming device.
And so it's not intended to slow people down. It's just to make sure that people know who has
the right-of-way. And so if there's no cross traffic, it's pretty clear for people when they arrive
at the intersection. If we were to design this intersection now, we would not recommend a stop sign.
Some of the suggested treatments and additional
solutions that we thought of as the engineering department and also what we heard from the residents
was to look at traffic calming devices like speed humps, speed tables or race crosswalk. Some other
ideas that were brought up were rumble strips and traffic circles. After looking into this intersection
for several months, we have not identified a preferred long-term treatment and if we were to do
more improvements, we would need more time to analyze this. Our current recommendation is not to remove
the stop sign, but it's also not to do any additional improvements at this intersection. We'd like to
focus our near-term resources on other locations that have a clear need and a more clear strategy for
improvements. And that's just because we want to prioritize where we're putting our attention. And just
to give some context,
Um, the SS for a intersection priority score for Smith and Morningside is 37 out of a hundred, which
ranks it as number 90, uh, as in like the 90th intersection with, um, the most collisions and things
like that. So there are other locations that have a higher priority and also have less attention from
the public. And because of that, these other locations would benefit from us looking into them and seeing
what other improvements we can make.
So right now we're not recommending that we do any more investment in this intersection, but that we
look at other intersections that have higher needs. And then as we make improvements to those locations,
we can come back to Smith and Morningside and see if there's other improvements that are needed then.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Garzi. Are there questions or comments on the Smith Morningside compliance
report from commissioners? Any questions or thoughts? Mr. Sossberg?
I had a question. What is the in the top 10? Highest priority intersections in the city What is the
intersection priority score? Roughly, I mean just I'd say roughly about 60 like high 60s. I don't think
there anything with a hundred is a maximum, right? Yes. Okay. So there's quite a few intersections with
much more dramatic problems. Can you describe one?
I would not be able to describe that unless I actually took a time to like look at all the collisions,
but I would imagine something has to do with high speed And crashes that's correct, okay Well, I just
want to let commissioners know that if they want to do any follow-ups they can always Ask for something
to be put on the agenda during discussion of topics not in the docket at a future meeting
Bring it to my attention in scheduling for a future meeting outside of this meeting Thank you for the
presentation. Let's move on now to the staff memo and College Mall and Covenanter Is this mr. Garza
again back again, all right, welcome back. It's also my item so for College Mall and Covenanter We were
asked to look at this intersection and see how we can improve bike access to cross College Mall currently
there is vehicle detection via cameras and
Or currently the way that you can cross this intersection is by having a vehicle get detected by the
cameras Having a pedestrian go up and push the pedestrian push button or wait for a college mall to
max out its green time and then the cross street of Covenanter will get green The video detection available
here is a little bit old and so it's only able to detect vehicles and so some of the Improvements that
we've we've looked into we have three different options
And the first option is the one that we're recommending, which is to improve the signal timing. What
we'd like to install is a minimum recall for Covenanter, so that even if there is no vehicle on Covenanter
detected, that College Mall will eventually get a red and allow Covenanter to cross. The benefit of
this is that bikes won't have to wait, but the downside is that College Mall will get
a red, even if there is no cross traffic and then vehicles on College Mall will be waiting and they
may be wondering why they're stopped. But the impact of this is fairly small because this will happen
most of the time at night. During the daytime, there's enough cross traffic on Covenanter that a vehicle
will be detected and get a green. And so it's mostly during the nighttime when having the minimum recall
will be helpful.
And as I mentioned before, this is something that staff plans to implement first just because the cost
to do this is very minimal. There is no hardware that needs to be installed. We just need to update
the signal timing. And so the only cost is to have people on College Mall wait occasionally for vehicles
or bikes to cross. The second option that we looked into was to install a push button for bikes. And
so this would be installed on a pole
With a push button close to the curb or on the edge of the roadway. Um, when we talked to our consultant
about this, this was not something that they recommended just because it would increase the risk of
vehicles hitting it and then having to maintain it. Um, bikes would still need to go over to the side
of the street and actuate the button. And if a person on a bike were to push this, it would call the
amount of time needed for a pedestrian to cross the street, which is a lot longer than a person on a
bike needs to.
And so it would just waste a lot more green time that's needed. Since this was not an option that was
recommended by the consultant, and we also agreed with their recommendation, we didn't get a cost estimate.
The third option is to improve the video detection at this intersection so that it is able to detect
bikes. The cost for this investment would be $25,000 to $30,000. And the benefits of this would be to
provide green time
for Covenant are only when is needed. So we wouldn't have to have green time allocated just to make
sure that there is someone able to cross. Some other benefits of just having improved vehicle detection
is allowing us to have better counts for the intersection and to better optimize the signal timing for
this intersection and then further for the whole corridor. The downside would just be the higher cost.
After we look into option number one of changing the signal timing, we would like to pursue investing
in option three. Previously, we had also come back to the commission and we had made some improvements
to the intersection, so I just want to share about those. We have three improvements that were made,
which is installing high visibility crosswalks, adding a no turn on red sign, and installing
Left turn yield on green signs. Thank you Oh, is that it Yes, that's okay. Thank you. Are there any
questions or comments Commissioner Davis At that intersection is that at night it is so very dim were
any improvements to lighting considered or can they be They weren't considered but we can look into that
The issue tends to be that the drivers simply aren't seeing the people trying to cross So whether they
might be yielding but they might not be seeing Further questions or comments from members to my left
to my right Is there a next step here when will when should we expect to follow up with you on or when
we should expect you to follow up with us on this
question. That's a good question. I think in two months would be a fair amount of time. We would need
that first month just to install it and then to make observations afterwards and see how it's operating.
But if I understand correctly, you're not installing option three yet. You're doing option one, which
is just the changing the existing signal equipment. That's correct. So you're saying that as soon as our
but I think our next meeting is in December. No, we're in October yet. Our next meeting, our two meetings
now would be the December meeting. You're saying that you will actually be in operation? Yes,
that's correct. Okay. Well, you have had enough time then to, to get a sense of how it's working. I
can't promise that there'll be enough time to make a definitive conclusion, but I think it'll be enough
time for us to make a general idea. Okay. Well, we look forward to hearing about it two meetings from now.
Thank you. All right Let's go on now to The next item updating speed limit signs will be consistent
with existing city code. I take it that mr. Garzi is presenting. Yeah, that's me as right All right,
so as part of our effort to clean up code and To clean up the signage that we have out in the streets
and just make sure that they match each other we were looking at the city code to see what kinds of
speed limit signs or speed limit regulations we had. And we checked those with the speed limit signs
that we had out in the field. And we observed that there are several signs that do not match what's
in the code. For example, there were streets that had 30 mile per hour signs when in code it was a 25
mile per hour sign, or the opposite, where it was a 20 mile per hour sign, but in code it's only 25
mile per hour.
And so there were about 19 of these different locations that we found where we are changing just what
the signs say and we're not changing what the code says. And they, they vary in different situations.
Um, they're on the list. They're about, they're 19 of them. Um, a good majority of them, we are replacing
30 mile per hour signs with 25 mile per hour signs. They were just mistakenly signed as 30 mile per hour.
There are other situations where they're in residential neighborhoods and they're just signing properly
and removing the sign the signs or It's a school zone and it just hasn't been signed If you have questions
on any specific street, I'm happy to talk about those That's okay. Thank you questions to my right questions
to my left and
Sometimes you say remove a sign do not repost. Is it known to people that the citywide speed limit is
25. Like is that are the places where you and the few places where it says do not repose the sign. Is
there already some other sign indicating the speed like how how does that work. I'm fairly new to Bloomington
so I'm not sure exactly what people are required to do when they take a vehicle test but I know that
when I took my test
I was asked if there is no sign, what is the default speed limit? And where I'm from, it was 25 miles
per hour. I'm not aware of any signage here that says the default sign here is 25. So again, why are
there some do not repost indications here where you remove a sign and don't post the correct or whatever
the default speed limit is there?
My understanding is that people here know that the default sign or speed is 25 miles per hour. I'm just
not sure what's required of people when they take the driving test. Okay. I'd like to know more about
it. Cause seven of the 19 say do not repost and that that one part is not clear why there should not
be a sign. For example, Miller, I'm sorry. Are you talking about Miller drive? Eagleson third to Atwater,
uh, university street park to woodlawn Vermilia.
Walnut to private drive it says treatment remove 20 miles an hour. Do not repost remove 30 miles an
hour. Do not repost That's the thing I don't understand yeah For us to maintain it's fewer signs for
the city to have to maintain okay, and we already know what the Unposted speed limit is so anytime that
you can remove a sign and take that off of the city's inventory of something that has to be maintained
is probably a benefit
No, I get that adjusted. How do who's we how do we know what the unposted speed limit is? It's on the
driver's test when you pass it when you take it in Indiana Thanks for confirming that I appreciate it.
All right. Thank you Let's move on to the next report 180-day order update. Mr. Garzi Yeah, it's me
as well All right, so this is an update on the 180-day orders and
Half of them are new orders and then the other half are just extended orders. So for the new orders
we have Cottage Grove Avenue parking and that's just to flip the parking from the north side to the
south side This is something that's already been installed out there And that was done just to eliminate
the door or the bike lane during conflict The other one is for the Matlock Heights neighborhood At the
neighborhood's request we are eliminating or
prohibiting parking on one side of the street. And this is just due to the road width not allowing people
to park on both sides of the street as well as parking demand especially during you football games.
And then for Summit Woods this is the whole sub subdivision that is being brought into the city's maintenance
inventory. And so we're just documenting all the stop control and parking restrictions.
And then the last one that's a new one is the Inglewood drive parking. Emergency responders requested
that we install no parking signs on one side of the street just to allow them to drive down the street
with their emergency vehicles. And then the other ones are extending orders for the four all-way stops
on 7th Street, loading zones on Kirkwood, two all-way stops on 13th Street, and on-street parking on
South Washington.
That's all thank you Okay, are there questions or comments on the 180 D order update to my right to
my left I Will say that I've never been supportive of The 2501 the four always stopped intersections
on 7th Street. I know that was a heated debate but
I'm wondering how many 180 day orders are appropriate. This one has been extended three times now. That
there's more than one that has been extended three times. Do we have a rule? I'm not aware of a rule,
but I can pass it on to Andrew. Okay. Let's move on now to the staff memo on agenda item tracking.
Is that your Ryan Robling planning services manager There are a number of items that we've discussed
in the past this is a Thing we've had commissioners requests that we do. So we'll do it periodically
where we go back and talk about things that have We haven't discussed in a while items like
traffic inquiries or Other resolutions that this body has made so there's a handful of those the first
one. Mr. Garzi covered tonight, which is the college mall and Covenanter We talked about two requests
specifically To look at bike infrastructure and signage infrastructure and then there's one outstanding
item, which is Mr. Commissioner Strasburg made a motion for staff to
Develop a resolution that reviews city policy on citing drivers for traffic violations This is something
that we are working on behind the scenes and will eventually hopefully have something to show for it
the SS for a Act safety the safe streets and roads for all safety action plan has it an action ID
that calls for the Safe Streets program manager to meet with all of the other governmental bodies, fire,
police, engineering, public works, et cetera, et cetera, and come forward with things like this. So
that is something that we are working towards. Hank Duncan is our Safe Streets program manager, and
we expect to have something in the not too distant future, but getting all of those people in the same
meeting room isn't always as easy as it sounds. So that's the first one. The second one,
Big one is Indiana Avenue. We brought forward TCP 2610 and This body reviewed it and asked for us to
consider redesign as is one of the options for a project like that and we so mr. Flayer or Commissioner
Flaherty made a motion or for the petition back to staff and we are currently not advancing anything,
but it is still It's it's on the back burner. It's not
In the water or anything. It's just something that will be reprioritized Hopefully in an upcoming project
that will look at all downtown streets which would be great because then we can coordinate things like
Indiana and done as a one-way pair and maybe come with a slightly different design that suits The needs
and wants of this body plus the needs and wants of stakeholders in the community There's a couple of
other ones Smith Road is a commission
Commissioner led traffic inquiry Smith Road between 46 and Morse Pike that will come in October. It's
been on our agenda for a little while but Mr. Drummey or Commissioner Drummey knew that he wasn't going
to be at this meeting so we are going to present it in October and then there's a couple of meeting
minutes that we'll take a look at in upcoming meetings once we get all caught up and happy to answer
any questions.
You blew through that pretty quickly and I could barely keep up with you. Are there questions or comments
from Christians to my right to my left? Mr. Stossberg Thank you for your report but point of order if
I'd like to make a motion to allow public comment on the staff reports before we move on That's okay.
I think there's some people here who might like to do that Okay, well staff reports aren't usually the
subject of public comment so that would require
A second and a vote Is there a second to mr. Sossberg's motion to your public comment on staff reports?
We have a motion and a second any discussion on the motion Seeing none will the secretary please call
the roll on the motion to hear public comment on staff reports this meeting
Yes Davis, yes Stossberg. Yes Copic. Yes The motion passes 5-0. We will now open the floor to public
comment on any Report issued by staff this meeting. Is there any one member of the public either in
the room or online who would like to speak? So please come to the podium You'll have three minutes or
use the raise hand function in zoom. So anyone who would like to speak or
to staff reports this meeting. I see no one approaching the podium in the room. Is there anybody on
Zoom? Nobody on Zoom. Last call for public comment. Seeing none, we come back to the commission to move
into our next, that's all right, the next section of the meeting. We'll start with case number TCP 2618.
Commissioner Volin, can I, sorry to interrupt.
Because we didn't have zoom for the first couple of minutes Can I make a request for transparency purposes
that we redo the roll call and the minute vote? Those are the first two things they were fully missed
by Members who are online and so we would just like to make sure we recap it get it recorded and have
it well Sure, why not? Thank you. Let's have the secretary. Please call the roll to call this meeting
again to order Yes
Volin here Davis here Here. All right. Well, we fixed that for those who are watching via zoom that
there is a quorum and this is an official meeting of the Transportation Commission
Again, let's hear TCP 26 18 the petition to implement roadway improvements along Walnut College and
done Okay, who is sorry to annoy you one more time. We actually did have a member of the public who
would like to speak And during the public comment about staff reports All right, I will hold pulled
back on the case. Let's go back to public comment on the staff report getting in just under the wire,
please Go ahead and oh, it's in the room. Please go ahead and speak
sign in your name and you'll have three minutes to speak. Hi I'm Brianna Alexander. I live in Parkridge
East and I
been here before in regards to the intersection at Morningside and Smith Road. I was honestly shocked
to see the report come up because I have asked both the neighbors in Parker G's and the neighbors in
Park Ridge a couple of times now if anyone had
Has seen anyone out there conducting any kind of study and not one neighbor has reported seeing any
of those So I have followed up I don't know if you guys are aware But the neighborhood actually has
a camera pointed at the intersection and we have been recording for many months All of the accidents
and we do have them We have that video cataloged and it is open to the public and I can provide that
if you would like to see
So I am double checking that those dates and times that somebody was actually out there conducting a
study. Furthermore, as that camera has been recording that intersection, there has been a lot of very
concerning activity at that intersection. One of the new stop signs has been ran over twice, and I'm assuming
The someone has to know because it's been put back up twice I know police officer has posted at that
intersection Multiple times and I travel through the intersection a few times a day But not terribly
often and I personally seen at least four vehicles pulled over For running those stop signs in the couple
of times that police were out there and so
I think that it is a bigger problem than is being acknowledged. I saw in your report that the two times
that somebody was posted out there studying was only for a 30-minute period of time, and I don't know
if that is enough time to capture what is actually going on. But like I said, there is a video camera
posted watching it in our section, and we do have 19 different videos catalogued
of people running the intersection that you can see over a...
between the dates of May 6th and September 27th 15 of those videos are after the additional stop signs
went in and the stripes were done And I would argue some of the most egregious ones There was one where
somebody did a donut in the middle of the intersection again. There was the stop sign was hit There
are two videos of someone
going through at a very high speed at that intersection and I First the city to continue looking in
to Other solutions miss Alexander your time is up. I'm afraid and you're addressing the Commission so
any Commissioner is welcome to bring up comments based on public comment during the Discussion of items
on the agenda
portion or of this meeting or future meetings We would urge you to send any evidence you have to the
Transportation Commission directly. Thank you for your time Any other public comment on staff reports
online Last call for public comments on staff reports Seeing none. We'll move back to the agenda. We're
going out of cases. Let's try one more time for TCP 2618 who is here to report that?
that case For Bloomington, I'm here to report on that. Okay, please Go ahead and may I ask everyone
to Get as close to the mic as you can because or at least if we can have the volume in the room turned
up just a little bit
Thank you Here this evening to present the maintenance maintenance project for our North walnut North
College in North Dunn Street This was a project that was requested of us to prepare a set of plans for
by public works it is a maintenance project and
to increase the pavement condition index for those three streets. In general, it's gonna consist of
a one and a half inch mill and a one and a half inch overlay for the majority of all three streets.
But in some areas where there's been advanced degradation, there's gonna be a deeper mill along North
Dunn and various locations of full depth patching on Walnut and on College. Now with the maintenance
project, we would like to also implement some safety
Components to the project given the opportunity to work on those corridors and those safety improvements
include eliminating sidewalk gaps that exist on two of those corridors college walnut Adding curb bump
outs at certain intersections where there are safety concerns protect the parking areas so drivers don't
use the parking areas as through lanes and then stripe intentionally stripe all the lane lines 10 feet wide and
some of the design considerations that we took into consideration with this was that Walnut and College
are both primary arterials. They are posted at 30 and 40 miles an hour. However, as Mr. Garza pointed
out, I believe it's Walnut should be posted at 25 miles an hour, the corridor south of 17th.
North Dunn is a secondary arterial and it's posted at 35 miles an hour. When we put the set of plans
together, we wanted to consider fitting the existing configuration, especially on college and Walnut
with the curb additions, particularly because it's part of an ongoing corridor study. So we also wanted
to make sure it fit the existing condition as well as fit any proposed condition that may come out of
the study. Would want to point out too that Walnut and college are both
part of the high injury network. So we wanted to pay close attention to those. And then speed is an
issue too. I don't know the speed of Dunn off the top of my head, but I do know that college and Walnut,
the speed studies coming out of the study show that over 50% of the folks that travel Walnut and college
are going over the posted speed limits. So that's why we focused on striping the lane lines at set widths.
Using specific tapers to posted signage posted speed limits so that we could Maybe help calm the traffic
and keep them closer to the posted speed. I Was Yeah, I actually already hit on a lot of these in my
account in my presentation we wanted to make sure the curb ramps which are required to be compliant
for the type of funding that we're seeking out of the state meet the ADA and pro-wag compliance and
Then of course we wanted to eliminate the gap, sidewalk gaps. And then the curb bump outs, established
curb bump outs that fit existing and future conditions. I have a set of snippets that just kind of shows
just some of the intersections that are part of the proposed layout at this point, just to kind of show,
give illustrations of what I'm talking about. So at Walnut and 12, there would be a curb bump out
on the west side of the road, pushing the traffic together, pinching them hopefully to slow them down,
providing a 11 foot lane with a curb face on the west side, a 10 foot lane in between stripes, and then
a bicycle buffer that currently exists today, and then a dedicated five foot bike lane. There was a
fatal accident at this particular intersection. That's why I believe it's on the high injury network.
So the other things that we can add here
our compliant curb ramps in the corners, add a curb ramps to cross Walnut if need be, but most importantly
to add the green indicators for bike lanes. The highest reoccurring accident in this intersection is
folks heading north on Walnut taking a right onto 12th and then colliding with a bike also heading north
on Walnut. So just to bring more awareness that there is a bike lane moving through that intersection.
At North Walnut and 17th, also a high accident intersection. There is not much we can do at that intersection
except to restripe it the way it currently is. So this shows the existing configuration. You have an
11 foot left turn lane, 10 foot through lanes, a bicycle buffer, then the bike lane, and then putting
back the green striping for the bike lane as well. And at 19th and Walnut,
This is an area that receives a lot of pedestrian crossings over to the Miller Showers Park. There's
a voluntary crossing that you can see just with the worn down grass, the northeast corner of 19th and
Walnut over to Miller Showers. So we'd be proposing to add a formal crosswalk in that area with new
crosswalk striping and signage as well as continuing that same bike lane striping feature through the
intersection.
From the south end of college, of the project at college and 11th, we propose to bump in actually both
sides of college to provide two through lanes as exist today. Keep a full bike buffer and a five foot
bike lane that would end at the intersection and strike that accordingly. This would place the bus stop
that's currently just north of this intersection at the curb line, which is where
Bloomington Transit prefers to pick up folks on the curb line rather than an inset that currently exists
today. There still would be two through lanes in this area. And I'd like to point out that for traffic,
we're not reducing the number of lanes in any of this design. We're simply shortening up or making narrower
the through lane width, but no capacity is being affected.
So at College and 14th, this is an intersection that currently has a pilot project with the delineators
on it that pinch in the traffic to two lanes. Under this project, we would propose to formalize that
curb bump in or curb bump out and reduce the length of pedestrian travel across the intersection. We
would add a northern crosswalk as well to make it pro-wag compliant, allow pedestrians to cross all
four legs.
And then also continue the bike lane crosswalk as well with the green striping through the intersection.
You can see it on this one as well in the what's the bottom right hand corner of this slide also proposing
to add essentially the yellow line on the what would be the southbound the easternmost southbound lane.
And that would be to continue to define that 10 foot wide lane so folks
Stop using I'm sorry to interrupt is is every image here north facing up Every image is north facing
up. Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry about that To add that yellow line on the left side of the left lane
So that folks just stop using the free parking lane space if there's nobody parked there Limiting their
width of travel will Hopefully create a slower a slower corridor
Last one really is, you know, some of the intersections don't really have any improvements need to be
made, but this one on done in 19th just kind of lays out the pedestrian signal that's already installed.
And just in some cases, we're just putting back the pavement markings that exist there today to continue
to enhance the safety that's already present. So I'll take any questions if the commission has any questions.
Thank you for the presentation. Sure. Are there questions to my left? Mr. Stossberg Thank you, I have
a process question for the city we have these situations where A street is due for regular maintenance
as these are at the same time. We have long-term processes going on with them like We're thinking about
college and walnut. We don't have definite plans. It's not necessarily funds or a timeline and
So is the process there that we proceed with regular maintenance until the longer-term plan gets on
the calendar? How do we balance those? Because fiscally, there might be opportunities to save some money
if things align. No, that's a challenge. The estimated pavement life for college, last time college
was paved, I wasn't here, but I was told that it was about 12 years ago. So we have about a 12-year
expected 12-year life for the college and walnut pavements as we put them back.
I know the corridor study that's kind of in play and not Doesn't have a recommended alignment yet, even
if it were to be approved and then you get on the tip and then seek federal funding I mean the reality
in time is that you're at least halfway through The life cycle of the asphalt that we put down next
year Probably more because of the size of the project that's being proposed. So Yeah, it was
The life cycle of the concrete was actually more Concerning to us because concrete has a life cycle
should have a life cycle of 50 years or so So we really tried to make sure our curb bump outs fit with
All the options that we saw are as many as we possibly could so we wouldn't be wasting money on concrete
but knowing that the asphalt would Come to the end of its life before any Long-term improvements would
be made Thank you, that's all further questions to my left
Questions to my right. Mr. Pilsky, is it? Lubitsky. Lubitsky? Yep. There's at least one of these that
is not north facing up. In some cases, I can't tell which street is which. Could we briefly go through
each image again? And you can just, it's not even labeled which street is walnut, which street is 12,
for example, in slide five. Yeah, I apologize for that.
I've been in this project so long. It's just well I appreciate that but so yeah, this is obvious to
us. Yeah walnut walnut is The road that runs left to right. It's the okay. So north is to the what is
to the right or left here in this case? North is to the right. Yes, in all cases north is to the right
North is to the right. Yes, okay In all cases north is to the right in all cases north is to the okay
that helps I
There was Okay, so the slide for North College and West 14th Street That is that green the new green
striping is southbound southbound bike lane The new green striping is not for the southbound bike lane.
Yes it would be a dedicated bike lane with a five-foot dedicated buffer and
Okay. Now this these images make sense to me. It took me a while to parse them Questions commissioners
to Midas One the College Avenue lanes are currently ten feet or is this they're being restricted down?
No, actually there there's a center line separating them. Yeah, otherwise they're They're they're wide
there. There really is no definition of
Until you get places like the pilot project at college and 14th where they do they do neck down I believe
they're 12 or 14 feet wide at that point I'll just know Bloomington Transit buses other than on 7th
Street don't travel down any lanes that any roads that have 10-foot lanes We usually require 11 feet
minimum for any of ours and we have a number that travel on this section of college So when there is
a curb present, it does go to an 11-foot lane for that reason. Okay, okay
So the expected behavior for the bus driver is that they'll be driving slightly into the bike lane buffer
they will drive into the bike lane for pickup and drop-off for big up and drop-offs and then Anytime
that they're driving and their vehicles are larger than 11 feet. It'll they'll go into the buffer and
Yeah, thanks Got it Okay, a couple more questions. I know this is remedial, but what is the community
crossing matching grant application?
The community crossing matching grant application is a process that the state puts out. Um, I think
it's through, um, their gas tax collection for communities. It's a 50 50 match, uh, up to a $2 million
application, um, to do maintenance projects on roadways that hopefully the local see is needing the
most maintenance. So, um, through
Through the public works we applied for the two million dollar grant earlier this month. The window
actually closes Wednesday So hopefully we'll know soon whether we get that grant a two million dollar
application would yield a one million dollar grant from the state Say they get two million dollar what
the two million dollar application? If fully awarded by the state would bring a million dollars into
the city of Bloomington for these for these projects Where would the other million go? It would come
from local match
So it's a matching grant. Yes, it's matching. There's a word matching grant. Yeah, that'd be it. That'd
be a question for public works I'm not sure where that where that money comes the matching local matching
comes from and so this represents All the things we would do with that money and there's not like this
isn't like a rolling set of grants We in this year, these are the things that we would do with the money
if we could yes It's a very specific application. You have to do exactly these segments as you apply
for them at the state level Okay
And you said that there was a fatal accident at Walnut and 12th. Can you describe the nature of the
accident? Did it involve a pedestrian or a bicyclist or a scooter rider? I would call it a pedestrian.
I think it was somebody who was on their scooter, but they were standing next to their scooter at that
point in time. If I remember this accident correctly, I didn't think it happened at an intersection.
I thought it just happened on North
Yeah, I believe it happened in the northeast corner of Walnut and 12th Huh? Okay, that's news to me
any further questions on TCP 26 18 Before we go to the public Let's go to the public for comment on
TCP 26 18 the petition to implement roadway improvements along Walnut College and done as part of the
CCMG Project if you'd like to comment on this petition, please come to the podium
Sign in you'll have three minutes. If you'd like to speak to it online, please use the raise hand function
in zoom Sure, anyone who would like to speak to TCP 2618 Anybody online Last call for public comment
on TCP 2618 Seeing none we'll come back to the Commission for Debate. Is there any comment on TCP 2618?
To my left
Am I right seeing none can we have the role of a roll call vote on 20cp 2618? Yes Yes, Stossberg, yes
Copic yes, mr. Minus Yes TCP 2618 passes 5-0 and
We move now to TCP 26 20 the petition to implement roadway improvements on Rogers Road Who is presenting
on this item? Thank you nice to see you, please go ahead Thank you. I will just get my very
short presentation pulled up for you. I
So this is the staff report for TCP 2620 And it is regarding the resident led traffic calming program
for 2026 So just to give a brief background on what this program does each year. We have a small budget
this year. It's around $50,000 to
implement some sort of traffic calming device on a street that The public identifies so what that application
looks like is Co organizers will look at a street that they live close to and have identified Has a
speeding issue and they will come to staff and they submit an application describing the concern and
then they must
Collect signatures from other residents within 300 feet of this quarter which was done on Rogers and
then they must present us with a supportive letter from a council member in this case was council member
daily and then two letters of support from a Institution in the area. So in this case, it was Sherwood
Oaks Church and the woodlands HOA so once all of that was done and
East Rogers Road was compared to all the other ten applications or there were ten total sorry and in
that we found that East Rogers Road had the worst speeding issue so these were vehicle speeds that exceeded
the legal posted limit and We took into account how much they exceeded them by So as a result
of looking at that, the crash history and the vulnerable road users in the area. We sent that to engineering
for them to come up with a design. That design was then shared with emergency services and also with
the public at a September 10th meeting at Sherwood Oaks Church. The initial design was six speed tables
from High Street to Sarah Road.
two of those speed tables between each intersection. With, let's see, the Stan's Drive and then Spicewood
Lane and then Sayre Road from west to east. And then in a minute I will show you the revised design.
But just to go over a couple of things in the report before I show the concept.
This is, this road is eligible for traffic calming. It is a neighborhood connector, similar to last
year, something that makes this different from West 11th Street before, which was the 2025
winning application where speed bumps, or speed humps were installed. This neighborhood connector is
a secondary arterial, so it sees more traffic here.
There's more through traffic to other neighborhoods. For example, there's not very many drive cuts at
all on this stretch But is still an eligible application So the current posted speed limit is 30 miles
an hour the average observed this summer in June was 38 miles per hour and Approximately 97 percent
of all vehicle traffic exceeded the posted limit so that
It essentially was a was a worse result than all of the other applications here And the the purpose
of the speed tables would be to reduce the vehicle traffic through here To be closer to the post limit
We did do a bit of outreach to Emergency services which resulted in
Modification of the speed tables. So there is concern of the number of devices which were placed
strategically to reduce Vehicle speed like from one intersection to another so that Vehicles did not
speed up in between them And then in the revision we took a slightly different approach to prioritize
the safety of the intersections So I will show you that here
So over to the over to the West We did hear some feedback at that public meeting Just to verify the
north is up on these right correct. Okay. Thank you So to the west is high street nuts to the left as
well We heard some feedback that vehicles were going a bit fast through that roundabout and
that a lot of children use this path that connects south to the Goat Farm Park and north to Childs Elementary
School. And then as you go east for a good stretch of that path, there's only a very small portion where
it's like a five foot wide sidewalk. The rest of it is pretty wide, at least eight or 10 feet. So that
is a relatively recent addition in the last couple of years, but apparently is seeing more use.
People are taking it over to the bus stop It's route number five has a stop right there at the cross-section
or the intersection with the stands And then people are also traveling south on the stands perhaps to
Olcott Park as well if you go up to that intersection we've put there we've proposed instead of speed
table that is
Stretching the entire width of the road across two lanes now. It only shows one lane each so this will
reduce the number of Speed tables that a vehicle must travel all the way through the corridor from east
from When they're going eastbound and also reduces them from six to three when going westbound but it
does slow vehicle traffic at the intersections where a pedestrian
or a cyclist may cross. And then the intersections are also important because with the crash history
that we looked at, all of the eligible crashes on East Rogers Road for us to evaluate in this stretch
were in some way related to speed, where speed was a contributing factor. And those were clustered near
intersections. So we did hear some feedback that perhaps it would be
You know people have difficulty turning left out of say spice wood Where cross-traffic does not stop
and then also out of the stands or the woodlands right there? In the very middle of the concept where
cross-traffic does not stop So hopefully this will signal to drivers that they should they should slow
down and they will have to slow down to comfortably traverse the
speed table in front of the crosswalk, but that should also create an added benefit for Vehicle traffic
trying to turn left out of those side streets and then Lastly This is consistent with our goal of reducing
crashes and creating
Street that has opportunities for all ages all abilities to use it here. It seems like there is demand
for crossing Rogers north-south at these intersections and for using that path and for Traveling the
corridor on the bus as well. So we believe that this promotes a safer
Experience for those walking biking taking the bus or driving in their vehicles along this corridor
One one thing I wanted to mention about The revision is that we did hear some concerns about cut through
traffic through the stands There are some stop signs along the way like say you're going You're going
east on Rogers Road and then south on there you could potentially avoid
some of the traffic calming devices by turning right into the stands and then going through a stop sign
or two on the way to Sayre Road. In the initial plan, that would have avoided the majority of those
devices. I believe it would have been four out of the six. But I believe that this revision does mitigate
that concern because at least
Two of the three of them you would have already passed so there would be minimal incentive or time savings
if any to Route traffic through the stands. So I Think that concern is mostly mitigated as well So I
just I realized I haven't addressed the the size of them so for context I
There is no perfect analogy or example of a speed table in Bloomington at present. These are proposed
to be asphalt and somewhere along the lines of 22 feet long where you would have a six foot, six foot
rise to about three and a half inches tall. Could be 3.25 to 3.75 and
than a 10 foot table. So most passenger vehicles would sit atop the table and then come down on the
other side. So it is a bit of a gentler geometry than other speed humps or speed cushions in Bloomington.
There are some raised crosswalks that are kind of similar but constructed of concrete so they have a
bit of a sharper angle to them. But it shouldn't be terribly unfamiliar to drivers in Bloomington.
to use and this we think better fits the context of a street where the Speed limit is 30 miles an hour
as opposed to some of them where we've had speeding problems, but actually the speed limit is 25 So
dish this combined with the feedback that we had from our emergency services Meant that the speed table
was kind of a clear option here
And I'll just briefly Go through so that you can see them a little bit more up close So it would be
just ahead of each crossing as you travel both east and west on High Street the stands near the bus
stop and path to the north and spice woodland
I'm happy to answer any questions or cycle back through those images if you'd like to see Thank you
Let's go to questions from commissioners. Do are there any questions on TCP 2620 to my left? Mr. Coppock
Did you say how many accidents there were that on those intersections So there have been six in the
past five years At least
Let's see, three of them were at the intersection with the stands. One at, I'm sorry, four, because
one was labeled Windingbrook, so four of them there, and one at Spicewood, and that would be all,
I'm sorry, so five at the stands slash Windingbrook, and one at Spicewood. Also, didn't there used to be
speed bump or whatever east of the roundabout Over by I don't remember what the name that subdivision
is would something rather but that used to be there and has been removed is that Anybody remember that
Maybe it's too far back. But I'm sorry. I don't remember Well, if we're gonna put these in and say we
there was one down there further by the On further down I think but anyway, okay. Thanks
Mr. Stossberg What is the design speed of these the target speed at which you're trying to slow down
traffic to My understanding is that it's somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 to 30 miles an hour we
do have John Garzi here if you have more technical questions on that, but My impression is 25 to 30
Yeah, mr. Garzi, do you have any comment?
So just, we're not trying to really slow people down from driving the speed limit, we're really trying
to take speeding behavior and get them to drive what the sign speed is. Yes, right now, I think a better
way for me to have explained it is right now it feels like the natural safe speed for a driver is closer
to 40 miles an hour.
And that's where most of the flow of traffic is. So the 85th percentile speed is something like 41 miles
an hour and the 15th is 32. So you have the main like hump of the distribution is solidly in kind of,
you could get a ticket kind of zone. So right now,
people are perceiving that it is comfortable and safe to drive at that speed when we're getting a lot
of comments that it's hard to turn left out of your intersection because you're expecting people to
go 30 and they're going 40 and very few cars are yielding the first time they see a pedestrian because
they're only going at a speed where they can't slam on their brakes and react in time and then not risk
getting rear-ended.
Thank you, I think there's a misconception that traffic calming is to make us drive extra slow when
I think more often it's to have us drive a safe speed that was already the speed limit. Thank you. Questions
to my right. Am I correct that there is an elevation, significant elevation change along this strip?
Yeah, so I would say the biggest stretch
The biggest elevation change well, it's between these two pictures. So I'll show you this initial one.
It's from down from the circle to the stands, right? Yeah, so the the high street roundabout sits quite
a bit lower than oh, so we're at stands So we did hear some comments that You know if say a firetruck
is going up Up as an up in elevation which is
Eastbound towards the stands then having a traffic calming device there could prove difficult to Decelerate
and then accelerate So as so as to not cause damage to the vehicle we did also hear some concerns that
you know, perhaps That could be difficult to maintain or plow Which is a concern as well, but I think
most of our streets with traffic calming are able to
Be maintained quite well by streets. So the westbound Speed table at the high street intersection is
purposely well away from the walking path to give Downhill drivers time to slow down. Is that the idea?
Could you describe the location if you put up the high street intersection? I Note that the speed table
for westbound drivers is well back from the
the intersection from the path the walking path Whereas all the other speed tables are right up against
the walking path. And so I was just curious If the reason that it was set so far back was because it's
coming from Downhill and drivers may be going faster than like just out of curiosity. Why is that?
I think that's accurate and it's preferable to have a little bit more space than we do in some of these
areas. Like coming out of the roundabout is a bit awkward. Certainly the visibility of having the speed
table as you're coming down the hill towards the roundabout is favorable. But what we're working with
is some of these intersections don't have a whole lot of room
for example at At the stands you'll see the the westbound one it kind of sticks into the intersection
a little bit Which is not ideal But it it is still ahead of the crosswalk, which is very important But
I'd say that the biggest change is we've kind of crunched them to where it's more similar to a race
crosswalk and before we had
We had some speed tables that were like right smack dab in the middle between the stands and high street
Which is right on that hill and now we've kind of concentrated it Did I hear correctly that you said
that there are no other examples of speed tables in the city I Don't believe that there are so this
is that this is a first for us I'm I don't feel entirely qualified to answer on behalf of the entire
city, but perhaps John mr. Garzi, can you
That's correct. These would be the first asphalt speed tables that we have Does anybody on staff have
any concern has anybody raised any concern about speed tables compared to speed cushions or anything
else have members of the public? Objected for any reason to speed tables If your question is have people
push back and preferred speed bumps and
On this corridor and most of the most of the feedback that we received is that hey, this is a pretty
high traffic corridor It's one of the couple options we have to go into town and that this Basically
that the approach we could take could be less aggressive and I think the the speed table is a good example
of how this fits the context of
And we're not shoehorning in a solution that's actually built for a more neighborhood street with more
driveways and A different atmosphere to it Okay, thank you any further questions from commissioners
See none. We'll go to the public for comment on TCP 2620 if you would like to speak to this issue Please
come to the podium. You'll have three minutes. Please sign in and
If you would like to speak in your online, please use the raise hand function in zoom and we'll call
on you as soon as we can Hello Jeff, you're my fire marshal for the city of Bloomington We've had multiple
conversations About this issue with the two entities. We do appreciate them lowering the number of of
the speed tables our biggest concern is
Getting there our number one thing is time Fire grows at our doubles in size every 30 seconds so every
we've did a lot to Reduce our response times Two things this area particular is our furthest away from
any of our departments. It's It's about an eight to ten minute drive from our station five for the first
engine company to get to Sarah Road and
So anything that we do any any we're not denying that something needs to be done, but any type of traffic
calming devices Hinder our response whether it's a bump out where this curve whether it's a speed table
speed bump Our trucks are you know in excess of 80,000 pounds. They're slow to stop slow to accelerate
and with that like I said
Fire doubles in size is proven fact that every 30 seconds it doubles. So think about a small trash can
Beside your office in 30 seconds that grows to two trash cans in 60 seconds that grows to four trash
cans in 80 or in 90 seconds That's eight trash cans and in 120 seconds at 16 trash cans Approximately
you have approximately two minutes nowadays and
according to the FPA and national standards to get out of your house safely before Conditions come where
you wouldn't be able to survive in most cases. So Even though we just have three traffic calming devices
a whole lot better than the six we agree that still is Approximately going to slow us down 30 seconds
at each one according to what we were given from these individuals So that's going to still add
90 seconds to our route across Rogers Road Like I said, we're not disagreeing that something needs done
but and we greatly appreciate the studies and everything our biggest thing is is the study is geared
towards vehicular traffic and not an 80,000 pound fire truck and
So we've asked for clarification They're going to try to work on it and we're going to try to work as
well is to try to get some more information on What a safe? Speed for the fire truck or any other emergency
service vehicle to to go over these speed humps What kind of things I mean the things that we face is
suspension issues braking issues and things like that our maintenance has went up tremendously in the
last few years and
Just for breaking in different things, you know our brakes no more we break wear and tear on the brakes
the suspension and things like that, so Anytime We can reduce the number of traffic calming devices
whether it's like I said whether it's bump outs or anything like that We're not denying we don't need
to do something but it hinders us tremendously and time is an Assessance when it comes in emergency,
so That's really all I have to say
I'm happy to answer any questions Thank you for your comment that this is a public comment portion will
if we'd like That's all for now. Okay. Thank you. Thank you Any other members of the public would like
to speak to this issue, please come to the podium. Is there anybody online who'd like to speak? I'm
not sure who's tracking that right now No one online again if you'd like to speak to
Item TCP 26 20, please use the raise hand function in zoom. We'll go to another commenter in the room
You'll have three minutes Thank you so much I live at the intersection of winding Brooks circle the
stands and Rogers
And could we ask your name, please? Shelly Taylor. Thank you. Thank you. I wear hearing aids. So if
I hesitate it's just because no problem to hear no problem. I Just wanted to say It does seem like a
pickle because I totally acknowledge what you're you know You're up against and I also know what I have
seen at that intersection which is you know
Lot of accidents a lot more than has been reported because a lot of times they don't you know They don't
call the cops to to report these things It concerns me greatly that the crosswalk is simply unsafe.
I've seen pedestrian crossing signs One of them was dragged under an SUV vehicle all the way up the
hill you know
and that sign was knocked down. I see speeding cars and I hear speeding cars multiple times a day. I
work a lot of the time from home and I've seen accidents and I've seen little kids out there at the
crosswalk and my own self and other people standing there with 10 to 15 cars just speeding by, standing
in the middle of the crosswalk
And nobody is stopping. So it is a concern. And I just wanted to say that I'm in support of this traffic
calming in this area. And I want to thank David and all the people that worked on this traffic calming.
I'm sorry I don't remember your name but I know you worked on it as well. And and I I also feel that
you know emergency vehicles are
Certainly an issue. So I hope that there's Some solution we can come up with that benefits everyone.
Thank you Thank you. Are there any commenters online who'd like to speak to TCP 2620? Mr. Roebling Nobody
last call for public comment on TCP 2620 See none, we'll come back to the Commission for further questions
or comment
Any questions, Mr. Coppock? Well, one comment, too, is like the fire department, I know the
street department, if you're plowing that, when you've got your plow down, you have to raise your plow
before you come up to either one, to any of those. That's a question, I think. No, it's not a question,
it's a statement. Oh, okay. And then the other thing is, I kind of question the ones down by the roundabout
because you're already reduced speed when
Especially when you're going eastbound, you're in the roundabout, and when you're going westbound, you're
almost to the roundabout. I know there's a lot of pedestrians in there, but I don't know why you would
need those two particular calming devices there. You're at the bottom of the hill when you're going
westbound, so anyway, my question is why you need those two. Mr. Brantes?
Yes, so the when you're coming down the hill we were getting complaints that cars were not yielding
at the crosswalk and they were there their field of vision was on the It was smaller and further ahead
and it was focused on the roundabout and so where you would pull up to is passing the passing the crossing
first and then for going into
East bound I'm going to pass that over to John if you would like to answer The the reasoning for for
the placement there Exiting the roundabout was because we were finding that people were not being slowed
down by the roundabout as much on the lower part just because the amount of curving that you go through
is not as significant as on the upper part
But we're also looking at this part of the street just because there's a crossing or a trail crossing
from the Rogers Farm Park Going north and there's also a It was like a school cross guard. So that was
another reason that we were focusing on here Does answer your question mr. Coppock, okay I do have a
question Can I do we have a
number off the top of our heads of the number of people who have been killed in Car accidents in the
city of Bloomington in the past year of the past five years any sense of it I Don't have that number
but we can we can find it. I mean, do you have an approximation? Is it one is a ten? Is it a hundred?
I Would imagine are you saying in the last year? Yeah, then the last year of the last five years. I
would imagine it's in the hundreds and
This report is showing 70 It's all records that we have this goes back want to say it's five years We
have 70 fatalities 1.1 thousand serious injuries. Okay, I would like to ask mr. Ullmeyer if he knows
Can you give us the comparable number of people who've been killed in fires in the past one to five
years? Have anybody has anybody been killed? Do we
Okay. Mr. Uh, Meyer says that he there have been people killed, but he can't give us a number. Um, my
understanding has always been that, uh, uh, something like 40,000 people are killed every year in the
States, uh, uh, in car accidents and the number of people killed by our fire departments is so good
that significantly fewer people than that are killed every year. Um, sir, please, that that's what I'm,
that's what I'm getting at.
was specifically talking about fires Those accidents you're talking about It's still respond us police
officers and emergency Medical services responding to those and all those they're still going to slow
our response down to those issues Well, I should have made that clear. I wasn't just talking about fire
That's understandable us down. So any any of those things are going to slow us down to any emergency or
We're responding to you. No, no, that's totally understandable. And again, I admire the efficiency with
which fire departments like ours have gotten You know better at responding to accidents, but what I
kind of I'm observing they don't build your church for Easter Sunday rule I don't want to build our
roads for a fire alarm fire When the broad widening the road
Increases the number of people who speed and more people die from car wrecks than fires So that's my
concern is as much as I don't want to slow down Your truck response. I would like to know Like how slowly
though your trucks have to go over the speed table since this is going to be the first time that We're
using speed tables on the regular Here because I I take your concern. I just don't want to throw the
baby out with the bath water. I
Again, I would say that our response is just not our response is that accident that you're talking about
So we're going to be slowed down to that accident that you're talking about as well. So it's not just
fires It's any emergency. It's a grandma having a heart attack. It's you know, it's the police responding
to something You know, it's EMS responding to things all those things are are concerned. So it's just
not fires It's so understood. Thank you
Any other questions before we go to or or comments where we go to a vote any comments to my left? to
my right Mr. Midas So I believe the number I was quoted as 30 seconds per Cushion is this time taken?
Can you speak to that at all? Is that what your estimations were when if you like look at it
an infrastructure development like this?
So that was a number that we got from Cincinnati when we talked to them about other quick build responses.
That's not something that the fire department necessarily like accurately recorded. That was like a
ballpark number. That was just like the easiest thing that we could share. We got other data from San
Francisco and Portland, but those were kind of on two ends of the spectrum. So it was hard to really
say what was really the truth. And then also for David, so this is
This is like a neighborhood greenway. Um, that's the nature of these grants and developments.
Is there a look, I assume that like as much traffic calming as we would benefit from all over the place,
these are on lower traffic roads that are lower priority for emergency response vehicles. Is that a
correct assumption or do you, could you really do a traffic calming infrastructure thing like this in
on any street in the city?
It is definitely not intended This program is not intended to be used on just any street in the city.
So this is for shared street a a Residential neighborhood road and then a neighborhood connector is
where we're taking extra care sending it to more departments having more coordination with emergency
emergency services
Think what makes this different is So it's the I had it written somewhere here so The neighborhood connector
is its typology I believe but its classification is a secondary arterial and so that means it's designed
to hair to See more average daily traffic and it is a bigger connection for
vehicles, so This would be the street that has the most volume of any of the other traffic calming projects
We've done but it also has a much less aggressive treatment for it So whatever traffic calming devices
we've put on previous Residential neighborhood streets those those would cause more of a delay
But they're also less likely to be a connection to some other neighborhood So it is less likely that
you're taking that route to get to yet another neighborhood street So this is where it's a bit unique
but not too terribly far off from like West 11th Street, for example I'll just make a comment as someone
who lived in the neighborhood for a number of years I can absolutely guarantee that the
I can say that I've experienced the inability of traffic or the frequency of traffic, not slowing down,
especially at this roundabout. I think this, the speed cushion specifically at the roundabout look very
strange. Um, but if you are coming, especially on the eastbound lane, trying to see out of your periphery
when you're basically pedestrians are coming from a 180 degree behind you angle, um, it's useful.
Further questions or comments. I actually have a question for the bus lady Are the buses as big as the
fire trucks and do the buses have a concern about going over these tables? No We go over a
lot of neighborhood streets that have speed cushions and speed humps our vehicles have to slow down
That's great for us and they don't have anywhere as near the need of the fire truck to go quickly. No, we know I
We're not responding to a fire alarm fire ever. So, okay last call before we go to a vote Will the secretary
please call the roll on TCP 2620 Davis Yes, Stossberg yes Coppock No, mr. Midas, yes full in yes
That vote is four to one. And I believe according to our bylaws, that means it does not pass. It requires
five votes of the nine member commission. So TCP 2620 is rejected. We go now to TCR 2619. And with this,
I'm going to pass the gavel to Mr. Sosberg since this is
Resolution that I'm sponsoring Yes, and if I can get Well, I don't know if there's a slide that staff
wants to put up I didn't really intend to put it up No, no, it was just what I submitted before but
I don't think we need it, okay
So I was just going to let me get my notes up here Also have the endorsed the tracker spreadsheet right
that might be useful to put up on the screen, although it's hard to read Yes It so I wasn't intended
for this to be facilitated over the screen So I did print out and everyone should have a paper copy
of this specific tracker just to try to keep everything straight
Okay, just to put everything into context, this resolution was part of another resolution in the July
meeting. It calls for the commission to review and accept the Walker study and to vote on each of its
recommendations and send its endorsements to the Common Council. So as I've noted in the memo, it is
our job to oversee such studies.
The study was not brought to I mean while the commission was consulted as a part of the commission's
process. It was not Neither the this commission or its predecessor had any involvement in the Hiring
of the contractor or the shaping of the questions. It came out of parking services. I
But it is our job to quote coordinate supervise and when necessary approve transportation related studies
plans consultant reports activities programs and projects So Walker submitted the draft in July The
they had made 12 recommendations This Commission has not actually weighed in on them. So what I'm asking
for is for every member to to
endorse or reject each recommendation accordingly. And so what I'm going to do is I'd like
to move endorsement of each recommendation. We're going to do it all under one resolution, but we're
going to vote on each recommendation separately. So I'll be asking the acting chair to call for discussion,
public comment and a vote on each one.
And with that I was going to start with the first recommendation Okay So Again, I move endorsement of
study recommendation number. Oh one a lack of a majority vote for the recommendation means the Commission
rejects it The indoor the recommendation is transfer all citation appeals duties from the city clerk's
office to the parking services division and
So I personally think that this is a mistake. In reading the, I oppose this recommendation. In reading
the reasoning for it, the consultants say that to increase the efficiency and clarity of the appeals process,
They recommend all citation appeals duties be transferred from the city clerk's office to the parking
services division. Parking services will gain increased oversight and control of the appeals process
and persons with violations will have a more clear process for filing an appeal. Any required adjudication
beyond the appeals process would then be escalated to the court system. So my problem with
this recommendation is that number one, we don't have a court system. Effectively, the court system
is the clerk's office.
but there's no formal court system and I think the consultants misunderstood that. Secondly, the reason
they gave in their observations for this recommendation were that it improves customer service and that
there's a need for the two offices to communicate. And I just don't think that that is anywhere near
enough justification to
To unify. I mean our job is not per se to improve the customer service of parking we want to have the
best thing we can but You know, there's also a question of to what extent Like how does parking services
handle appeals versus the clerk's office the clerk is at least a neutral body so Whereas parking services
has stated that their goal is customer service if that means that
more people get their tickets waived or voided, and are we even tracking those numbers? I think we are,
and I think the city collectively is, I don't think the commission has done so yet. We don't have a
proper annual report yet. And so for these reasons and others, I think that this recommendation is actually
not one the commission should endorse. So that's my opinion. I'm looking for discussion from other members.
Recommendation is now open for discussion that The Council for Community Accessibility was supposed
to receive the parking fines from people who park illegally in handicapped spaces and One of the reasons
given for us not receiving that money is
is because so many of those tickets are dismissed. So I don't if in fact there is a chance that more
tickets will be dismissed if everything gets transferred to parking services which it could.
I don't know. I would not be in favor of that. Thank you. To my right.
Yeah, I am aligned with Mr. Voland. I think it's a useful separation of powers for to be able to appeal
to a different body than the one that issued the ticket. So I will be voting in alignment at this point.
Is there any further comments from commissioners? We're going to take public comment for each of these.
Is there anyone from council chambers who'd like to
Please come to the mic. You'll have sign in you'll have three minutes And if you're online go ahead
and raise your hand we'll look for you soon I'm Susan stole. I'm a deputy clerk for the clerk's office
I'm probably I've been with the department for six years and I'm probably the person that is most involved with
adjudication but I do believe our office does a really efficient job with Taking care of all those and
giving good customer service and explaining and I think the separations of power is something that we
Definitely promote. So I don't know if you want to ask me any questions at all about what our office
does, but you're welcome to I
Thank you. Okay, you're welcome. Thank you Moving to ask people on anyone online Seeing no we'll move
on to the next item. So actually no at this point we vote you wanted a vote on each item I would like
a chance to say something in response to what I've heard just briefly that I think that the Commission
should be tracking things like how many voids
are done in a given year, how many tickets, I mean, that are appealed or dismissed. I know that the
clerk's office is capable of drawing those numbers up, but not every number is in the clerk's control.
And so I don't think that they've given enough reason yet to change the way we're doing things, even
though I get the motive for it. I think we should move carefully and not
endorse this recommendation So now we will move on to a vote our vote is to support Mr. Voland's
recommendation, which is a no on the recommendation that Would you like to I just I think that the motion
should be I'm sorry. I need to pull it up here and
Moving I moved endorsement of study recommendation number zero one. So a yes vote agrees the recommendation
a no vote rejects the recommendation so When I make a motion for every one of these it will be to endorse
it whether I agree with it or not Okay, so I'm moving endorsement of recommendation. Oh one a Yes vote
supports the recommendation a no vote rejects it
So a no vote agrees with you in this case, that's correct No vote agrees with Commissioner Voland's
initial recommendation so we don't need to attend to what Commissioner Voland's recommendations where
we can think about the recommendations from the Walker study face value whether or not an individual
Endorses that recommendation or does not endorse that exactly right and we're going to structure all
those the same the same way Thank you
Thank you. That's a easier way to do this. I think so. OK. So the motion is to endorse the recommendation
to transfer all citation appeals duties from a city clerk's office to the parking services division
and we'll have a roll call vote on this. No. At this point we do not need seconds. No.
Copic no, mr. Midas. No Bowen no Davis no Okay motion fails I move endorsement of study recommendation
number zero Number oh to a lack of majority vote for the recommendation means the Commission rejects it this
Recommendation was to develop a parking system and parking services division mission statement that
is supported across city departments. I Think this is a good idea But I don't know that I should be
presenting it I think we should you know, just talk about it, but I do think this is a good idea It
doesn't hurt for there to be a mission statement. I do question who will be
Creating the parking system and the parking services division mission statements whether there'll be
one or two but on its face, this is a reasonable thing with there should be something consistent that
employees involved with parking follow in the effort to make parking More useful and equitable Thank
you We'll move to discussion from commission members will start on my right
on my left. All right, we'll take public comment on this. Anyone in council chambers would like to comment
on recommendation number two, parking mission statement that is supported across city departments. Seeing
none online, I think our online person is out of the room. That's okay. Brief pause.
No one no one online. All right. We'll come back to a vote unless there's any other discussion seeing
none. The motion is to develop a parking system and parking services division mission statement that
is supported across city departments. We'll have a roll call vote. Yes.
Yes Yes Yes Yes Motion carries. Thank you moving on to the next item. I move Recommendation
I move endorsement of study recommendation number Oh three I'll just read it now. So this is the third
there there were the twelve recommendations divided into four categories the first three are all in
the category of
Organization this third one adopts a data-driven approach to parking operations and management with
recurring transparency of key performance indicators so the The report talks about The parking revenues
not being transparently linked to the parking system or city improvements or mobility goals or reinvestment
plans There's been You know
in other words, no science behind the way that we manage parking. It's just sort of, uh, by our gut.
And, uh, uh, it was the parking commissions observation as far back as 2016, uh, 2017 when they started
rather that, uh, the, the commission needed to look at parking as a holistic system made up of a bunch
of programs that garages,
meters lots neighborhood zones and citations were all part of a single Parking service provided by the
city And that there was no there had been no one person or department in charge of it all For several
good reasons and that somebody needed to study it across departments so You know this
This is a pretty anodyne recommendation. I think that it's important though that we get our reports
done so that the things they call for, parking occupancy rates, maintenance response times,
revenue per space, revenue allocation, compliance rates are something that the members of the public
can easily call up. So for those reasons, I endorse this.
And it just sort of underscores the need for the Commission to complete the work It's called for in
it in the ordinance to do an annual report of parking data Thank you Thank you Discussion from commission
members to my left To my right No, I think this is consistent with other things the city has been doing
to move for more data-driven
decision-making, and I think it's overall good for equity, and so I will be endorsing this. Is there
any further discussion? Oh, awesome. Right. Any public comment? In chambers? Online? Seeing none. Any
further discussion here? No. All right. The motion is to endorse recommendation number three.
Adopt a data-driven approach to parking operations and management with recurrent transparency of key
performance indicators roll call vote, please Terminus yes Boland. Yes Davis. Yes Stossberg. Yes Copic.
Yes Motion passes. Thank you
Mr. Chair, I move endorsement of recommendation p1 This Is the second tranche of recommendations all
about policy and the recommendation is quote implement on-street metered parking rate changes Utilizing
a zone based system considering high demand and lower demand areas the consultants say that
They recommend that parking rates in the high demand zone defined as metered areas north of third and
south of Seventh Street be increased to $1.50 an hour. Low demand zone south of third and north of seventh
can be set at a minimum of 125 an hour. And they go on to talk about the idea of zone pricing. But the
recommendation does not specifically say what prices should be set at. I think this is the
policy that we should, or this is the recommendation we should most strongly endorse in the exact wording,
implement on-street meter parking rate changes utilizing a zone-based system, considering high-demand
and lower-demand areas. That's fine. What the prices should be is another question. It's my very fervent
belief that there are some zones that are so underutilized that the price should go below a dollar,
that we haven't experimented with variable pricing at all.
and that if we have to test a 25 cents an hour on a very obscure block for a semester or a year, it
will be worth it. But at any rate, at least going away from one price for the entire zone is long overdue.
In fact, it's more than a decade overdue. We should have done this a long time ago. I'm glad to see that
Walker endorses this I think it's going to be up to us to decide how many zones there are how many prices
there are But just the idea that we would go to two or more Prices is an idea whose time has come. So
I endorse p1 Thank you, sir discussion from commission members on recommendation p1 miss Davis. I
I don't feel that this should apply to disabled parking spaces because those of us who need them don't
have much choice in where we park or Even if we could park farther away that might be further disabling
so if we could do a carve out and have a you know a standard rate or the Whatever it is
25 cent rate That would be if we can do that then I would agree with this Oh This is something that
the parking commission talked about quite a bit the biggest issue isn't do we want to carve out special
Audiences we also talked about a special rate for volunteers and
volunteering downtown and the like. There are things we can do with ParkMobile to affect that. The big
problem is gonna be in enforcement. How do you prevent, I mean, the lower you drop the price in the
disabled spots, the more you incentivize people who don't wanna pay the full rate next door. So we wanna
make sure that as a result of lowering the price, we don't actually cause the spaces to become less
available. Having said that,
I don't have a problem with that idea personally. It really matters how we implement it. But I don't
think it should, I mean, if we're talking about making disabled spaces a zone, that's an interesting
idea. But right now we're just talking about geography. And one thing I've noticed is that there was
a, we received data through Council Member Flaherty from, what's the name of the, Arrive, the consultant.
that pointed out that Disabled spaces represent almost 6% of downtown parking spaces, which is a much
higher number than I'd ever hoped for I I've done the impression that 4% was doing great so I just want
to make sure that those spaces are actually available and I want you know, so I Share your concern.
I Don't I think we can accommodate it and still change the
prices at least two different zones. Thank you. We'll now move to public comment on recommendation P1
in chambers online. Back to the commission for final comments. No. All right.
Move it take it to a roll call vote on recommendation p1 implement on-street metered parking rate changes
Utilizing a zone based system considering high demand and lower demand areas Yes Yes, yes Yes Thank
you motion carries
Moving on to recommendation P2. I move recommendation P2 which reads implement off-street parking rate
changes So the consultants say here they recommend increasing surface lot parking rates using the same
demand based on street parking zones Lot one lot three and lot five are located within the high demand
zone. They recommend to set that price at a dollar fifty an hour Lot six is a low demand zone. They
recommend raising the price to a dollar twenty five an hour
Garage transient rates are recommended to increase from 50 cents to one dollar an hour. Once again,
I agree with the recommendation I believe though that And and I'm less Concerned about the pricing for
garages. I know that a Fundamental principle the Parking Service is trying to observe is that it should
be less expensive to park in the garage than on the street which is the more valuable
Parking having said that I think this is very much dependent on what rates we go to for the meter rate
sets all other rates So I wouldn't necessarily endorse The exact amount but again the recommendation
just says Implement off-street parking rate changes. I do think that most rates need to go up but especially
especially considering the 4th Street garage and the impending opening of the new convention center and
That's going to make a big difference in demand for parking in 4th Street, and it will be good to have
rates more appropriate to demand by next February. Thank you. Thank you. Moving to discussion from commission
members, starting on my left, on my right. Seeing none, we'll move to public comment. Any in chambers?
Seeing none. Online? Seeing none.
Back to All right. We'll just move this to a roll call vote. It's recommendation P to implement off-street
parking rate changes Yes Stasberg, yes Copic. Yes, mr. Minus. Yes Boland. Yes Motion carries. Thank
you moving on to recommendation P
I move recommendation p3 which reads quote reduce on-street paid parking enforcement hours unquote the
reason that the consultants gave for it is Based on peer review and comments from stakeholders. They
identified enforcement hours as an opportunity for adjustment Current enforcement hours end at 9 p.m.
And are considerably later than those of pure cities I perhaps disagree with this recommendation more
than anything else in
the set the original set of the original our set for downtown meter enforcement was 8 a.m. To 10 p.m.
And we've seen data over the years that show that demand for parking is as strong in the evening if
not stronger than it is during peak demand during the day and that the fact that people don't
necessarily like to pay parking that late doesn't mean that when you're on the square or Kirkwood at
nine o'clock at night or ten o'clock at night on a Sunday that you're not still seeing a Complete lack
of available parking spaces because the demand is so high combined with the fact that Effectively the
dollar an hour rate that was set in 2013 has dwindled to the equivalent of 75 cents an hour in 2013
dollars today
I don't think we have anywhere near enough data to show that this is a problem We should be pricing
parking according to the demand. There's a great deal of demand in many zones for For for parking after 9 p.m.
And we're only going to 9 p.m. So I really couldn't disagree with this more I don't think we have the
data to and I definitely disagree with the idea that peer review and comments from stakeholders
I think that pricing should meet it should be set according to the demand for a given place if we're
in more demand than say Iowa City or Jefferson City, Missouri then so be it That's that's what it costs
to park in Bloomington Thank you moving to discussion from commission members on recommendation p3 Walker
To stop enforcement at 8 p.m. Instead of 9 p.m. Is that the specific reduction? They don't say that
in the recommendation. They say that in there Well, I mean I guess they do the the thing we're voting
on is reduced on street paid parking enforcement hours They recommend going cutting back to 8 p.m I'll
just say I very much agree with their recommendation. I think the city of Bloomington our enforcement
between 8 and 9 p.m.
I don't want to say I want more enforcement but I think it's it's lacking. I think having an earlier
time where enforcement is cut off encourages people to go to restaurants and downtown businesses more
and specifically potentially attract people who are spreads out the business goers into the later evening
hours which I think some restaurants would appreciate. I also kind of
see it as a little bit of a safety issue. I do think I mean I understand that you want to price things
according to demand but specifically in the late night hours putting a higher priority on on street
parking when that is often the only place that people feel like safe walking to and from businesses
feels important to me. I'll likely be voting in support of their recommendation and not necessarily
for those reasons. I agree that ours doesn't need to. We don't need to mirror every other city just
because that's what they're doing.
Thank you. Mr. Villalon, for the benefit of people who are not less familiar with how this parking theory,
the idea is if you price it appropriately, you're targeting a particular occupancy rate, like 80%, for
example. So by actually raising the price, you can provide better customer service in a sense because
there's likely to be a spot available because you're at 80% occupancy.
And if you price it too low, you're at 100% occupancy, which could actually be more frustrating. Is
that did I? Capture that right? Yeah, I mean the my counter to mr. Midas would be If anything, I think
pricing it right would make it safer because there's a greater guarantee that a space will be available
when people need it I I love telling the story of January 2013 when I was driving to City Hall at 720
on a Tuesday night it happened I remember it because it was
Mike Pence's first state of the state address and I was going to a meeting at 730 and I had 10 minutes
to kill and I noticed that the square was packed on a Tuesday night at 720 and I drove around the square
looking for parking spaces and in six circuits of the square I counted three spaces max available out
of 130 that was before meters were implemented in August of 2013 and
But there were never more than three spaces out of 130 spaces on the square available That's a sign
that the square was underpriced at that time. There was no almost no way to find parking without Cruising
for parking which is the kind of thing that Donald Shoup talks about being inimical to a city. It creates
traffic. It creates frustration It does not increase business the whole reason we have meters is to
Is to help
commercial and government and people get to services and so if people who Don't need to be parking there
are staying there because they can afford it or it doesn't cost anything Then that keeps the person
who's looking for a spot close to their business away from it. So I Also don't think that 8 p.m. Is
late Or even 9 p.m. Is late. There are some places that charge till much later than that and
but For our peer cities, perhaps we are later than most but there's a good reason. Bloomington is a
popular downtown. So once again, I I respectfully disagree. I think that This is a bad idea at least
not until we get better data about what's happening in that last hour of parking Thank you any further
Commission comments before we go to public We'll now move to public comment is there anyone who'd like to
Comment on recommendation P P three reduce on street paid parking enforcement hours. Seeing none. We're
asking online. I'm seeing that there's not online. Last chance for commission comments. We'll take it
to a roll call vote then on recommendation P three reduce on street paid parking enforcement hours.
No. Copic. No.
Yes, no Davis No Okay motion fails, thank you. Mr. Chair. I move that recommendation ot1 be endorsed
It reads quote transition to multi-space on-street meter pay stations operated using pay-by-plate the
the study says
They can recommend replacing the existing single space meters with new multi-space meters that allow
users to enter their license plate. Replacement is recommended to avoid the increased downtime and ongoing
maintenance and support costs that occur with technology at end of life. I could go on, but I can confirm
that when the meters were purchased in 2014, they were used and they were purchased because they were
about half a million dollars less than the 1.5 million it would have cost the city for new
meters and we paid the price for that there was a lot of of of Maintenance required to keep those meters
running parking services done a heroic job of keeping them going but there are More efficient ways to
provide parking that that even though they don't provide that visual cue of a meter in front of every spot
that the city would benefit a great deal from new technology. There was also, we should point out that
ParkMobile was adopted at the same time as meters, but it would have cost a significant amount of money
then to make the meters react to somebody who paid via ParkMobile, and so the city decided not to do
it. I didn't blame the city for it. I do hope that new technology will allow us to
To make it clear. I mean, I don't even know what I'm talking about. Let me just go away. There won't
be that visual indication that a spot is That a meter is in use with the blinking light on the front
Anyway, I do agree that it's time to go to more efficient technology. So I endorse this Thank you comments
from Commissioner commissioners on recommendation ot1 to my left to my right miss
I know that they brought in two devices to test in here and they for some reason it was the minimum
amount of parking time on those two devices was 15 minutes and I would just I assume that that doesn't
negate this but I would want to make sure that our current parking rates with her You would be able
to park for less than 15 minutes even with these new devices, which wasn't demonstrated Mr.
When the meter ordinance was adopted there was debate about how to set the price and ultimately that
this price was set at 25 cents per 15 minutes And so I think that that needs to be changed Maybe they
said it because they assumed that that was the minimum but I I Think we get people somebody gets charged
25 cents no matter what You can use
You can chart you can park for three minutes right now or for six minutes using other coinage and I
would want that. Oh, I see. Yeah. Well, I wouldn't I don't disagree. Yeah. Mr. Coppock. I've got a question.
Does the pay by play have to go with the license plate recognition technology. You have one you have
to have the other.
No, if you if you go to say the Wells library to park you have to enter your plate into the the kiosk
to park there I don't know that they have a license plate reader, but it's a small lot. It's easy for
them to see I don't I think these are two different things for a reason Yeah Is there an ability to have
Multi-space on-street meter pay without using pay-by-plate and there is because the other option would
be to use space numbers So rather than going up and putting in your pay-by-plate, you could go up and
put whatever space number you're in So we've grouped those two together But my understanding is there
is an option to separate them Are you saying then that the problem is with the specific phrase using
pay-by-plate so that we have a choice? We do have a choice on the
Well I just played technology reader technology recognition technology mean if you use pay by plate
I know like you do in the Dunn Street parking lot but I don't know how that translates to if you're
parking on say Third Street or someplace else. I know in Indy they have the spots have numbers on them
like you're in space 15 25 or whatever you pay like that. Do we have to mark all the spaces then or
Think that you're basically arguing that maybe we should cut the phrase operated using pay-by-plate
So that we can make that decision later Is that what you're suggesting? Yes, I would second that Just
as a point of order the Walker room at the Walker recommendations
These are not being put forward by any staff person at City Council. So I just am not sure why you're
right the purpose of amending the motion at this time would be because there is no relationship between
The vote happening tonight and like actual like parking policy that might be implemented Okay, then
I would suggest that we endorse ot1
But anybody who doesn't believe in pay-by-plate should vote against ot2 That way it would send
the appropriate message. I think that and just as a reminder if and when staff decide to Take any action
on any of these recommendations. There will be another opportunity Right for the Transportation Commission
to weigh in so this is not the last time you'll be asked for an opinion on any one of these items
Seeing none moving to public comment in chambers Member of the public not as my position in the city
I'm I would request that we have multiple stations that we can easily find there are often times when
I go out there with my kid and he likes running around and I'm usually having to kind of like scramble
and hold them and
And if it would be easier for me to go and find a spot as opposed to having to walk far down the block,
that would greatly help me or my wife. It would also be nice to pay by spot as opposed to pay by license,
just to be easier to remember like the place that you've parked as opposed to the multiple digit number
that you have as your license plate. And also just to maintain the nice social nicety of paying it forward
and just like overpaying it.
It is nice. It's like really trivial. But in this world, it's nice that you can do something for your
community or your random neighbor or show up to a spot and you find that, oh, I've got like 30 extra
minutes. Thank you. So those are my comments. Thank you. Thank you. Other public comments on recommendation
OT1? I see none in person. Online?
None coming back to the Commission final comments. Mr. Roller reacting to the public comment. I Do think
that parking services has talked about two kiosks per block face one on either side of an alley Which
I think is a reasonable accommodation I'm agnostic about pay by space versus pay by plate. I do think
there's an argument for both so I don't have a problem endorsing this and
But I share everyone's concern about Which method we might prefer and it's something that will need
to be talked about when it comes up Yeah, I think I will be voting to endorse this but do share these
concerns and one thing I'm considering is that we'll have another opportunity to weigh in and perhaps
between now and then there can be some refinement in this language on for example pay by plate versus
pay by space and
whether or not this clarification on whether we need license plate readers to do this. So thank you.
Any further comment from commission? All right, we'll take this to a vote. The we are voting to endorse
recommendation OT one transition to a multi-space on street meteor pay stations operated using pay by
plate. We'll have a roll call vote, please. Copic. Yes. Mr Midas.
Yes Davis Sossberg, yes Motion carries. Thank you. Mr. Chair. I move recommendation ot2 quote upon moving
to a pay-by-plate Multi-space meter system for on-street parking update the enforcement system to mobile
license plate recognition LPR technology and transition to digital permits this was one that I wasn't
willing to say no to a
my biggest concern was mobile license plate recognition technology. We have a huge and growing concern
about privacy in the world thanks to AI and technology. Flock cameras are very controversial. License
plate technology, that's essentially what flock cameras are. And so there's a big question about how
would parking services handle that data.
Where would it reside? What rules would govern it? I don't think the city has a data policy You know
That's at least not one that's commonly known for that reason alone. I'm very hesitant to recommend
this even though I support Improving the technology to make the job of parking services Easier so I'm not
Saying no yet. I'm eager to hear what other people have to say on this one But my inclination is to
not endorse it simply because they recommend LPR technology Thank you start on the right, yeah I think
that's an excellent point and at this point I don't I think we have a very reasonable other alternative
This technology of collecting everyone's data and I'm very comfortable saying no on this one Thank you
My left Thank you, I'll also be voting no for the similar reasons I have concerns particularly with
the Public Center around flock if we're using license plate reader technology We need to clearly communicate
how this system is different for example that it's isolated that it doesn't do other things that there's
a lot lots to clarify there I think before I would endorse
The license plate recognition technology. However, I have worked previously for a parking company and
I know that This is a common technology in parking. It hasn't been a long time long before flock People
were using this to track when you enter and leave a garage So there are reasonable ways to do this but
for today I would be voting no We'll now move to public comment on recommendation ot2
Any online not final opportunity here we have a public comment As a member of the public I would just
like to express a comment on this particular item just in hearing commissioners express concern over
the Applicability of flock
related technology to what's being proposed. I would caution against making any kind of conflation of
the two technologies as Commissioner Stossberg pointed out mobile license plate recognition technology
has been around for a really long time. And the thing that has made flock possible has not been around
for a very long time. And so I think that while it's perfectly reasonable to be concerned about the
use of surveillance and enforcement.
I think that it's very likely that what's being proposed here is not at all Comparable to a flock system
Thank you. Thank you for your comment Yeah, I would agree with that public comment. I think this is
really a more matter of clarification That will be helpful to move this forward Any other public comment
in person online. No, all right. I Think we're ready for mr. Vullen
I just wanted to respond to public comment by saying that We don't have to worry about flock to be worried
about Collecting data that might be usable in different ways Mr. Midas's suggestion that we could go
to pay by space removes the personal identifier from it until the person gets a ticket and again, I'm
not even saying that we shouldn't use a
Technology this is why I wasn't an outright no on it. I I feel like I have to be a no Only because the
city has yet to adopt a data policy if the city had a policy for how it handled data like this that
was written out and adjudicated that was it was you know thought out I would have much less trouble
supporting this recommendation until then I'm just too queasy to endorse it. Thank you
We're ready for a roll call vote on recommendation Oh to upon moving to a pay-by-plate multi-space meter
system for on-street parking Update the enforcement system to mobile license plate recognition LPR technology
and transition to digital permits. That's ot2 ot2 Mr. Midas No Bone no Davis Stossberg no
Copic no motion fails Mr. Chair, I move recommendation ot3 This is again in the tranche of operations
technology recommendations and it is quote replace the existing off-street gated parking equipment the
Study further says that the city should replace existing off-street parking equipment with a new system
that will continue to be supported by an equipment vendor they have a
You know a problem with data technology and they need to To update it. I endorse everything they said
there and I support this recommendation Thank you comment from commissioners left right no public comment
in person say none online Say none I think we'll just make this one easy and go straight to the roll
call vote. I
Yes Davis Stossberg. Yes Coppock. Yes, Mr. Midas. Yes All right motion fit motion passes, thank you
Yeah, Mr. Chair, I move recommendation c1 quote create a recognizable city of Bloomington parking system
logo and brand identity separate from the city's brand identity unquote to that end they said
To promote parking as a distinct holistic entity parking services should develop a consistent brand
including fonts colors and a logo all Street parking signage parking facility entrance signage the parking
website and online parking portals should use this format for a consistent look and feel They continue
about that a unique and easily identifiable parking brand would improve the customer experience and
encourage our utilization I agree
In principle with everything they said here, but I don't agree with is the idea that parking should
go on its own and do its own branding that this is the job of the city as a whole and regardless of
what Branding may have come out of the mayor's office recently that you know has been the subject of
amusement The principle is correct that there should be a coherent citywide branding scheme so again,
it's not like these things aren't necessary and
But I don't think that parking should be going it alone. They should be doing it. There's no acknowledgement
here that it's In coordination with the mayor's office. So for that reason alone, I can't recommend
see one Thank you discussion from commission members public comment Online no
Yeah, I agree with Mr. Voland's comments here. So I'll be voting against this. Let's take this to the
roll call vote then. Davis? No. Stossberg? No. Coppock? No. Stermitis? No. Voland? No.
Motion fails. Mr. Chair. I move recommendation c2 quote develop and launch an ongoing parking system
communications and marketing campaign unquote Bloomington should in fact create and release a comprehensive
campaign that educates visitors about parking locations rules and regulations a little surprised We're
not doing it but parking services impulse here and Walker's impulse is the right one again, I think
it should be in the context of a citywide
Marketing campaign that's coordinated with anything else that the city is doing but Walkers impulse
parking services impulse is correct here. We should have a marketing campaign to promote Garages if
there's one thing I'd love to see personally. It's a sign Outside of every garage saying how many spaces
are open like why haven't we gone to that yet? that should be the first thing we do to promote a
Parking availability, but otherwise I endorse this Come on comment from commissioners Public comment
on recommendation c2 in chambers online All right final final call Take this to a roll call vote, please
Stossberg Yes Copic
Yes, mr. Midas. Yes, Nolan. Yes Davis Motion passes. Mr. Chair. I move recommendation c3 install
informational signage at key locations unquote This is the same thing as C2. I Have no no change in
my comment. It's I agree with it. We should have informational signage at key locations perfect simple
comment from commissioners of
Public comment on in person online Seeing none roll call vote, please Copic Yes, Mr. Midas. Yes, Follon.
Yes Davis Stasberg. Yes
Motion passes. Mr. Chair. I move approval of TCR 26 19 with the document quote findings regarding the
Walker study unquote attached Which includes the record of the vote of each study recommendation the
vote shall be recorded in the In the form of yeses nos and abstentions The last names of commissioners
who were in the minority for each vote shall be noted adjacent to each vote in case of a tie All votes
shall be specified
Thank you motion is on the table discussion from commissioners on this overall Seeing none public comment.
Did we get a second on that? I need a second Approval of the document as With this document, I'll read
it again I move approval of TCR 26 19 with this document attached which includes the record of the vote
of each study recommendation
in the form of yeses, nos and abstentions. I'll say it. All right. Great. Commissioner comment.
Seeing none. Public comment in person online. None. I think we'll take this to go ahead and take this
to roll call vote, please. Mr. Minus. Yes. Bowen. Yes. Davis. Stasberg. Yes.
Yes Motion carries Thank you And now I return the gavel to mr. Vola. Thank you, mr Sossberg We go now
to section 5 of the agenda discussion of topics not on the docket We need to talk about scheduling a
special hearing to review the college walnut corridor study. I believe this is mr. Roebling Thank you
Ryan Roebling, Planning Services Manager. As you are all familiar with, we have been working on a College
of Walnut Corridor study for a couple of years now, and we've
Received a final recommendation and we would like to show that to first the Transportation Commission
and in order to do that We need to pick a date To have a special meeting that this is a project that
is big enough to warrant its own meeting So we didn't want to include it in the October meeting In order
to make sure that it is fully heard and we have plenty of time for public comment and Commissioner questions so
Are there any dates that work I can give a list of potential dates or however you would like to go about
this. Let's just start by reviewing our next meeting is October 26. Correct. And then our final meeting
of the year would be December. What date is our December meeting. It's after Thanksgiving. It is the
seventh December 7th. OK. So you want something in between those two. That would be ideal. So we're
looking at another Monday.
That's agreeable to everyone. Any Monday November 2 9 16 leap out to anybody. The second is open for
chambers is open for the second and the 16th. I cannot do the ninth. I could do the second second word.
Oh, actually, I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. I see now that Public Works will be in chambers on the second
Those bums and then Planning Commission is on the 9th. So 16th and then are we okay with a non Monday
for this special meeting? Someone else will be here Anybody have problems with the 16th I can do the 16th
There's only four of us who are saying yes to it. We haven't consulted other Members, but we can follow
up via email, but I wanted to get an idea of what date so the idea is to send a press release ASAP So
I can lock in and try to get a member or two to confirm that they can make the 16th But this is is a
good enough for tonight well if Nobody objects will tentatively schedule it for the 16th. We have a chance to
Amended at the October meeting, but this will give everyone plenty of heads up So let's shoot for Monday
the 16th of November at 530. Will it be here in chambers? Okay Okay, we go not a general public comment
on items not on the docket. This is a question for staff Our items that have been placed in this to
be announced Because they seem to be like letters to the Commission We receive
We've received public comments of this nature before we have not announced them or talked about them
necessarily They have been made available to commissioners in a way that you guys can access them and
bring them up I will note that the item C Was a message that was a direct follow-up from our July meeting
from one of the vendors that came and spoke about the kiosks
they provided some graphics that We aren't able to make screen reader accessible for what I hope are
somewhat obvious reasons but There was a letter that staff sort of amended by providing some visual
description that one is fairly substantive, but staff liaisons do not expect to hear from the
vendors in follow-up communications they There's there's I think was maybe a miscommunication as to
the The next opportunity that they will get to meet with the Commission and so if if letter C was a
Basically a report shouldn't it have been under reports and communications it because it's not really
a report. It's more of a
their attempt to address some of the comments or questions that were raised at the last meeting and
I see there I sort of had to make a judgment call whether to append it to the July meeting agenda or
to carry it forward here and I decided that given the distance that it The average person would not
think to go back that far to note this information. So for transparent the sake of transparency, I just
noted it here instead and
Okay. Well, I don't think there's a need for us to Discuss these items per se they're just here for
our information. I I will say that the the letter about electric dirt bikes on Bloomington trails that
one may become more relevant in for the October meeting there may be some item related to
Electric bikes or scooters or something similar. I think we may want to consider As a commission changing
the agenda so that general public comment comes before cases and discussion because for example, I did
read the Boshir's letter and thought that it would be worth bringing up under discussion of topics not
on the docket So that's something we can talk about in scheduling but
Like I do think that that's a relevant issue that, you know, might be the subject of an inquiry, but
we're already past the point of the meeting where we could bring that up. So, but I appreciate the comment
here. If there's anyone who wants to discuss it, or if there's any member of the public who would like
to make public comment on items not on the agenda, you do have an opportunity to speak now. If you're
watching online, please raise your hand
In zoom and we'll call on you for any subject that is not on the agenda. You will have three minutes
to speak. Is there any member of the public who'd like to speak on items not on the agenda?
Anybody online? All right. Seeing none. Uh, once again, our next meeting is October 26th, October 26th
at five 30 in this room. Uh, if there's no other business, this meeting is adjourned.