►
From YouTube: Transportation Safety Committee Meeting- 8/02/2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
B
Going
to
call
this
meeting
to
order,
this
is
the
meeting
of
august
2nd
of
the
transportation
safety
committee
continuing
our
meeting
from
july
19th,
where
we
were
considering
the
gateway
plan.
Before
I
talk
at
all
about
the
agenda
or
how
we're
going
to
go
about
it,
let's
go
through
real,
quick
and
we'll
do
a
roll
call
of
members
and
staff,
dave,
ryan
transportation
safety
committee
and
I'm
just
going
to
go
and
order
call
your
name
misael.
B
Can
you
hear
me
there
you
go,
we
can.
B
All
right
nature.
B
Great
now
that
we've
got
that
that
taken
care
of,
thank
you
thank
everybody,
or
thank
you,
everybody
for
showing
up
today
and
being
willing
to
do
this
special
meeting.
So
we
can
finish
up
what
we
started.
We
had
a
three-hour
meeting
a
couple
weeks
ago
and
it
was
just
feeling
like
the
last
10
or
15
minutes.
We
were
maybe
losing
steam
and
not
being
as
efficient.
So
I
think
today
would
things
hopefully
will
go
fairly
efficiently
and
rapidly.
We
only
had
we
didn't
have
many
items
left
to
cover.
B
We
had
gotten
through
most
most
comments
that
made
it
over
into
the
recommended
column,
with
the
final
language
that
we
are
recommending
for
community
development,
things
that
we
recommend
to
make
revisions
to
the
gateway
plan
which
community
development
and
david
could
fill
us
in
on.
B
This
will
be
taking
to
the
city
council
representing
what
what
we
brought
forth
so
today
is
our
opportunity
to
go
through
the
items
that
we
didn't
finish
last
time
of
which
we
don't
have
a
lot,
and
so
I
think
we're
going
to
be
able
to
get
get
through
and
tackle
them
and
try
not
to
rehash
things
that
we
did
last
time
unless
people
have
had
last
minute
questions
committee
members
that
is-
and
you
want
to
go
back
and
and
and
clarify
something
we
can
do
that.
B
But
the
idea
is
to
go
with
the
new
stuff,
and
with
that
david,
could
you
expand
on
or
clarify
anything
that
I've
said
in
terms
of
how
you
see
things
going
and
maybe
a
a
question
that
me
said:
lisa
asked
earlier
about
the
process.
H
I
think
the
the
one
thing
I
would
want
to
emphasize
is
that
you
did
continue
this
meeting
with
the
intent
of
providing
a
recommendation
at
this
continued
meeting,
but
the
so
I
think,
that's
the
the
first
objective
clearly
if
the
committee
feels
that
they
need
more
time
to
deliberate,
you
know,
and
or
you
know,
if
you
want
to
make
a
recommendation
today
and
then
continue
to
discuss
it-
maybe
make
further
recommendations
later
and
or
to
establish
a
subcommittee
of
the
members
to
you
know
to
work
on
particular
elements.
H
H
I
think
they
would
both
really
appreciate
having
a
recommendation
from
the
transportation
safety
committee
and
and
other
committees
as
well,
and
so
what
they
will
do
with
that
is.
You
know
ultimately
make
decisions
about
what
to
incorporate
into
the
you
know
into
the
various
documents,
the
the
gateway
area
plan.
H
In
this
case,
in
terms
of
their
policy
direction,
that
will
form
the
basis
of
the
project
description
for
the
environmental
impact
report,
so
there's
a
whole
other
process
that
we'll
go
through
once
those
amendments
have
been
made,
I'm
not
going
to
go
over
the
the
process
for
amendment.
We
looked
at
that
last
time,
so
I'm
not
going
to
rehash
that.
But
what
I
will
say
I
guess,
is
that
you
know
we're
really
hoping
to
provide
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council
planning.
H
Commission,
you
know
in
the
near
term,
say
in
the
next
you
know
month
or
so,
to
try
and
stay
on
track
with
timelines,
and
then
the
the
committees
will
have
you
know
further
time
to
deliberate.
I
don't
think
that
you
know
most
of
what
we're
looking
at
in
further
refinements
will
rise
to
the
level
of
having
an
impact
that
isn't
going
to
be
evaluated
in
the
eir
and
ultimately
you
know
just
to
be
frank.
H
If,
if
you
know
that's
the
direction
that
we
went,
we
had
to,
you
know,
go
back
and
revise
the
eir,
although
it
wouldn't
be
the
preferable
option,
it
is
possible
even
to
have
additional
process
beyond
that.
So
all
of
this
is
to
say
is
that
yes,
we'd
like
to
stay
on
the
timeline
we'd
like
to
have
recommendations,
timely
and
to
move
those
things
forward,
but
in
no
way
shape
or
form.
Should
the
committee
feel
like
they're
under
any
kind
of
undue
pressure
to
make
those
decisions.
F
J
F
H
B
B
H
H
I
apologize
if
you
wanted
to
kick
off
a
policy
discussion
based
on
your
packets.
While
I'm
pulling
this
up
that'd
be
great,
it
looks
like
it
got
moved.
I
apologize
for
that.
B
Yeah,
I
was
pretty
much
relying
on
that
document
and
I
don't
have
it
open
or
printed
there.
We
go.
B
So
what
I'm?
I
guess,
one
of
my
first
questions
are
when
we
wrapped
up
the
last
meeting.
Delos
said
we
were
pretty
close
to
being
finished
with
all
the
submitted
comments,
and
then
we
had.
H
Okay
and
I've
got
I'm
not
sure
who's
sharing
is
that
dave
is
that
you,
I've
got
the
the
other
file
up
here.
Thank
you.
E
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
remember
that
I
believe
we
were
done
with
everything.
The
only
thing
we
had
to
discuss
was
a
7th
street
couplet
or
l
street
couplet.
B
B
B
So
I
think
I'll
give
my
my
thoughts
on
that
and
then
we'll
talk
about
it,
decide
where
to
go
with
any
recommendations
and
then
we'll
go
to
the
other
ones
that
we
didn't
get
to.
If
indeed
there
are
maybe
maybe
you're
right
karina
that
we
were
finished
or
david.
Whoever
said
that.
H
Yeah,
I
think
karina
said
that
that
was
my
memory
too,
and
after
just
scrolling,
through
these,
it
looks
like
we
have
comments
included
in
all
of
the
you
know,
left
or
right,
most
boxes,
with
the
exception
of
the
l
street.
B
Okay,
well,
why
don't
we
just
get
right
to
that,
so
my
comments
that
that
I
have
left
are
only
about
the
sections
of
the
draft
plan
that
discuss
l
street
and
I'd
like
to
share
some
passages
from
the
plan
that
I've
found
useful
and
helpful
in
catching
the
flavor
of
what
the
gateway
area
professes
to
be.
B
The
other
thing,
one
thing
that
I
do
would
just
like
to
reiterate
is
that
this
is
a
draft.
I
believe
it's,
this
very
first
draft
or
the
first
draft
released
in
december
and
hasn't
undergone
any
changes
yet
that
have
been
you
know
released
as
a
as
like
a
second
draft,
so
I
think
we
need
to
consider
it
in
its
early
stages
and
like
any
draft,
it's
subject
to
revision.
Some
revisions
are
to
be
expected,
maybe
even
some
major
ones
and
that's
okay.
At
this
early
stage,.
B
So
I'm
gonna
read
some
things
from
the
from
the
the
plan
that
I
grabbed
out
of
it.
No
I'll
try
not
to
take
too
long
but
they're,
not
necessarily
in
the
order
they
appear
in
the
plan.
I
just
put
them
in
an
order
that
I
wanted
to
kind
of
capture
the
essence
of
the
visions
and
goals
that
are
relevant
to
this
committee
and
some
of
them.
B
You
know,
I
know
where
I
got
them
in
the
plan
and
I'll
give
you
those
those
footnotes
of
what
section
it's
in,
but
others
are
just
little
sections
so
under
the
section
under
vision,
vision,
guiding
principle
number
five,
which
is
entitled
design
circulation
improvements
to
accommodate
planned
growth
and
minimize
vehicle
trips.
B
Section
seven
on
mobility,
a
stated
repeated
as
stated
repeatedly
throughout
this
document.
The
gateway
area
is
envisioned
to
be
a
sustainable
neighborhood
in
which
residents
have
the
option
to
live
car
free
without
sacrificing
safety
or
convenience.
B
This
has
the
subsequent
benefit
of
supporting
the
city's
goals
of
reducing
greenhouse
gas
emissions
and
vehicle
miles
travel
vmt.
So
the
reason
I'm
giving
a
lot
of
these
things
are
they
they.
I
think
they
really
do
a
great
job
of
reflecting
the
city
of
arcatas
goals
and
visions.
So
I've
got
a
few
more
here.
B
Consider
non-motorized
campus
layouts
for
areas
that
have
incomplete
block
patterns
and
or
are
currently
lacking
in
vehicular
roadways
such
as
the
barrel
district
consider
providing
limited
to
no
new
facilities
for
motorized
vehicles
instead
consider
creating
a
campus
layout
with
vehicular
access
on
the
perimeter
and
robust
non-motorized
facilities
throughout
the
interior
plan
for
the
infrastructure
that
would
be
required
for
these
areas
to
serve
as
key
park
and
ride
transit
hubs,
another
one.
So
these
are
in
section
ga
under
mobility,
finish
incomplete
blocks
with
active
transportation
infrastructure.
B
B
These
are
all
verbatim
right
out
of
the
gateway
plan
and
they
they.
I
think
these
are
great
great
items
and
visions
that
are
part
of
the
overall,
the
overall
plan.
B
B
B
Here's
an
interesting
note:
the
plan
area
currently
contains
no
public
parks,
recreational
facilities
or
publicly
accessible
open
spaces
other
than
the
rail
to
trail
project
along
l,
street
spermatum
verbatim
from
the
plant.
It
says
a
paved
class.
One
bike
trail
passes
through
the
heart
of
arcata,
connecting
the
northern
half
of
the
city
to
the
arcata
martian
wildlife
sanctuary.
The
area
is
also
a
bustling
business
hub,
as
well
as
a
vibrant
arts
and
culture.
Note.
So
now
to
my
observation,
really,
the
l
street
corridor
is
the
only
place
in
arcata.
B
B
You've
got
the
pub
there.
You've
got
the
arcata
playhouse.
There's
the
coffee
shop
a
little
ways
down
the
street,
some
other
shops.
I
believe
the
plan
envisions
other
types
of
small
businesses
there.
I
I'd
love
to
see
and,
and
I've
expressed
it
before
it's
a
great
place
for
a
little
coffee
shop,
a
bookstore,
a
bike
shop,
ice
cream
stand,
it
could
be
a
wonderful
destination
for
arcata.
This
is
a
great
opportunity
to
come
up
with
something
like
this
that
doesn't
exist
anywhere
else
in
arcata.
B
However,
this
plan
proposes
to
put
a
street
down
there,
granted
keeping
the
trail
there,
maybe
even
enhancing
it
a
little,
but
it's
still
a
area
that
people
and
pedestrians
and
bicyclists
will
have
to
compete
with
car
traffic,
which
traditionally
will
dominate
the
vibe.
B
I
envision
a
linea
this
being
a
linear
park.
At
least
south
of
11th
street
7th
to
11th
is
probably
the
you
know
the
biggest
well
11th.
All
the
way
to
samoa
right
now
is
is
really
a
pretty
nice
area
through
there
other
than
the
the
crossings.
B
So
I
would
say
this
would
be
a
wasted
opportunity
if
we
continue
with
this
plan,
to
include
this
as
part
of
a
circulation
element
with
a
new
street,
and
I
don't
think
the
transportation
safety
committee
personally
should
endorse
this.
I
recommend
we
let
the
city
council
know
and
and
obviously
let
community
development
know
today
that.
B
I
would
encourage
the
engineers
and
transportation
planners
to
go
back
and
revise
the
plan
so
that
this
area
is
eliminated
as
being
considered
for
new
streets
and
car
traffic,
and
my
recommendation
is
that
is
to
become
a
car
free
linear
park
that
prioritizes
people.
I
think
you've
got
some
smart
engineers
and
transportation
planners
that
put
together
a
fantastic
draft
plan.
I
just
find
this
to
be,
unfortunately,
a
a
real
missed
opportunity
and
something
that
I
personally
can't
support.
B
A
The
the
information
from.
B
Yeah
I
okay,
so
I
think
misael
is,
is
first
go
ahead.
Miso.
C
Yeah,
I
don't
I
don't,
you
know,
have
to
probably
raise
your
hand,
but
it
just
makes
it
a
little
easier
that
way,
but.
D
C
Gonna
say
to
dave
so
so
so
you
would
say
that
it
would
be.
A
better
plan
were
k
street
retained
as
the
two-way
that
it
is
and
hell
street
be
enhanced
for
pedestrians.
Only.
B
That's
possibility,
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what
to
do
with
k
street.
Like
I
said,
I
think
this
is
their
first
draft.
I
think
we
got
some
smart
engineers
and
planners,
and
I
bet
given
if
they
were
given
direction,
to
revise
whatever
the
circulation
element
is
and
don't
consider
l
street
as
part
of
it.
That
may
mean
some
modifications
to
k
street
as
planned.
C
But
you
see
it
as
currently
representing
an
increase
in
in
like
automobile
capacity
k
street
you
mean
the,
I
guess,
the
the.
C
Well,
yeah,
it
wasn't
your
criticism
of
the
of
the
lnk
couplet
in
terms
of
how
it
will
bring
more
traffic
to
l
street,
yes
yeah,
so
that's!
What
I'm
getting
at
is
right
is
that
you
then,
would
be
suggesting
to
keep
k
right
as
though.
B
Yeah,
okay,
k
should
remain
the
mean
the
main
artery
to
getting
things
through
there.
However,
there
may
be
other.
B
Yeah,
I
think
there
there
could
be
other
alternatives.
I
know
there
had
been
some
worry
about.
You
know
if
people
will
then
start
taking
jay
yeah
and
I'm
skeptical
about
that
and.
G
B
Know
put
a
bunch
of
stop
signs
on
jay.
They
already
has
a
lot.
I
don't
take
j
if
I
need
to
get
through
if
I'm
feeling
squelched
in
my
car
to
get
through.
So
I
you
know
sure
it's
a
valid
valid
concern
and
I
maybe
they've
considered
different
alternatives,
but
what
I
I
guess
I
don't
like
the
trade-off
of,
although
I
love
looking
at
the
drawing
of
what
they've
done
with
k,
I'm
going
man.
This
would
be
awesome
to
bike
down
k
like
this
yeah.
C
B
It's
not
awesome
enough
for
me
to
do
what
is
being
proposed
to
do
with
l,
so
I
don't
have
an
exact
alternate
plan
to
recommend
and
I
don't
think
that's
what
is
needed
from
us
today.
Like
I
said
this
is
an
early
draft
yeah.
C
B
They
can
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
and
try
some
things,
the
one
just
one
other
comment,
and
I
lost
my
thought
so
with
that.
C
J
C
Well,
what
was
my
thought?
Oh
in
my
mind,
the
making
the
l
street
more
more
of
a
thoroughfare
would
also
increase
the
you
know
for
pedestrian
use
of
eighth
and
ninth.
It
would
increase
the
times
that
you
would
have
to
cross
a
automobile
road.
B
All
right
karina.
E
I
think
they
can,
as
I
think
you
suggested
it
can
be-
a
slow
down
area,
because
this
is
what
about
a
half
a
mile,
all
told
from
one
end
to
the
other,
and
it's
going
to
dump
out
on
jane's
road,
which
is
pretty
much
a
similar
size.
A
Yeah
hi.
Thank
you.
I
do
also
support
your
point
of
view
dave
and
I
want
to
think
of
keeping
it
car
free
on
l
street
and
and
thank
you
for
sharing
the
verbiage
from
the
draft
document.
That
was
those
you
can
see.
We
know
the
right
thing
is
going
to
be
accomplished.
Let's
just
do
it
a
different
way,
I
think
that
you're
saying
so.
B
All
right,
david,
loya
your
hand,
is
up
yep.
H
Thanks
chair,
so
you
know
I
wanted
to
respond
to.
You
know
a
couple
of
the
things
and
I
understand
that
you
basically
just
had
your
deliberations,
and
I
also
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
know
if
you're
planning
on
taking
public
comment,
that
we
keep
that
in
mind
before
you
take
any
action.
H
You
know
there's
a
continued
hearing
item.
I
believe
that
you
know
satisfied
the
you
know
the
public
comment,
unlike
a
couple
of
the
committees
where
they've
actually
set
up
a
special
meeting
where
public
comment
is
required
to
be
taken
at
the
special
meeting,
because
this
is
a
continued
hearing
item,
I
believe
that
you
can,
you
know,
continue
on
without
public
comment,
but
again
you
know
you
may
wish
to
take
that
time.
So
that's
one
point.
The
second
point
is
that
you
know
I
I
just
want
to
give
a
little.
H
You
know
background
and
narrative
on.
You
know
the
decision
to
include
l
street.
All
of
the
things
that
you
read
about
the
plan
are
absolutely
true.
They're
in
there.
I
think.
All
you
know,
all
of
us
would
resonate
with
those
statements
about
trying
to
provide,
for
you
know,
alternative
transportation
and
additional
amenities.
H
Also
recognizing
that
you
know
the
the
you
know:
community,
the
city,
the
state
is
not
going
to
transition
to
alternative
transportation
overnight,
so
there's
definitely
a
transition
period
there.
When
we
first
started
this
gateway
planning
effort.
H
You
know
I
was
pretty
firm
with
the
with
the
instructions
to
the
the
to
the
consultants
that
you
know
we
didn't.
I
didn't
want
to
add
another
new
street,
no
new
streets.
I
know
we
have
some,
you
know
broken
blocks.
You
know
l
street's
an
example
of
one
o
in
all
of
these
q
street
broken
blocks
and
they
wanted
to
do
complete
streets,
but
for
a
lot
of
different
reasons,
you
know.
H
I
know
nature
will
probably
speak
more
to
the
engineering
elements
of
this,
but
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
some
of
the
background
on
the
discussions
that
we
had
early
on
with
the
consultants.
I
think
you
know
many
of
the
same
decisions
that
or
thoughts
that
you're
having
you
know.
I've
heard
it
from
many
in
the
community
who
are
opposed
to
opening
l
street
for
traffic,
we're
all
saying
the
same
things
we're
motivated
for
the
same.
H
You
know
for
the
same
end
goals
for
a
reason
not
to
open
l
street,
and
so
when
we
started
discussing
this
with
the
consultants
I
asked,
for
you
know
several
other
options
and
I
proposed
several
suggestions.
Like
you
know
what
about
a
j
street
couplet,
I'm
hoping
you
can
see
my
map.
H
Okay,
so
samoa
is
here
k.
Street
alignment
is
here
and
here's
j
street,
so
the
j
street
alignment
would
go
from
samoa
and
in
this
instance,
j
would
probably
be
the
northbound
and
you
would
either
you
know,
jump
over
here
or
we'd
have
to
do
some.
You
know
changes
at
14th
street
to
you
know,
drop
down
here,
and
so
this
would
put
you
know
effectively.
H
You
know
through
you,
know
this
this
neighborhood
here
and
you
know
what
we
know
of
g
h
street
is
that
it's
primarily
commercial,
but
there
is
a
lot
of
residential
on
there
as
well,
and
so
it's
not
unlike
you
know
what
we
have
done
in
the
past,
so
jay
was
considered
in
part
because
of
the
the
connection
points
jay
was
rejected
both
by
internal
staff
and
by
the
consultants.
H
We
also
explored
options,
for
instance,
of
going
down
11th
street
and
either
coming
across
at
q
or
coming
across
at
n,
and
then
completing
the
street
for
q
and
or
n
again.
You'd
have
to
cross
wetlands
here
potential
wetland
impact
here
and
then
there's
sort
of
the
block
length
consideration.
You
know:
are
people
really
going
to
come
if
they're
wanting
to
go
north?
H
Are
they
going
to
come
down
south
on
alliance
and
then
drive
several
blocks
in
the
exact
opposite
direction
from
the
direction
that
they
wish
to
go
to
come
across
and
then
to
go
north
again
so
from
an
efficiency
standpoint
and
whether
it
actually
you
know
it's
quicker
or
not,
you
know
folks
just
aren't
going
to
make
that
transition,
and
so,
ultimately,
because
of
the
improvements
that
happen
as
a
result
of
the
you
know,
bike
and
pedestrian
crossings
and
I'll
share
with
you.
What
those
look
like
here,
you
know.
H
Ultimately,
the
decision
was
made
to
go
with
the
cup
of
concept
and
l
street
was
the
most
logical.
You
know
decision.
This
is
a
typical
cross
section
of
k
and
8.
that
you
hear
see
here.
There
are
different
examples
of
you
know
how
these
could
be
structured
in
terms
of
the
the
profile,
but
the
piece
that
I
want
to
do
is
to
look
down
on
the
aerial.
So
right
now,
there's
two
ways
of
traffic
on
eighth
two
ways
of
traffic
on
k
street.
H
H
An
8th
street
turn
left
northbound
from
from
the
western
side,
and
so
there
are
multiple
points
of
conflict,
approximately
the
same
number
of
points
of
conflict
on
the
southern
crosswalk
as
well.
H
By
segregating
out
the
traffic.
You
have
one
left-hand
turn
movement
off
of
eighth
street
as
a
one-way
one
through
point
of
traffic,
all
funneled
into
a
single
lane,
and
so
from
the
from
the
perspective
of
someone
walking
across
k,
street
you've
gone
from
having
multiple
points
of
conflict
with
cars.
Blocking
your
view,
cars
blocking
the
view
of
other
oncoming
cars,
etc,
etc,
and
crossing
40
feet
of
crossing
to
you
know
crossing
one
lane,
approximately
11
or
12
feet
of
crossing
plus
a
bike
lane
with
far
fewer
points
of
intersection.
H
You
have
the
exact
same
set
of
circumstances
on
l
street.
It's
true.
It
would
open
up
l
street
you're,
giving
something
up
from
from
the
l
street
perspective
in
terms
of
having
a
very
quiet,
basically
walking
road.
I
mean
when
I
walk
on
l
street
right
now,
I'm
generally
not
concerned
about
whether
there
are
cars
there
and
I
kind
of
used
the
l
street
and
the
the
trail
interchangeably,
and
I
think
everyone
has
sort
of
that
same
that
same
feeling,
and
so
you
would
be
giving
up
that
feeling
and
replacing
it
with.
H
You
know
kind
of
a
slower
speed,
similar
version
to
k
street
but
running
the
opposite
direction.
So
this
is
not
just
a
recommendation
of
the
you
know:
community
development
department.
This
was
generated
after
lots
of
in-depth
thought
from
both
our
consultants
and
the
management
team
here
to
produce
this
concept
going
forward.
Having
said
that,
I
think
that
you
know
this
committee's
job
is
really
to
put
forward
what
it
thinks
is
its
best
recommendation
based
entirely
on
the
purview
of
the
transportation
safety
committee.
So
balancing
you
know
those
parameters
that
are
within
your
scope.
H
You
absolutely
should
feel
empowered
to
make
the
recommendation
that
you
fail,
as
a
committee
is
best
to
make
and
we'll
forward
that
on
to
the
commission,
to
the
commission
and
the
council
to
the
question
earlier
about
who
ultimately
makes
that
decision.
That
would
be
the
council,
based
on
the
recommendations
of
all
these
different
bodies.
B
Yeah
really
appreciate
that
explanation,
david.
That's
it's
good
to
get
kind
of
the
background,
work
that
went
behind
it
and,
of
course
you
can
certainly
turn
you
know
assessing
those
intersections
into
kind
of
a
numbers.
You
know
mathematical
issue
in
terms
of
the
numbers
of
potential
conflicts
and
anytime
we
can
redu
reduce
those.
That's
that's
a
good
thing,
and
that
and-
and
I
see
that
kind
of
throughout
the
draft
plan,
with
what
they're
doing
you
know
with
as
many
intersections
as
they
possibly
can
it's
just.
B
It's
got
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
good
stuff,
and
I
want
to
acknowledge
that,
but
something
I
also
want
to
quickly
just
bring
up
that.
I
don't
know,
if
nature's
hand
is
still,
but
I
do
want
to
hear
from
nature
just
three
three
terms
that
kind
of
kept
kept
showing
up
throughout
the
draft
plan
were
quality
of
life,
pedestrian
friendly
environment,
car
free
options
and
even
though
we're
a
transportation
safety
committee,
I
don't
think
you
can
separate
all
those
things
from
safety.
B
So
when
I'm
thinking
about
all
these
things,
I
I
do
always
have
to
go
back
to
you
know:
what's
our
purview
what's
our
role,
and
I
do
believe
that
if
we
can
have
an
area
within
arcata,
that's
a
destination
and
people
can
use
it
with
no
thoughts
of
being
shared
with
cars.
We
have
a
greatly
increased
safety
zone
of
that
particular
nature.
I
had
a
and
lastly,
I
had
a
brief
informal
conversation
with
a
couple
of
engineers.
B
B
F
Yes,
thank
you
very
much
for
giving
the
opportunity,
I
would
say,
and
thank
you
and
david
for
explaining
the
history
behind
it.
I
think
you
know
we
were
involved
old
city
team
engineering,
team,
environment
services,
team
and
our
design,
team
and
consultants
consultants.
We
work
on
this
layout
and
ultimately,
it
was
presented
as
better
option
and
you
know
I'll
just
use
the
one
word:
it's
a
trade-off.
F
If
we
don't
do
the
l
street
and
we
just
keep
the
k
street,
what
would
look
like
and
down
the
road
and
when
we
say
down
the
road,
it's
not
five
or
ten,
maybe
less
even
15,
20
years
down
the
road
when
the
traffic
increases-
and
we
don't
do
anything
on
the
k
street
currently
k
street
has
a
50
foot
right
away
with
sidewalk
on
both
sides,
no
bike
lanes
and
traveling
on
each
direction
and
parking
on
both
sides.
F
So
if
there
are
more
class,
what
is
the
next
option?
Just
in
concept?
The
next
option
would
be
getting
rid
of
parking
and
adding
one
more
lane
of
traffic
looked
like
maybe
potentially
would
be
a
central
turn
lane,
which
you
know
if
you
want
to
see
a
picture
of
a
central
terminal
and
the
example
would
be
central
avenue
where
there's
a
travel
lane
and
there's
a
center-ton
lane,
so
they
are
able
to
make
right
or
left
turn
while
they
are
going
it
just.
F
It
increases
the
efficiency
of
the
road,
so
there
will
be
no
parking
on
k.
Street
will
be
a
more
travel
lane
and
the
length
of
the
crosswalks
will
be
longer
so
on.
That's
not
only
in
one
location,
but
that
will
be
at
the
multiple
blocks,
each
location
that
every
single
position
going
to
downtown
from
l
street
or
from
west
arkada,
towards
plaza.
F
They
have
to
always
have
that
cross
that
long
right
away
and
then
again
as
david-
and
you
mentioned
a
number
of
conflict
points
that
we
are
trying
to
minimize
and
we
want
to
be
bike
and
pet
friendly
cities.
So
we
want
to
minimize
conflicts
at
the
intersection.
So
the
plan,
the
proposed
plan-
that
does
that-
and
it
not
only
divides,
I
would
say-
l
street-
I
have
heard
from
some
people
and
some
of
the
people
believe
I
think
not
in
this
camp
member
or
not
in
this
committee
or
another
public
here.
F
But
some
people
believe
that
when
we
are
proposing
l
straight,
we
are
getting
rid
of
the
trail,
but
that's
not
the
idea.
The
trail
still
remains
there
with
a
buffer
between
the
road
and
the
buffer
could
be
in
different
form.
It
could
be
a
landscape,
it
could
be
a
fence,
it
could
be
protected.
There
are
different
ways
of
right
now
in
just
in
concept
we
are
showing.
Yes,
there
will
be
a
class
one
trail.
F
We
cannot
get
rid
of
that
because
it
was
built
as
a
part
of
a
california
coastal
trail,
part
of
humboldt
bay
trail,
north
and
south,
in
connecting
arcadia
to
eureka
through
a
class
one
trail,
so
that
will
remain
there's.
There
was
never
a
thought
enough
of
removing
that
class
one
trail,
so
it
will
remain
where
it
is
with
some
additional
amenities.
Maybe
it
could
be
landscape
or
some
other
features,
and
right
now,
l
street
is
a
travel
lane.
People
do
travel
to
that
vehicles
out
there.
F
There
will
be
a
bit
more
than
that
we
can
increase.
We
can
improve
that
by
having
a
shorter
crosswalk
on
l
street
and
on
k
street.
So
hence
again,
I
would
go
back
to
trade-off.
If
you
just
look
at
the
future
of
k
student,
adding
all
the
vehicles
there
and
then
no
parking
there
and
all
the
park,
people
will
be
parking
somewhere
else,
maybe
downtown
or
on
the
east
of
k
street,
so
that
just
adds
more
vehicle
miles
travel.
F
F
So
hence
this
was
proposed
as
a
plan.
So,
as
you
said
yes
and
as
engineers,
if
you
go
to
transportation
engineers,
yes,
they
will
have
a
better
option
there.
There
could
be
other
plans
that
we
have
not
thought
about,
but
at
the
time
when
we
were
looking
at
a
project
like
david
mentioned,
you
know
on
maybe
extending
q
street
or
n
street
or
m
street
having
different
ways.
We
looked
at
various
options
and
this
was
what
standard
out
as
a
better
option
for
bicycles,
pedestrians
and
for
vehicles.
F
So,
as
you
said,
you
know
we
have
to
consider
everybody.
We
cannot
just
focus
on
car-free
zone
or
car-free
area.
Yes,
definitely
some
areas
could
be
car
free,
but
for
to
keep
the
mobility
on.
We
got
to
consider
about
car
vehicles,
pedestrians,
skateboards,
everybody
and
emergency
emergency
vehicles
as
well.
So
with
that
in
mind,
this
was
presented,
so
I
just
wanted
to
give
you
just
some
background
that
how
we
end
up
here
as
main
leagues,
I
would
say
it's
a
trade-off
on
balance
for
future,
which
increases
mobility
and
for
bicycles
and
position.
F
You
know
and
again
I
will
say
I'll
stress
on
that
more
you
know
we
are
bike
and
federal
city
and
we
want
to
continue
to
do
that
in
a
better
way
than
any
other
city.
So
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
feel
free
to
ask.
B
F
E
Okay,
another
question:
why
would
you
have
to
add
extra
lanes?
F
Got
the
question
for
the
k
street
when
I
say
adding
a
traveling
stay.
F
F
Not
only
slow
down,
it
would
be
backing
and
queuing
I'll.
Give
you
an
example
when
there
is
a
small
event
in
downtown
plaza.
A
few
years
ago
during
halloween,
the
cars
were
backed
up
to
some
more
255
on
a
highway,
which
is
not
a
great
thing.
So
definitely
we
want
to
slow
down
the
speed
and
we
want
to
be
able
to
go
slow,
but
not
at
the
level
that
it
creates
hazard
on
highways
by
chewing
vehicles
on
backing
up
on
the
state
highways.
E
F
H
I
think
the
other
thing
to
consider
is
that
the
you
know
the
the
shortcuts
that
the
chair
was
talking
about
earlier,
we're
gonna
do
what
we
can
to.
H
H
You
know
connectors
or
arterials,
as
the
case
may
be,
by
putting
you
know,
bollards
in
at
key
locations,
so
that
you
know
it
would
be
local
traffic
only
and
that
would
prevent
shortcuts
through
through
some
of
the
other
streets,
but
I
think
you
know,
maybe
not
the
the
worst
case
scenario,
but
a
very
likely
case
scenario.
H
If
traffic
gets
bad
enough,
you
know
on
k,
street
you'll
see
work,
arounds
people
developing
their
own
work
arounds
and
you
know,
while
it
would
not
make
any
sense
at
all
under
today's
conditions,
for
someone
say
going,
you
know
southbound
on
on
k
street.
You
know
to
jump
over
at
11th
street
and
you
know
duck
down
l
street
or
whatever
your
first
opportunity
is.
I
mean
I
realize
there's
a
boulder
there,
but
there
is
a
portion
of
l
street
that
is
is
drivable
because
it's
intended
to
be
a
local
street.
H
You
know
when
people
get
tired
of
waiting
they'll,
you
know
they'll
take
those
shortcuts,
regardless
of
how
little
impact
it
really
has
on
their
actual
commute,
and
so
I
think
you
know
the
the
concept
here
is
to
try
and
manage
the
growth
in
traffic
in
a
way
that
balances
priorities
for
towards
pedestrians
and
bikes,
so
that
we
accomplish
all
those
high-level
goals
and
objectives
of
maintaining.
You
know:
alternative
transportation,
focused
infrastructure
and
you
know,
and
car
free
lifestyle
to
the
extent
possible.
H
Certainly
what
we
do
know
is
that
you
know
when
you
know
when,
when
you
don't
provide
for
safe
infrastructure,
for
people
to
fully
utilize
the
circulation
system,
you
discourage
those
alternative
transportation
uses.
I'm
you
know,
I
think,
that's
that's.
What
we're
trying
to
balance
with
this
proposal.
A
B
A
B
Yeah,
I
think
I
think
they're
putting
up
the
it's
from
page
74,
I
believe,
shows
the
cross
section.
A
Okay,
so
what
does
that
look
like,
then?
Is
it
a
similar
bike
path,
bike
lane
that
we
have
in
downtown
arcata,
currently.
B
A
F
I
believe
we
don't
have
exact
number,
but
parking
is
will
be
provided.
I
I'm
not
sure
if
you're
able
to
see
the
screen
that
I'm
sharing
mishka
I'm
showing
the
screen.
If
the
pdf
page
number
is
89
of
the
draft
gateway
plan,
it
shows
the
k
and
l
intersection
of
the
k
and
l
streets
at
eight
between
seventh
and
eighth
street.
It
shows
the
layout
of
how
and
again
this
is
in
concept.
You
know
it's
not
a
final
design,
but
in
concept,
how
there'll
be
a
bike
lane
buffer
a
travel
lane
and
parking
space.
A
Yeah,
so
it's
kind
of,
is
it
like
more
what
we
have
on
8th
or
ninth
street
those
kind
of
roads,
but
longer
by
the
co-op
and
coming
off
in
the
plaza.
A
H
Yeah
and
in
particular,
there's
one
lane
of
traffic
instead
of
two.
The
proposal
on
k
has
a
larger
buffer
from
the
travel
lane
for
vehicles
and
there's
also
two
alternative
proposals.
One
has
sort
of
a
raised
bike
lane,
so
you
have
curve
protection
and
the
other
has
more
like
you
know,
painted
and
or
protection.
A
H
As
it's
not
going
to
be
100
wash
because
there
are,
you
know,
bump
out
intersections
so
you're
not
going
to
have
as
much
parking
because
of
those
there's
also,
you
know
several.
H
You
know
right
now,
there's
not
a
whole
lot
of
drop
curbs
for
ingress
onto
parcels
on
k
street,
whereas
there
are
several
on
l
street,
and
so
even
though
the
plan
shows
you
know
some
parking
in
front
of
areas
where
there's
currently
drop
curbs
those
parking
spaces
wouldn't
actually
be
realized.
You
know
unless
there
was
provision
for
access
to
those
properties,
otherwise,
but
it's
a
slight
decrease,
I
believe,
but
I
don't
have
an
exact
account
for
you.
A
Okay,
because
I
I
just
wanted
to
address
in
general
too,
and
that
while
we
envision
having
increased
traffic,
we
are
going
to
try
and
minimize
parking
and
as
a
person
that
I
like
currently
live
in
what
I
don't
know,
it's
kind
of
like
the
I
live
in
the
the
gateway
district,
and
I
can
tell
you
that
if
we
allow
have
a
lot
more
development
without
considering
parking
the
reality
of
parking
it
it's
going
to
impact
the
neighborhoods
adjacent
to
the
area.
A
So
I
just
want
us
to
encourage
continue
to
think
about
the
need
for
parking
in
the
future,
even
though
we
want
it
to
be
pedestrian
and
bicycle
and
non-motorized
vehicle
based,
I
think
that's
important
to
remember.
I
don't
think
they're
just
going
to
go
away
yet
maybe
they
get
the
planners
are
more
optimistic
than
me,
but
so
just
want
that
to
be
on
the
record.
B
All
right:
well,
thanks
for
comments
mieshka,
so
I
think
what
I
want
to
do
at
this
point
is
wrap
up
this
discussion
and
go
to
our
our
diagram
and
decide
how
we're
going
to
make
recommendations
and
take
motions,
and-
and
the
last
thing
I
just
want
to
say
to
l
street-
is
all,
although
I
appreciate
all
the
information
on
the
background
and
what's
been
done
and
what's
been
attempted
just
because
we're
you
know
we're
a
transportation
safety
committee
if
we
can't
come
up
with
a
complete
perfectly
successful
design
and
alternative
ourself
right
here.
B
Well,
obviously,
this
isn't
the
place
to
do
it,
and
I
still
have
faith
that
we
need
to
go
at
this
again
make
another
attempt
to
come
up
with
something.
So
I
I
remain
unconvinced
that
that
I
could
endorse
this.
So
I'm
going
to
put
forth
a
proposal
to
the
committee
that
we
had
a
recommendation
with
this
wording
revised
the
circulation
plan
that
eliminates
l
street
is
being
considered
for
new
streets
and
car
traffic.
B
This
area
is
recommended
to
become
a
car
free
linear
park
that
prioritizes
people,
and
I
would
like
to
get
a
sense
similar
to
how
we
did
these
other
other
sections.
Two
weeks
ago,.
B
If
there's
support
for
that
to
go
in
that
column
or
if
there's
opposition
or
maybe
we
should
start
do
we
want
to
vote
on
these
individually,
I
think
we're
done
with
the
ones
we
did
two
weeks
ago
and
I
think
we
were
good
with
them.
Unless
anybody
wants
a
chance
to
say
anything
different
about
them.
So
I'll
start
with
arena
and
you
have
your
hand
up
and
they're
bothering.
E
E
And-
and
you
said
there,
they
got
gotta,
they
have
to
plan
for
more
cars,
but
if
you
have
the
same
amount
of
space,
how
is
that
going
to
accommodate
more
cars.
F
No,
I
can
take
this
well,
we
are
trying
to
increase
the
efficiency
here
by
this
plan.
We're
not
trying
increasing
the
capacity
per
se.
E
A
H
Happens
in
the
future
well-
and
I
think
the
other
part
of
that
korean
is
that
the
the
primary
focus
here
is
balancing
the
the
circulation
pattern
in
favor
of
bikes
and
pets
in
favor
of
alternative
transportations,
and
so,
even
though
we're
not
creating
a
new
road
with
wider,
I
mean.
If
we
wanted
to
increase
the
capacity,
we
could
make
k
street
two
lanes
northbound
and
make
l
street
tulane
southbound
and
eliminate
the
trail.
That
would
create
additional
capacity,
but
I
think
that
you
know
what
we've.
H
H
Yeah,
improving
the
the
circulation,
improving
the
efficiency
and
providing
for
safer
crossings.
You
know
has
a
net
positive
and
I
think
that's
what
we
were
going
for
in
this
particular
proposal.
C
Yes,
well,
you
know,
as
I
was
listening
to
some
of
the
history
of
how
this
design
was
developed.
You
know
I
was
looking
at
the
plan,
the
diagrams
myself,
and
I
definitely
can
see
how
you
know
we
there
might
be
it
might
be
a
disservice.
C
You
know
to
create
a
situation
where
the
gateway
district
in
and
of
itself
was
highly
pedestrian
friendly,
and
then
it
was
islanded
from
the
rest
of
the
city's
bike
network
by
kind
of
the
the
the
k
street
thoroughfare.
That
would
remain
to
and
fro
and
what
was
the
other
thing
yeah
I
I
definitely
can
see
how
it's
not
kind
of
sort
of
a
net
increase
in
capacity
is
just
a
kind
of
a
shift
in
in
in
right
of
way.
C
But
more
to
the
point,
I
I
think,
as
I
continue
to
look
at
it,
we
we
might
be
able
to
have
our
cake
and
eat
it
too,
and
so
far
as
like,
the
the
bike
pads
themselves
can
can
in
some
ways
resemble
a
linear
park,
especially
given,
or
considering
how
they
can
be
shielded
how
they
can
be
physically
separated
from
motorized
traffic
it
can.
It
can
be,
it
can
be
greenery,
potentially,
potentially
even
furniture,
depending
on
the
specifics
of
the
design.
C
I
you
know
I
yeah
I'm
coming
around
a
bit
more
to
the
to
the
plan,
as
proposed.
B
Okay,
so
do
we
want
to.
B
Handle
all
of
these
items
that
go
all
the
way
up,
that
we
finished
up
and
float
on
them,
one
by
one
or
well.
I
think
we
were
somewhat
consensus.
You
approve
all
the
other
ones.
I
guess
we
need
to
find
out
what
we,
let's,
let's
take
a
idea
on
who
likes
that
language
right
there
that's
in
yellow
and
who
doesn't
or
if
they
want
to
propose
any
revisions.
I'm
gonna,
I'm
I'm
sticking
with
my
proposal
and
would
like
to
find
out
if
how
we
come
come
off
on
it.
H
Yeah,
I
think
a
straw
poll
vote
would
be
a
really
great
idea
you
can
find
out.
If
there's
support
for
this
or
not,
and
then
you
know
you
could
move
forward.
I
think,
as
you
said,
most
of
the
others
were
pretty
pretty
broad
consensus,
but
I
think
it'd
be
worthwhile
going
through
those
and
doing
straw
poll,
and
then
you
see
what
you
have
told
in
total.
As
a
recommendation,
the
committee
could
move
forward.
B
B
Okay,
there's
going
to
be
public
comment
taken
today,
I'd
kind
of
like
to
go
through
these
and
finish
finish
and
then
we'll
decide.
Okay,
unless
others
on
the
committee
feel
strongly
about
opening
it
up
for
public
comment
before
we
do
this
and
I
would
be
tempted
to
say
public
comment
for
those
who
didn't
comment
last
time
who
weren't
at
the
previous
meeting.
I.
H
I
would
suggest
that
I
mean
it.
You
know
it's
a
lot
of
the
times
when
you're
in
deliberations,
you
know,
bodies
will
go
through
the
deliberations.
Come
to
the
point
where
they've
got
a
motion
in
a
second
and
then
pause
and
take
public
comment.
If
you
choose
to
take
public
comment,
which
you
know
I
mean
again,
it's
it's
your.
H
H
B
B
H
Have
a
slightly
different
composition
of
committee
members
than
you
had
last
time,
and
so
because
this
is
the
body,
that's
taking
the
action,
I
would
suggest
you
just
go
through
the
exercise.
B
Okay,
yes,
misael,
yes,
mishka.
A
I
I
what
am
I
I'm
sorry
guys.
What
exactly
am
I
saying
yes
to
what
dave
you
you
were
proposing
before.
B
Okay,
so
what
we
did
at
the
last
meeting,
we
went
through
every
single
one
of
these
okay
submitted,
comment,
collins
and
talked
about
them
and
then
came
up
with
weeded
it
down
to
a
single
sentence
or
recommendation.
Okay,.
H
Okay,
this
is
under
ga7c
balanced
transportation
system,
and
there
was
some
added
language
in
here
that
says,
reduce
the
percentage
of
trips
that
are
made
by
automobile
and
provide
the
opportunity,
and
then
the
added
part
was
and
incentives
such
as
parking
meters,
limited
parking,
etc,
and
facilities
to
divert
trips
from
automobiles
to
other
modes
and
then
was
added,
encourage
metered
parking
with
proceeds,
reinvested
in
the
gateway.
If
consistent
with
city
policy,
special
district.
B
Yes,
I
think,
since
you
weren't
here
absolutely
well.
C
Reduce
the
percentage
of
trips
that
are
made
by
automobile-
wouldn't
it
make
more
sense
to
say
by
providing
opportunities
or
incentives.
H
I
think
michelle
one
of
the
things
that
we
had
suggested
was
if
we
could
just
get
a
sense.
I
mean
we
took
these
notes
on
the
fly.
If
we
can
get
a
sense
for
where
the
committee
wanted
us
to
go
with
the
language
got
a
recommendation,
then
staff
would
craft
that
language.
If
it's
consistent
with
the
plan,
this
one
is,
and
so
we
would
craft
that
language
and
insert
it
in.
H
If
it's
inconsistent
with
the
plan,
we
would
report
that
on
to
the
planning,
commission,
city
council
and
then
directed
to
include
that
in
a
plan
by
that
that
body,
we
would
then
craft
some
language
and
then
that
that
saves
us
from
having
to
you
know,
sit
here
and
work
craft
each
one,
but
I
think
we
get
the
general
gist,
which
is
to
support
not
only
just
in
general,
but
actually
create
some
incentives
and
disincentives
to
help
move
the
move,
the
needle
on
alternative
transportation.
E
H
C
Second,
yes,.
G
H
Okay,
this
one
and
ga7h,
which
is
about
mobility
infrastructure,
that
sports
car
for
your
lifestyle,
make
sure
that
there's
explicit
ride
and
bike
share
language
find
ways
to
incorporate
that
we
ensure
the
streetscape
design
improvements,
prioritize
pedestrian
circulation
that
promote
walkability
and
support
a
car,
free
lifestyle
and
accessibility
for
all
ambulatory
modes
and
create
additional
and
safer
methods
for
crossing
k.
Street.
B
I
want
to
propose
a
modification
to
this
when
nature
was
talking
about
k
street
and
if
it
stays
like
it,
is
he
it.
He
referred
to
all
the
crosswalks
staying
tickets.
Do
something
they're
currently
under
another,
entirely
separate
project
to
become
one
ways
that'll
happen
before
any
of
these
other
improvements
happen.
9Th
street
would
be
a
prime
place
to
identify,
as
creating
you
know,
really
prior
to
diet,
prioritized
pedestrian
and
bicycle
crossing.
B
So
when
we
say
create
additional
and
safer
methods
for
crossing
k
street,
I
would
propose
something
like
with
potentially
considering
9th
street
as
a
priority,
somehow
wording
that
maybe
somebody
else
could
help
me
with
that.
If
you
get
the
gist
of
what
I'm
saying-
and
I
don't
know
if
it's
already
somewhere
in
the
plan-
it's
even
necessary,
but
I
would
just
like
the
city
council
to
know
that
we
definitely
need
to.
B
Improve
this
situation-
and
I
think
ninth
street
may
be
a
great
place
to
do
it
you're
only
two
blocks
from
seventh
and
only
two
blocks
from
11th,
that's
really
most
where
most
of
the
people
are
walking
from.
I
don't
see
people
walking
down
k
street
personally
they're
going
to
cross
k
street
they're
going
to
get
to
k
street.
I
mean
biscay.
You
live
over
there
in
one
of
those
neighborhoods.
When
you
cross
k,
I
mean
I
usually
go
to.
I
usually
cross
at
11.
B
H
Yeah,
I
I'm
going
to
put
in
a
pitch
for
future
arcades
here
dave,
because
if
the
plan
goes
as
proposed,
there's
going
to
be
all
kinds
of
new
activity
on
k
street
that
doesn't
isn't
there
right
now
we
have
a
mirror
gas.
We
have
the
mini
storage.
No
one
is
walking
there
I
mean,
except
for
me
I
walk
it
quite
a
bit,
but
but
if
there's
you
know
where
amerigas
is
right
now
you
know
one
of
the
plans.
H
One
of
the
planning
pieces
includes,
or
one
of
the
one
of
the
components
of
the
plant
includes
a
walking
street
between
the
amerigas
parcel
and
the
mini
storage
parcel.
For
example,
some
of
the
form-based
code
could
define
you
know
internal
alleyways
between
those
and
so
theoretically,
you
could
have
a
cross
that
goes
between.
H
You
know,
k
street
and
l
street
with
a
walking
path
there
and
then
a
walking
low
speed
road
in
between
k,
street
and
l
street
running
north
south
on
those
mid
blocks
as
they
develop
out.
So
I
can
see
a
lot
more
pedestrian
activity
occurring
on
k
street
in
the
future,
and
I
think
you
know
trying.
D
H
You
know
think
about
how
to
plan
for
the
future
based
on
current
circulation
patterns.
You
know
doesn't
doesn't.
You
know,
probably
provide
the
insights
that
we
need
for
for
those
future
residents
and
and
users.
B
Right
right
now,
good
good
good
points,
and
I'm
good
with
that
language
that
you
typed
there.
Anybody
else
have
any
problem
with
that.
B
A
B
E
H
Got
under
ga7k
incentivized
dedication
of
parcel
frontage
is
community
amenity,
and
there
was
just
a
question
about
this.
I
don't
think
that
there
was
necessarily
a
change
in
policy
here
and
last
time
we
gave
an
example
of
sorrow
place
how
that
whole
project
was
set
back
and
it
provided
on-street
parking
where
there
was
previously
none,
and
so
that
was
an
example
of
how
private
property
is
now
being
used
for
public
purposes.
H
H
There
was
some
discussion
here
about
parking
standards
or
we've
heard
it
a
little
bit
again.
Today
there
was
a
recommendation
previously,
for
you
know,
charging
charging
for
parking,
and
this
one
was
calling
for
unbundling
parking
from
rents.
We
definitely
want
to
encourage
that
there
are
many
other
alternative
transportation
incentives
that
are
planned
for
in
the
plan,
including
you
know,
car
share
programs,
we
added
bike,
share
programs,
those
were
implicit
but
we'll
make
it
explicit
bus
pass
programs
for
residents
or
employees.
Lots
of
things
like
that.
H
H
One
of
the
key
tenets
of
this
planning
work
is
that
we
we
need
to
let
the
market
control
to
you
know
to
some
extent
the
uses
that
are
going
to
occur
within
the
buildings.
Now
we
don't
want
to
have
100
conversions,
so
this
might
be,
you
know
targeted
so
like
maybe
on
the
core
street
corners.
You
want
to
make
sure
that
there's
retail
but
but
requiring
retail
before
you
can
do
residential.
H
C
Sorry,
I
was
just
oh
well,
I
mean:
can
there
be
a
like
a
floor
area
requirement,
sort
of
a
thing
that
could
be
appropriate
or.
C
It's
in
in
my
mind,
that's
the
type
of
mix,
use
development
that
I
would
like
to
see
in
terms
of
including
retail,
very
close
to
residential
use.
I
don't
know
I
just
would
like
to
hear
more
discussion
on
that.
H
Yeah
absolutely-
and
I
I'm
sorry-
I
gave
it
short
shrift
we've.
You
know.
I've
had
so
many
conversations
that
I
forget
who
has
been
bored
to
tears
with
the
the
comments
that
I'm
making
and
who's
hearing
it
for
the
first
time.
So
I
apologize
for
skimming
over
that.
So
just
a
little
bit
of
the
background
on
that
is
that
you
know
like
right
now
in
arcata's
downtown,
for
example,
you
can
go
around
and
luckily
things
are
rebounding
a
little
bit.
H
But
you
know
there's
word
on
the
street
that
you
know,
maybe
that's
a
been
a
false
rebound,
but
there's
a
lot
of
vacant
retail
right
now,
a
lot
of
vacant
space
it
could
be
used
for
retail
or
office
space,
and-
and
so
you
know
that
right
now
on
on
balance
in
our
market,
we
don't
need
more
retail.
And
so,
if
we
require
ground
floor
retail
before
you
can
start
building
residential,
which
we
desperately
need
residential,
then
you're
not
going
to
get
any
residential
because
no
one
can
make
the
retail
pencil.
H
And
so,
if
I
tell
you
have
to
pay
to
build
out
retail
and
hope
that
you're
going
to
have
tenants
in
that
retail
before
you
can
start
building
the
the
residential
you're
just
not
going
to
have
any
development
at
all.
So
the
concept
here
is
that
you
know
there
may
be
some
targeted
areas.
I
mean
there
might
be
some
some
specific
corridors
or
portions
of
you
know,
for
example,
k
street,
but
we
want
to
ensure
that
there's
some
some
retail
that
happens
in
those
areas
or
it
may
be.
H
You
know
on
the
corners
of
of
certain
blocks.
You
want
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
retail
component
but
for
the
most
part,
we're
saying
in
this
plan
that
the
the
market
is
going
to
provide
the
balance
of
residential
and
retail,
that's
appropriate
with
the
with
the
ability
to
come
in.
If
we
see
that
things
are
getting
really
out
of
whack,
you
know
we
don't
want
the
gateway
area,
for
example,
to
become
a
bedroom
community.
For
some
other
commercial
or
or
you
know
employment
base.
H
You
know,
then,
then
you
know
you'd
start
to
see
that
that
production
of
that
use
type.
B
So
david,
it
looks
to
me
like
these-
are
both
just
there's.
There
aren't
specific
recommendations
here,
other
than
yeah
just
a
couple
of
comments,
and
I
don't.
Unless
anybody
sees
those
becoming
here,
we
go.
H
I
agree:
okay,
so
street
cheese
install
tree
tree
street
trees
consistent
with
the
standards
for
applicable
street
typology,
as
identified
in
chapter
eight
mobility
use,
modern
planting
techniques
which
extend
the
life
and
health
of
the
trees
is
applicable
and
available.
H
I
don't
see
this
as
a
bad
addition.
I
think
that
you
know
we
certainly
want
to
protect
those
investments.
C
Yeah
well,
one
thought,
as
I
forget
where
I
read,
but
I
read
recently
that
in
some
places
would
have
been
measurable
increases
over
time
in
pollen
levels
are
in
part
attributable
again.
I
don't
remember
my
source
on
this
to
kind
of
mail
landscaping,
trees
that
are
chosen
for
their
their
lessened
debris
that
they
create
versus
their.
C
You
know
more
fruit-bearing
females,
so
I
mean
I
you
know,
I
don't
know
if
that
problem
can
be
tackled
just
in
and
of
itself
with
the
just
with
this
this
particular
development,
but
that's
just
one
thought
other
than
that.
Yes,.
B
A
I
have
a
comment
which
you
can
say:
let
me
say
it
could
contribute
to
that.
Can
we
I'd
like
to
say
something
about
edible
landscaping,
then,
because
that
would
be
something
that
has
would
be
dioacious
trees
and
therefore
they
both
have
fruit.
H
H
Yeah
these
I
mean
these
are
really
no
impact.
In
terms
of
you
know,
policy
discussions.
I
think
that
you
know.
Unfortunately,
environmental
services
isn't
here
to
speak
on
behalf
of
the
the
maintenance
requirements
for
some
of
these,
but
I
think
that
you
know
those,
and
those
also
can
be
sort
of
side
recommendations
that
come
out
of
the
the
committee,
for
I.
B
And
also
parks
parks
committee
is
is
weighing
in
on
this
and
creeks,
and
wetlands
and
other
people.
You
know
who
maybe
it's
closer
to
their
parameters.
A
E
B
H
Okay
and
then
in
terms
of
street
furniture,
include
bike,
lockers,
free
or
for
rent
for
long-term
storage.
H
A
B
E
H
Okay,
let's
see
okay,
there
was
some
discussion
about
walking
routes
to
schools
and
I
think
nature
addressed
that
last
time.
I
didn't
do
safe
design
existing
rail
with
trail
into
a
roadway
sure
existing
class.
One
trail
is
converted
to
a
road
and
class
four
bikeway
along
l
street
additionally.
Consider
adding
I'm
sorry
amending
license
agreement,
great
road
redwood
trail
agency
to
maintain
a
trail
within
the
great
redwood
trail
agency,
right
away.
B
So
class
one
trail
is
a
completely
separated
trail.
That's
what's
there
right
now,
right
david.
F
F
B
E
Think
this
this
came
out
of
my
concern
because
there
was
talk
about
moving
the
trail
and
I
wasn't
sure,
with
the
impending
rail
banking
of
the
right-of-way.
E
B
B
F
H
I
was
just
going
to
say
I
would.
I
would
suggest
that
I
mean.
I
think
this
is
a
good
good
policy.
I
think
it's
you
know
obvious.
You
know
we're
going
to
do
that,
but
it's
good
to
intimate
that
in
in
the
policy
document.
I
recognize
it's
a
little
in
conflict
with
the
idea
of
keep
l
street
as
a
linear
park.
You
may
want
to
add
some
language
into
this.
That
is
like
contingent.
If
the
council
doesn't
remove
illustrated.
A
H
And-
and
I
guess
what
I
would
say
is
even
if
there
is
a
change,
you
know,
then
we'll
just
revise
this
collaborate
with
the
great
redwood
trail
agency
to
reflect
whatever
that
collaboration
would
look
like
moving
forward
to
maintain
trails.
B
A
H
A
A
H
Okay,
so
here's
a
quick
check
in
on
where
we're
at
you've
pretty
much
got
support
to
pass
everything
all
in
one
fell
swoop,
there's
only
one
recommendation
and
that
was
to
eliminate
l
street
as
a
couplet
that
only
had
three
and
one
no,
and
so,
if
you
wanted
to
pull
that
out
separately,
you
could,
or
if
you
wanted,
to
just
accept
the
sale,
that
the
vote
is
going
to
pass.
H
You
could
vote
with.
You
know
with
all
of
us
understanding
that
you
have
some
reservations
about
gsat
ga7e.
H
B
Could
get
a
sense
from
I
was
going
to
ask
a
question
before
god
voted
on?
Is
that
a
is
that
a
term?
We
could
entertain
a
motion
and
and
just
take
a
vote
on
just
saying,
yeah,
to
take
the
recommendations
to
city
council
as
discussed
and
has
voted
on.
You
know,
as
noted
we
we
could
do
that
right
and
that's
that
still
means
that
we,
as
a
committee
majority,
are
sending
that,
along
as
a
recommendation.
It's
just
a
three
to
one
that
makes
sense
david.
H
Yeah
I
mean
the
the
recommendations.
Pass
is
a
you
know
as
a
once
once
they
pass
they.
They
move
forward
as
a
recommendation
of
the
committee.
There's
no
minority
reports
or
anything
like
that
right,
and
so
it's
it's
yeah.
It's
fine,
certainly
if
a,
although
it's
a
little
unusual,
but
if
a
committee
member
feels
you
know
aggrieved
by
the
decision
that
was
made,
they
could
certainly
put
their
you
know
they.
They.
D
H
Abridged,
their
first
amendment
rights
just
because
they've
agreed
to
you
know
to
volunteer
for
the
city,
so
they
can
go
and
tell
the
city
council
what
they
personally
believe.
Even
though
that
wasn't
the
way
that
the
the
city
council
vote
or
the
committee
voted.
B
Okay,
well,
let's
do
this.
We
have
two
participants
who
want
to
attendees.
I
guess
they're
under
public
comment,
so
david.
Why
don't
you
take
the
reins
and
allow
the
people
to
provide
public
comment
and
I'm
going
to
say,
let's
limit
it
to
david
two
minutes.
I
Yeah,
thank
you
for
letting
me
speak.
I
would
like
the
draft
language
on
the
submitted
new
policies
that
was
pertaining
to
l
street.
I
would
hope
that
you
would
go
back
over
one
more
time
and
look
at
the
wording
on
that.
I
think
you
were
appropriately
hesitant
on
that.
Initially,
the
exact
wording
of
in
the
event
of
creating
a
one-way
couplet
when
turning
existing
rails
and
trails
into
a
roadway,
ensure
existing
class
1
trail
is
converted
to
a
road
and
class
4
bikeway
along
lc.
I
So
that's
under
your
recommendations.
I
don't
think
at
all.
That
is
your
recommendations.
I
think.
Maybe,
if
you
could
reword
that
and
put
it,
I
think
you
guys
had
a
lot
of
great
ideas
concerning
l
street,
so
I'd
like
that
was
kind
of
on
my
top
of
my
list.
To
actually
have
you
guys
go
back
over
and
really
read
that
language
that
language
doesn't
appear
to
be
coming
from
from
your
committee.
You
know
your
members,
so
I'm
also
I
live.
I
I
cross
k
street
all
the
time
and
traffic
congestion
isn't
a
problem
at
all.
Currently,
it
doesn't
there's
not
a
lot
of
congestion
unless
it's
some
freak
festival,
the
the
really
the
the
main
concern
is
the
speed
of
the
cars
along
k
street.
I
know
karena
has
alluded
to
the
brought
this
up
and
I
think
if
we
do
slow
down
the
speed,
maybe
it'll
encourage
people
to
ride
their
bike
across
town
instead
jumping
in
the
car
and
riding
across
town.
I
So
I
you
know,
I'm
all
in
forever,
slowing
down
the
traffic
along
k
street
keeping
a
k
street
as
it
exists
and
and
then
also
I
have
some
issues
as
being
a
cyclist.
I
If
there's
a
signal
that
we'd
have
to
create
at
at
samoa,
if
we
put
l
street
through
we'd,
have
a
a
signal
on
samoa,
so
the
cars
would
that
would
be
turning
right
would
be
crossing
over
the
the
bicycle
path,
pedestrian
paths
and
crossing
over
so
usually
when
they're
not
really
doing
a
check.
Thank
you.
G
D
Okay,
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
I
want
to
thank
the
committee
for
all
their
thoughtfulness
and
time
on
this
issue.
I'm
an
arcade
resident
and
I
bike
and
walk
in
arcata
daily,
and
I
support
the
knl
couplet.
I
understand
you're
thinking
about
it
and
all
the
different
opinions.
For
one
thing,
I
don't
think
there's
some
other
wonderful
option.
That's
going
to
suddenly
appear
for
southbound
traffic.
I'd
be
surprised
if
there
was.
D
The
second
thing
is,
I
think
it
keeps
k
street
even
as
we
develop
from
widening
and
safer
to
cross,
which
keeps
the
goal
of
access
to
the
gateway,
which
is
one
of
the
main
goals.
I
really
like
the
idea
of
the
more
protected
bike
lanes
on
tay,
and
I
think
that,
what's
happening
on
l
street
is
obviously
wonderful
and
very
important
to
arcata.
I
think
it's
really
possible
to
have
safe,
protected
linear
park
and
southbound
cars.
D
Somebody
mentioned
landscaping.
I
think
landscaping
could
be
a
key
tall.
Landscaping
can
be
a
visual
and
a
sound
barrier.
You
could
have
lawns
and
furniture
seating
there.
I
think
it's
completely
possible
to
keep
the
trail,
the
lovely
nature
and
the
development.
That's
happening
there
and
have
some
southbound
traffic.
Thank
you
very
much.
J
Have
jim.
J
Hello
committee
members,
thanks
for
this
moment,
I
do
fully
support,
not
converting
l
street
into
two-way
couplet.
A
full
build
out
of
l
street
would
produce.
Excuse
me
reduce
the
footprint
of
the
existing
l
street
pathway
and
pave
over
wetlands.
You
know
the
alternative.
L
street
path
would
enhance
the
linear
brain
a
green
belt
and
it's
serving
as
a
main
artery
to
parks
to
the
north
and
also
the
trail
network
to
the
south.
J
The
path
is
an
existing
right-of-way
and
it
won't
depend
on
privately
owned
public
spaces
to
be
commencing
improvements.
You
know
to
turn
into
a
green
belt.
I
mean
it's
a
great
space,
it's
great
opportunity,
expanding
that
roadway
is
just
going
to
reduce
that
opportunity.
J
J
You
know,
and
then
I
think
dave
went
over
a
lot
of
like
the
the
different
ordinary
policies
that
it
would
do,
but
I
just
in
case
ga
6a
calls
for
the
establishment
of
a
linear
js
park
adjacent
to
jolly
giant
creek
when
it's
delayed
highlighted
ga
6d
calls
for
enhancement
of
rails
to
trails
with
recreation.
J
K
K
Thanks
chris
richards
here
yeah,
I
I
really
liked
what
dave
said
in
the
beginning,
and
you
know
the
plan.
Language
really
supports
a
linear
part.
I
mean
I
underst.
I
understand
the
the
thoughtful
process
with
the
the
street
design
and
all
of
that,
but
I
there's
honestly
no
way
you
can
you
can
trade
off
an
opportunity
for
something
that
most
communities
would
dream
to
have
we
already
have
it?
You
know,
and
I
I
there's
definitely
different
options.
I've
heard
other
options
from
staff
that
wasn't
mentioned
tonight.
K
There's
there's
plenty
of
other
ways
to
think
this
way
through
the
the
other
thing
that
hasn't
been
brought
up.
That
I
should
reinforce
is
that
the
the
city
currently
doesn't
have
rights
to
the
property
at
the
north
end
to
create
this
roadway.
K
They
also
have
the
problem
with
the
rail
to
trail
and
a
couple
sections
where
it's
gonna,
you
know:
they're
gonna
have
to
get
some
rights,
especially
if
they
want
to
change
the
the
bike
trail
at
the
north
end
to
go
in
between
the
mini
storage,
along
where
the
existing
railway
is
so
I
mean
the
reality
of
that.
K
Currently
is
not
a
reality
anyway,
so
I
you
know,
I
I
think
when
it
all
adds
up
and
with
what
I've
heard
with
many
community
members,
I
I've
heard
very
little
people
in
support
of
adding
truck
truck.
You
know
traffic
on
another
street,
that's
already
a
very
people
friendly
place,
misha
and
kathy
both
expressed
their
viewpoint
on
shrubbery
or
something's,
going
to
make
it
where
you're
not
going
to
know
that
trucks
are
zooming
by
you.
You
know
10
feet
away,
and
I
I
just
don't
buy
that.
K
I
think
that's
a
cop
out,
that's
my
personal
opinion,
and
I
you
know
I
I
know
we
already
have
a
noisy
truck
route,
there's
plenty
of
options
with
diverting
bike
traffic
to
the
all
the
other
track.
You
know
friendly
areas,
it's
a
four
or
five
foot
section.
You
know
it's
a
six
block
section
so
anyway,
I
probably
ate
up
all
my
time,
yeah
that.
B
G
K
G
Hi
good
evening,
thanks
for
the
opportunity
tonight,
I
agree
with
dave
ryan's
recommendation
to
revisit
l
street
and
get
a
plan
b
developed.
I
don't
think
it's
feasible
to
get
permission
to
remove
the
existing
rails
and,
as
chris
just
said,
half
the
proposed
l
street
is
private
property,
and
I
think
that
maybe
you
can
see
this
happening
now-
that
savvy
bike
riders
will
self-divert
to
adjacent
quieter
streets.
I
know
that
I
would
prefer
to
ride
on
the
existing
l
street
pathway
than
to
do
k
street
and
have
a
good
evening.
Thank
you.
G
B
Okay,
so
I'd
like
to
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
all
of
our
recommendations
in
one
fell
swoop
and
then
take
a
vote
or
you
know,
get
a
second
and
take
a
vote
or
the
members
good
with
that
process.
A
I'm
sorry
I
I
don't
know
how
to
raise
my
hand
on
my
device.
This
is
mishka.
I
did
have
different
language
for
the.
B
See
if
david
could
find
it,
is
it
the
one
that
patricia
brought
up
about
the
the
word
road
in
there?
I'd
kind
of
look
like
to
look
at
that
again.
A
H
Sorry,
I
think
that
this
policy
mishka
only
comes
into
play.
You
have
two
competing
policies.
One
is
eliminate
illustrated
as
a
couplet,
so
you're,
making
a
recommendation
to
the
city
council
take
else
straight
out
as
a
transportation
route
entirely,
leave
it
as
it
is
or
enhance
it.
Even
let's
turn
it
into
a
linear
park.
Let's
enhance
it
and
embrace
it
and
make
it
more
and
bill's
going
to
deceive
elimination.
This
language
here
it
doesn't,
doesn't
really
apply
and
we
would
probably
put
forward
some
language
that
says
you
know.
H
Collaborate
with
the
the
great
rabbit
trail
agency
on
you
know,
trail
development
throughout
the
region,
something
along
those
lines.
But
this
this
policy
itself
is
moved
and
it
wouldn't
be
moving
forward
as
a
recommendation.
H
If
the
city
council
choose
the
second
option
the
ladder
and
says
we're
going
to
maintain
the
trail
as
a
we're
going
to
maintain
the
l
street
as
a
road
in
this
plan,
despite
the
fact
that
we
don't
own
all
the
property,
we're
going
to
put
this
in
our
plan
and
we're
going
to
work
towards
that
angle
over
the
next
20
years
to
turn
this
into
part
of
our
transportation
network.
H
If
that
transpires,
if
they
choose
that,
then
they'd
look
at
this
language
and
have
something
similar
to
this
incorporated,
and
I
think
to
the
public
members
comment
that
you
know
this,
isn't
what
this
committee
developed.
I
think
that
this
came
directly
from
karina.
Correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
I
think
this
is
your
language.
So
maybe
you
could
speak
to
exactly
what
you
know
what
you
were
pretending.
E
They
explained
it
earlier,
it
wasn't
a
recommendation.
It
was
just
a
question
if,
in
the
event
you
do
put
the
couplet
in
and
you
do
move
the
trail
if
you
move
whether
it
would
be
legal
to
move
it
out
of
the
railroad
right-of-way,
because
that
right-of-way
would
have
to
be
have
to
be
legally
required
to
be
a
trail.
A
F
You
know,
I
think
that
this
is
a
good
comment,
but
now,
since
this
policy
was
added,
maybe
we
should
just
maybe
just
remove
it,
because,
if
nobody's
feeling
comfortable,
I
think,
as
a
city,
we
will
ensure
that
you
know
we
will
work
with
future
agency,
whoever
takes
over
the
ncra
property.
So
it's
not
even
a
recommendation
from
tsc,
not
just.
We
should
be
doing
that
either
way
so,
and
this
was
a
added
policy
in
any
way.
So,
if
you
all
feel
comfortable,
you
can
just
totally
remove
it.
B
That
you
know
nature
makes
a
a
good
point,
because
you're
gonna
have
to
collaborate
with
them,
and
the
city
won't
be
able
to
get
funding.
They
wouldn't
be
able
to
do
anything
there
without
collaborating
them
in
the
way
that
they've
collaborated
with
them.
Anything
that
goes
on
in
those
rail
to
trail
corridors
so.
H
It
it
is,
it
is
good
it's
preferable,
though,
to
have
these
policy
documents
reflect
those
intentions
so
that
when
there's
a
question
in
the
future,
well,
you
know
what
you
know.
What's
the
city's
intention
when
it
comes
to
trails
right
now
that
the
tsc,
for
example,
is
saying
hey,
you
know,
don't
don't
mess
with
the
trail
leave
it.
You
know,
leave
it
as
pristine
as
possible.
H
If
we
go
into
the
future
and
we're
looking
back
on
the
discussion,
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
the
policy
document,
no
one's
going
to
be
in
this
room.
Nobody's
going
to
have
access
to
this
room
really
to
to
you
know,
see
what
the
discussion
was
and
this
discussion
isn't.
Even
the
decision
point
that's
going
to
happen
much
later.
So
if
we
want
to
reflect
that,
hey,
there's
a
there's,
a
strong
desire
of
this
city
to
work
with
the
great
redwood
trail
agency
on
trail
issues.
H
I
think
that
that's
perfectly
acceptable
to
put
into
policy
and
reflect
that
explicitly
in
that
policy
language
so
that
anybody
in
the
future,
regardless
who's
sitting
in
these
seats
in
my
seat,
your
seats
can
look
at
that
language
and
say
yes,
this
is
our
intention.
So
it's
fine
to
say
this,
even
if
that's
fully
our
intention
now,
it's
good
to
express
it
in
words
in
our
policy
documents.
H
So
I
think
this
is
good,
and
maybe
maybe
this
amendment
that
I
made
here
does
a
better
job
of
reflecting
karina.
What
your
original
question
or
pointed
question
was
collaborate
with
the
great
redwood
trail
agency
to
retain
a
separate
walk
bike
trail
along
l
street
that
could
be
included
whether
l
street
is
developed
into
a
part
of
the
roadway
or
not
ensure
existing
class
1
trail
or
class
4
bikeway
along
l
street
is
retained.
That
also
could
be
retained
regardless
of
l
street.
H
So
if,
if
you
change,
if
you
delete
a
little
bit
here,
maybe
mishka-
this
is
what
you're
driving
at.
I
just
couldn't
hear
you
properly.
But
if
you
make
those
couple
of
changes,
this
this
actually
is,
is
decent
language
to
retain,
regardless
of
what
happens
with
l
street.
B
I
think
it
clears
up
a
lot
of
confusion
to
me,
some
of
that
that
that
sentence
you
got
rid
of
helps
the
only
other
thing
that
and
karina
hasn't
answered
yet,
but
well
right
after
me,
if
she
can
wait
optional
language
in
the
event,
l
street
remains
as
proposed.
That's
a
little
bit
awkward.
What
remains
as
proposed
this.
H
B
B
H
B
I
don't
think
we
need
a
heading
there
and
if
you
the
strike
through,
you
did
so
karina.
Are
you
good
with
what
he's
got
right
there.
B
B
B
Know
I
think
we
had
a
problem
with
them
last
time
I
think
we
were
a
little
bit
skeptical
that
they
reflected
what
we
did
say
at
the
prior
meetings
or
reflected
everything.
We
said
as
I
had
notes,
and
there
were
things
that
didn't
make
it
in
there,
but
I'm
not
going
to
go
back
and
revisit
that
now
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
general
comments
being
sent
along
myself.
Anybody
else.
B
B
Okay
and
mieshka
you
seconded.
B
Okay,
we'll
go
through
and
do
a
roll
call
vote
I'd
vote.
I
messiah.
A
B
A
B
B
Unless
anybody
has
anything
else,
one
last
chance,
hey
mishka
your
hand
went
up.
You
figured
it
out.
B
Okay,
that's
great
well,
if
staff
doesn't
have
anything
else
and
they
haven't
indicated.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time.
This
meeting
is
adjourned.
Yep.
Thank
you.