►
From YouTube: Bloomington City Council, May 10, 2023
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
B
A
Here,
thank
you
and
we'll
begin
with
our
land
and
labor
acknowledgment.
We
recognize
that
the
city
of
Bloomington
sits
on
native
land,
the
city
as
well
as
City
administrative
buildings,
are
on
the
traditional
homelands
of
the
Miami
Delaware
Potawatomi
and
Shawnee
people,
and
we
acknowledge
that
they
are
past
present
and
future
caretakers
of
this
land.
A
Moving
into
the
agenda
summation,
we
have
one
set
of
minutes
for
approval
this
evening.
We
will
then
move
into
reports,
including
reports
from
Council
Members,
two
reports
from
the
mayor
and
city
offices,
one
addressing
deer
feeding
and
then
a
status
report
on
plexus
and
adus
per
ordinance.
2123,
we'll
then
take
up
any
reports
from
Council
committees
and
then
come
to
our
first
of
two
periods
of
public
comment.
A
We'll
then
take
up.
Appointments
to
boards
and
commissions
include,
in
addition
to
appointments
we
included.
There
also
is
the
approval
of
bylaws
bylaws
Amendment
for
the
city
of
Bloomington
Capital,
Improvements
Inc.
We
then
take
up
legislation
for
second
readings
and
resolutions
included.
There
is
ordinance
2310
to
amend
Title
20
of
the
unified
development
or
the
unified
development
ordinance
of
the
Bloomington
municipal
code.
A
We'll
then
take
up
legislation
for
first
readings
included.
There
is
appropriation
ordinance
23-04
to
specially
appropriate
from
the
general
fund,
arpa
state
and
local
fiscal
Recovery,
Fund,
Parks
and
Recreation
general
fund
and
motor
vehicle
Highway
Street
fund
expenditures,
not
otherwise
appropriated
appropriating
a
portion
of
the
amount
of
funds
reverted
to
various
City
funds
at
the
end
of
2022
for
unmet
needs
in
2023.
We'll
then
come
to
our
second
period.
Second
of
two
periods
of
public
comment,
we'll
take
up
matters
of
council
schedule,
and
then
we
will
adjourn
with
that.
Let's
move
to
approval
of
minutes.
E
A
F
A
G
H
C
F
J
As
we
previously
mentioned
here,
the
Animal
Control
Commission
is
proposing
a
feeding
ban
language
to
go
in
Title
VII
in
a
municipal
code.
We
had
hope
to
have
this
before
the
council.
By
this
time
the
Animal
Control
Commission
did
decide
to
bundle
that
change
with
some
other
changes
to
Title
VII,
including
streamlining
and
improving
our
dangerous
dog
ordinances.
J
J
If
the
feeding
ban
is
passed,
we
do
expect
to
have
a
fair
amount
of
opposition
to
it.
So,
in
the
meantime,
our
we're
working
on
identifying
areas,
people
that
are
feeding
the
deer
and
having
beginning
discussions
with
them
about
the
negative
impacts
that
feeding
deer
can
provide
in
preparation
for
that
passing
I.
Do
ask
since
I'm
up
front
here
the
people
that
there
are
those
in
the
community
that
are
feeding
deer.
This
is
a
good
time
to
stop.
Feeding
deer
creates
abnormal
movement
of
the
deer
in
Bloomington
and
actually
increases
conflict
between
neighbors.
J
So
if
we
can
stop
feeding
the
deer,
we
can
hopefully
decrease
our
conflict
around
the
deer
and
we
can
all
enjoy
their
presence
here
in
Bloomington
for
those
that
are
experiencing
conflicts
with
deer
in
2021,
we
did
put
a
you
report
system
in
place
for
wildlife
conflicts
that
can
be
accessed
on
the
city
of
bloomington's
website
homepage
by
just
clicking
on
report
issue,
so
that
has
been
an
unutilized
thing.
Our
office
has
only
received
60
Wildlife
reports
through
that
system,
since
that
was
put
in
place.
So
we'd
like
to
like
to
hear
more
if
possible.
H
Yes,
thank
you,
Mr
souter,
for
your
brief
report.
I
wanted
to
ask
if
you
could
expand
just
a
bit
about
the
negative
impacts
of
feeding
deer
other
than
the
you
know.
The
fact
that
if
your
neighbor's
feeding
deer,
then
the
deer
are
more
likely
to
eat
whatever's
on
your
property.
H
J
Yeah,
so
so
the
feeding
deer
increases
the
availability
of
food.
That's
that's
not
normal
to
their
normal
browsing
patterns,
so
it
tends
to
congregate,
deer
and
increases
the
amount
of
deer
that
are
produced
in
an
area
because
they
can
they
can
feed.
So
that's
part
of
it.
The
bigger
aspect
of
it
is
if
they
know,
there's
food
there.
J
D
Thank
you,
Mr
souter,
I
I
wanted
to
just
have
you
described
when
you
talk
about
feeding
deer,
that's
intentional
feeding,
obviously,
but
what
about
you
know
putting
out
food
for
Birds
because
dear
Wells
to
meet
food,
a
lot
of
bird
feeders
and
things
like
that,
but
I
assume
that
that
doesn't
apply
so
and
also
I
I,
assume
that
this
is
complete
driven.
D
J
All
right,
so
it
will
still
be
complaint
driven
as
far
as
as
following
up,
however,
with
our
research
that
we've
done
now
in
Bloomington,
usually
when
we
can
find
somebody
feeding
deer
in
areas
where
we
have
complaints.
So
if
we
Patrol
those
areas
we
can
kind
of
narrow
down.
But
yes,
we
will
be
largely
looking
at
individuals
to
let
us
know
who
is
feeding
in
areas
that
are
causing
problems
to
follow
up
on
that
ban
as
far
as
the
feeding
of
the
birds.
J
A
D
J
So
this
yes,
this
particular
feeding
ban,
is
looking
more
on
complaints
and
neighborhoods
issues.
Part
of
what
we
are
looking
at
in
conjunction
of
with
this
is
putting
together
different
individuals
throughout
the
city
departments
to
look
at
those
specific
issues
of
what
other
issues
deer
are
producing
when
it
comes
to
Wild
over
browsing
of
native
plants.
J
Impacts
that
when
it
comes
to
housing
conditions,
things
like
that,
so
we're
that's
still
very
much
in
the
infancy.
We
are
looking
at
getting
some
community
members
in
place
as
well
with
IU
and
others
to
kind
of
again
start
figuring
out
what
what
these
issues
are
and
then
looking
at
you
know,
like
you,
recommended
deer
accounts
and
things
like
that.
So
we
have
an
idea
of
what
we're
trying
to
achieve.
D
There's
a
public
health
impact
because
of
deer,
ticks
and
and
several
diseases
that
are,
can
infect
people
from
Deer
over
abundance
and
and
then
you
know,
the
correlation
of
tick
tick,
abundance
with
deer.
That's
another
consideration.
I
just
wanted
to
affirm
that
yeah.
J
C
First,
just
a
bit
of
commentary:
I
agree
with
councilmember
Rallo
that
not
only
is
it
a
wildlife
management
issue,
it
is
through
the
lens
I'm.
Looking
a
public
health
issue
and
I
think
at
some
point
we
don't
wish
any
of
this
on
anyone.
But
at
some
point,
if
you
happen
to
have
to
deal
with
the
possibilities
of
Lyme
disease,
these
sorts
of
things
and
I
think
you
would
agree
with
that
assessment.
C
The
other
commentary
is
I
agree
with
the
location
and
the
density
or
the
count
whenever
we
can
and
one
of
the
things
that
concerns
me
or
it's
all
a
concern,
but
one
of
the
things
that's
been
happening
on
two
occasions
in
the
last
five
weeks,
I
almost
or
had
encounter
with
deer
on
West,
7th
Street,
one
by
Banneker,
Center
and
the
other
by
I,
believe
it's
White,
Oak
Cemetery
one
with
just
two
and
one
with
four
and
as
they're
leaping
over.
So
that's
my
commentary,
but
my
question
or
comment
is
you
said
you
anticipated?
C
J
J
Already,
if
the
ban
happens-
or
it
looks
like
it's
going
to
pass,
we'll
do
a
wider
city-wide
mailing,
either
through
the
water
bill,
or
something
like
that
where
we
can
get
it
out
to
more
people,
and
then
it's
just
discussion
and
having
those
those
discussions
with
people
that
are
feeding
feeding
bans
and
not
feeding
of
wildlife
is
something
that
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
larger
Humane
Societies
support
fully
as
a
humane
way
to
kind
of
prevent
and
work
with
Wildlife
conflicts.
J
So
we
have
that
piece
behind
us
when
we
approach
the
people
in
Bloomington
who
truly
love
the
deer
and
feel
like
they're
helping
them
by
putting
that
food
out
I
mean
this
is
something
that
they're
doing,
because
they
they
love
seeing
the
deer
in
Bloomington.
They
they
see
them
as
a
rich
resource
and
a
beautiful
part
of
Bloomington
and
it's
those
that
are
are
going
to
struggle
with
with
that
change
in
their
life.
C
Public
education-
and
you
said
at
some
point:
if
it
looks
like
it's
gone,
then
we'll
make
it
broader
I,
like
the
robust
part
to
be
sooner
because
it
seems
to
me
that
education
will
help
mitigate
conflict.
It
won't
eliminate
it,
but
I
think
it'll
help
mitigate
it.
If,
if
people
know
what
what
what
we're
talking
about,
if
that
makes
sense,.
C
G
I
I
think
what
I
was
wanting
to
know
was
how
many
reports
have
we
had
of
people
feeding
deer,
and
can
you
kind
of
tell
us
in
what
part
of
the
city
that
is
you
know
like
east
west
south?
You
know
yeah
where's
where's.
It
happening.
J
Of
so
the
we
have
honestly,
it's
been
about
six,
a
lot
of
these
we
have
followed
up
with
when
it
comes
to
complaints
about
herds
of
deer.
We
have
gone
out
and
started
talking
to
people
patrolling
the
neighborhood
and
that's
how
we've
found
them.
K
Thank
you,
Jackie
Scanlon
development
services
manager,
Council
approved
a
change
to
the
Udo
related
to
duplexes
and
triplexes
in
May
of
2021,
which
was
signed
into
law
by
mayor
Hamilton
in
July
of
2021.
The
ordinance
contained
the
language,
the
planning
and
transportation
department
will
track
requests
and
approvals
for
the
uses
amended
in
this
ordinance
and
Report
those
findings
to
the
planned
commission,
Administration
and
common
Council
every
six
months
from
the
effective
date,
the
ordinance
May
duplexes
conditional
in
R1,
R2
and
R3
and
triplex's
conditional
in
R4.
K
K
The
council
also
placed
a
150-foot
buffer
around
newly
approved
duplex
dwellings
in
those
districts
around
which
new
approvals
cannot
be
sought
for
15
years
and
a
cap
of
15
per
year
on
the
use
in
those
districts
we
reported
in
February
of
22
September
of
22
and
since
September
of
22,
the
department
has
had
11
additional
inquiries
about
possible
duplex
uses
in
the
R1
through
the
R3.
As
last
time,
these
inquiries
range
from
basic
questions
about
whether
or
not
one
is
allowed
to
process
questions
to
proceeding
with
filing
a
dwelling.
K
Duplex
use
was
approved
via
the
conditional
use
process
by
the
board
of
zoning
appeals
in
October
of
22,
and
a
dwelling
duplex
use
was
approved
via
the
conditional
use
process
by
the
board
of
zoning
appeals
in
February
of
23..
So
that
is
a
total
of
three.
Since
the
regulation
was
passed,
we
have
also
received
one
Adu
permit
filing
since
September
of
22,
which
leaves
our
number
hovering
around
30
for
those.
K
Since
that
regulation
was
changed
and
we
wanted
to
let
you
know
that
we
have
put
together
an
accessory
dwelling
unit
website
and
that
went
live
on
April
11th,
so
that
can
be
accessed
through
the
planning
and
transportation
department
website.
It
has
a
number
of
model
adus
done
by
a
local
and
Regional
Architects
and
explains
the
process
for
both
attached
and
detached
adus
and
I
can
answer
any
questions.
L
So,
just
to
be
clear,
we
put
a
cap
of
15.
First
of
all,
you
said
it
was
15
years,
but
it
was
two
years.
That's
the
limit.
Let
me
see
if
I
can
find
that
again.
You
said
that
the
council
also
placed
150
foot
buffer
around
newly
approved
duplex
dwellings
around
which
new
approvals
cannot
be
sought
for
15
years
for.
L
Right
so
just
to
clarify
that,
but
so
again
the
the
worry
in
2021
was
that
duplexes
would
overrun
the
city
right.
But
we've
got
a
cap
of
15
per
year,
but
we've
literally
had
maybe
one
per
year.
We've
had
three
so
far
correct.
Just
and
and
can
you
even
say
where
they
are
in
the
city.
K
L
K
Martha
Street
and
the
north
side.
L
Is
it
the
opinion
of
the
department
that
the
rules
may
be
too
restrictive
that
they're
discouraged?
Is
there
a
reason
why
people
aren't
even
building
15
a
year.
K
I'm
not
sure
I
think
we
were
comfortable
I
mean
we
were
definitely
comfortable
with
the
cap.
We
said
publicly
we're
not
going
to
get
15
a
year.
That's
feel
free
to
put
a
cap
on.
That
was
not
something
we
would
argue
against,
as
was
the
case
when
adus
were
submitted,
I
think
it's
just
a
slow
roll
start,
I
think
having
it
be,
a
conditional
use
probably
does
slow
that
option.
K
We
had
a
fourth,
we
discussed
this
at
the
last
report,
but
one
of
we
had
an
Adu
a
serious
Adu
interest
within
150-foot
buffer
of
one
of
the
other
adus
I'm.
Sorry,
a
Plex
interest
within
the
buffer
of
one
of
the
other
duplexes.
K
So
you
know
that
has
materially
stopped
one
additional
duplex
in
town,
the
buffer,
I
think
the
regulations
could
be
I,
think
the
department
would
say
the
regulations
could
be
lessened.
We
definitely
didn't
get
the
Plex
wave
that
we
heard
about
from
the
public
and
members
of
the
bodies
who
saw
the
the
request,
but
yeah,
it's
still
kind
of
early
I.
Think
we
are.
We
said
this
at
the
last
report,
but
we
did
not
see
construction
slow
down
for
single-family
homes
during
covid.
K
Different
kinds
of
construction
happened
because
people
were
staying
home,
but
I
do
think
that
this
particular
use
is
probably
being
hampered
by
the
regulations
surrounding
it
and.
L
K
We've
only
had
one
sorry
since
the
last
time
I
reported,
so
we
report
on
how
many
new
permits
we've
gotten
since
the
last
time
you
heard
from
us
right.
L
K
L
L
A
Just
about
used
up
our
20
minutes
for
this
section
of
the
agenda
and
I'd
like
to
suggest
we
extend
that,
if
possible,
before
we
go
to
council
members,
rosenbarger
and
Rallo.
Is
there
a
motion
to
extend
this
section
to
705
710.
L
B
F
E
K
No,
it
is
not
a
rollover,
so
it
did.
My
understanding
is
it's
just
15
a
year
and
you
start
every
year.
F
Okay-
and
it
really
just
does,
and
does
it
say
that
in
the
code,
yes.
K
And
15
per
year,
yes-
and
it
does
not
discuss
extending.
K
D
Thank
you,
Mr
Scanlon
you
when
councilmember
Fullman
was
asking
you
about
whether
the
the
the
Caps
or
the
code
is
too
stringent
in
terms
of
allowing
more
plexus,
you
said
that
you
thought
they
were
and
I
wondered
in
what
way
are
the
were
the
inquiries
about
flexing
within
proximity
of
150
feet
to
one
another
and
therefore
prevented
a
Plex
from
from
happening.
K
Sure
so,
as
I
stated,
yes,
one
that
we
had
in
Green
Acres
was
within
150
feet
and
so
they'll
wait.
The
two
years
I
think
I'm.
Basing
that
comment
largely
on
what
we
saw
with
adus,
which
were
conditional
initially
and
pretty
slow
rolling
at
first
and
then
when
they
became
by
right
with
very
similar
requirements.
That's
when
we
started
seeing
more.
L
I
K
Uncertainty
and
I
just
think
it's
a
general,
not
understanding
of
planning
processes,
and
so
knowing
that
you
have
to
go
through
a
process,
I
think
does
kind
of
deter
people
before
you
even
have
the
opportunity
to
explain
to
them
what
that
process
really
entails
and
that
if
they
can
meet
the
requirements,
then
the
board
would
approve
their
request.
K
So
I
also
think
it's
you
know
kind
of
new,
and
so
maybe
that's
part
of
it.
But
now
that
we're
coming
into
you
know
three
years,
four
years
since
we
had
the
discussion
the
first
time
I
think
we
do
I
think
you
can
seriously
look
at
the
regulations
and
say
maybe
some
of
that
needs
to
be
changed.
If
we
do
want
to
have
more.
I
Thanks
some
follow-up,
that's
okay,
I
was
just
checking
out
the
Adu
resource
on
the
planning
and
transportation
webpage,
which
looks
great,
there's
some
fun
plans
up
there
in
the
Adu
catalog.
Could
you
tell
me
just
a
bit
more
about
it,
looks
like
a
number
of
local
Architects
and
other
submitted
plans
and
there's
a
mention
that
interested
parties
can
like
follow
up
with
those
architecture
firms.
I
Can
you
tell
me
a
little
bit
more
about
like
how
we're
communicating
and
marketing
this
like
Resource
Assistance
with
respect
to
adus
and
what
that
would
look
like
for
interested
resident,
utilizing
the
plans
that
exist
or
working
with
Architects
to
do
that?
Is
it
a
free
resource?
Is
it
going
to
be
a
fee
for
service
like
once
they
reach
out
to
the
folks?
Is
it
meant
to
brainstorm
help
folks
brainstorm
for
their
own
plans?
Like
just
tell
me
a
little
more,
that's.
K
A
good
question:
I
wasn't
intimately
like
the
exact
deck
laying
out
of
the
process,
but
I'll
tell
you
what
I
know,
which
is
that
we
did
I
believe
an
RFP
for
Architects,
both
local
and
then
Regional.
There
are
some
from
Indianapolis
to
try
to
design
adus
to
our
specifications
so
that
people
could
see
what
that
could
look
like
and
then
the
website
does
direct
the
member
of
the
public
to
the
designer.
K
So
whether
or
not
there
are
additional
fees,
I'm
guessing
that
there
probably
are,
but
it's
kind
of,
as
you
mentioned,
a
marketing
idea
to
show
that
give
people
an
idea
of
what
could
be
done.
Beyond
just
you
know
the
conversion
of
their
garage
or
adding
a
second
floor.
You
know
above
an
existing
accessory
structure
that
that,
within
our
regulations,
these
types
of
designs
can
be
done
and
so
I
believe
director
Robinson
sent
that
information
out
to
various
business
and
like
Realty
groups
in
town
to
start
distributing
some
of
that
information.
K
C
Council
member,
thank
you
for
the
report.
Miss
scanlett
and
this
may
be
unfair
and
tell
me
if
it's
on
and
I'll
withdraw
everything,
but
in
your
opinion,
with
having
buy
right
as
opposed
to
conditional
approval.
Would
that
energize
the
program?
Do
you
think
and
I
know
it's
too
soon
to
tell,
and
if
it's
unfair
just
say,
I
don't
want
to
answer
and
I'll
withdrawal.
I,
don't
want
to
put
you
on
the
spot,
but
but
there's
got
to
be
other
I
mean
sure.
There's
got
to
be
other
reasons.
C
C
K
I
would
say:
yes,
I
do
think
that
that
I
do
think
it's
a
barrier
I
think
by
right.
We
would
see
more
interest,
I
mean
it's
a
large
and
it's
a
large
Financial
investment.
As
you've
said
you
know,
I
mean
single-family
houses,
the
house,
a
block
away
from
where
I
live
within
walking
distance
of
this
building
went
for
a
per
se
last
week
and
got
over
asking
cash
offer
the
next
day
for
more
than
half
a
million
dollars.
I.
N
K
Like
people
are
it's
crazy
right
now,
so
yet
you
would,
you
would
have
to
really
be
invested
in
wanting
to
have
a
duplex
I
mean
it
is
a
different
type
of
living
style
than
some
people
are
used
to,
and
so
I
think.
There's
that
getting
used
to
that
difference,
but
I
do
think
that
making
it
by
right
could
help
stimulate
having
more
real,
viable
interests.
K
I
Yeah
I
guess
just
trying
to
think
about
continuing
to
evolve.
The
regulation
you
mentioned
staff
supported
it
would
support
some
changes.
I
I
think
like
these
are
sort
of
like
guard
rails
that
were
put
in
place
like
extra
precautions
as
sort
of
how
they
were
framed,
similar
to
how
edu's
World
out
in
2017.,
because
some
folks
in
the
community
certainly
were
very
afraid
that
New
York
hedge
funds
would
buy
hundreds
of
properties
and
tear
them
all
down.
I
And
this
sort
of
narrative
do
you
feel,
like
the
evidence
we
have
after
several
years
demonstrates
clearly
that
that
those
fears
were
unfounded
and
we
can
proceed
to
not
sort
of
hinder
the
process
of
developing
missing
middle
housing
in
Bloomington
sure.
K
I
think
the
tracking
that
we've
done
of
the
interest
that
we've
received
thus
far
from
plexus
is
primarily
from
local
people,
so
some
local
Realtors
or
local
developers,
local
Architects,
local
residents.
K
That
is
what
we've
seen
thus
far
I
do
think
again
that
allowing
the
use
by
right
with
as
many
restrictions
as
we
felt
were
appropriate.
You
know
just
because
something's
by
right
doesn't
mean
that
the
other
restrictions,
these
specific
standards
would
go
away,
could
help
us
with
our
challenge
of
of
lacking
missing
middle.
Yes,.
L
A
little
bit,
we
could
get
a
a
simplest
figure
of
the
number
of
out
of
Monroe
County
applicants
for
these
changes.
In
others.
If
there
have
been
30
adus
and
three
plexes.
L
F
In
neighborhoods
that
they
were
worried
about,
do
people
then,
on
the
other
side
of
that
call
to
ask
for
like
a
quad
class,
so
you
say
like
no:
only
a
duplexes
allowed
or
are
most.
K
It
definitely
varies,
I
mean
sometimes
when
we
get
calls-
and
this
is
just
for
everything
all
over
the
city.
People
just
don't
know
what
they
can
build.
So
you
know
they've
owned
a
property
for
a
long
time
and
now,
for
whatever
reason,
they're
looking
to
either
develop
it
or
get
rid
of
it,
and
so
they
call
and
just
say
what
can
we
build
here
and
then
we,
you
know,
guide
them
that
way.
I
don't
think
I
included
as
many
of
those
I
don't
think.
M
Okay,
that's
kind
of
neat,
so
people
call
up
or
like
you
get
regular
calls
about
what
can
I
build
here,
yeah
like
just
that
open-ended
question
like
what
is
legally
allowed.
Okay,.
I
Thanks
those
customer
revolence
question
which
is
I,
guess
I
would
request
if
we're
going
to
start
reporting
on
where
people
are
from
who
are
building
housing
in
our
community,
like
we
keep
some
context
around
that
so,
like
I,
think
a
lot
of
housing
that
is
built
isn't
necessarily
built
by
an
owner
or
developer,
who
who
lives
in
Monroe,
County,
lots
of
single-family
home
and
lots
of
more
dense,
multi-family
housing.
So
I'm
worried
about
the
narratives
that
people
construct
sometimes
to
suit
their
purposes,
based
on
a
very
limited
snapshot
of
information.
I
So
similarly
I
think
councilmember
Rosenberger
has
requested
in
the
past
that
it'd
be
nice
actually
to
know
how
many
duplexes
and
triplexes
that
have
been
existing
in
our
communities
for
years
are
being
converted
into
single-family
homes
and
leading
to
loss
of
housing,
stock
and
loss
of
housing.
Affordability,
there's
Triplex
near
where
I
live,
that
that
happened
to
not
long
ago
and
I
think
it
happens.
I
So
it's
just
sort
of
a
I
guess
if
you
have
any
feedback
on
that
or
thoughts,
but
but
it's
also
just
sort
of
a
request
for
future
reporting
for
us
to
think
carefully
about.
I
A
K
I
would
say
you
know
the
reporting
is
here.
I
am
saying:
we've
done
three
and
in
in
this
whole
time,
I,
don't
think
I
think
some
members
of
this
body
and
the
public
and
plan
commission
just
really
wanted
to
make
sure
that
if
it
was
going
to
be
a
lot
that
that
was
going
to
be
clear
to
the
decision
makers
and
if
you
felt
like
you
needed
to
make
changes,
you
would
do
that.
K
You
know
similar
to
when
we
started
reporting
on
adus
I
think
that
was
useful,
because
then
we
made
changes
to
work
toward
the
goals
that
we
have
already
agreed
upon.
If
we're
going
to
do
that,
I
think
that's
great
we're
happy
to
report.
I!
Guess
I'm,
saying
we're
happy
to
report
whatever
you
all
want,
I,
don't
necessarily
we
don't
want
to
limit
that.
K
We
want
to
report
whatever
you're
asking
for
and
then
agreed
that
may
be
a
slippery
slope
when
we
start
talking
about
specific
Dynamics
for
particular
uses
that
we're
not
tracking
for
other
uses,
and
so
that
may
be
something
for
this
body
to
kind
of
like
decide
if
they
really,
you
know
what
they
want.
Us
to
present.
L
Follow
up
on
what
councilmember
Flaherty
said:
I
mean
as
far
as
I'm
concerned.
There
has
been
a
very
strong
narrative
against
any
kind
of
non-single
family
unit,
partly
because
the
claim
is
that
they're,
all
from
out
of
town
and
all
the
money
is
going
to
Flow
Away
from
town
and
that's
why
I
think
it's
important
that
we
at
least
get
some
sense
of,
because
the
cursory
analysis,
I've
done
of
ownership-
and
such
you
know
buildings-
is
that
it's
not
coming
from
out
of
town.
L
It's
coming
from
the
demand
is
from
developers
who
live
here
in
town,
not
even
developers,
homeowners
who
live
in
town
who
just
want
to
expand
their
house,
so
I
think
it's
important
that
we
do
it,
because
I
am
for
one
sick
of
that
narrative
and
I.
Think
it's
false,
so
I
just
wanted
to
put
that
on
the
record.
Thank
you.
A
A
O
There
are
members
of
the
public
joining
us
on
Zoom
that
would
like
to
speak.
Please
let
us
know
by
using
the
raise
hand,
feature
which
you
can
find
under
your
control
bar
by
clicking
the
reactions
button
or
the
more
button.
You
can
also
send
a
chat
to
the
meeting
host
to.
Let
us
know
you'd
like
to
speak,
and
we
will
recognize
you
that
way.
A
A
P
Great
sorry,
my
name
is
Greg
Alexander.
A
couple
weeks
ago,
I
told
you
all
that
there
is
no
good
biker,
ped
connection
to
North
High
School
I
want
to
show
you
the
next
best
thing
so
in
red
here,
one
connector
path
does
exist.
It
connects
North
High
School
to
the
fritz
Terrace
neighborhood.
It's
got
severe
flaws
in
its
design,
implementation
and
maintenance.
It's
not
ADA
Compliant.
It
is
a
disaster,
but
it
is
the
best
option
by
far
next
slide,
please
to
get
to
the
next
neighborhood
to
the
South.
There's
nothing.
P
You
just
have
to
use
Kinser.
So
what
your
bike
on
the
sidewalk?
You
have
no
choice
right.
So
you
bike
on
the
sidewalk
on
Kinser
Pike,
with
cars
going
by
real
fast
sidewalks,
crappy,
sidewalks,
narrow,
sidewalks,
not
maintained
and
now
you're
in
this
little
neighborhood
next
slide.
Please
then,
there's
a
little
connection
to
Arlington
Heights
Elementary
and
the
weird
thing
is
that's.
Actually
the
path
itself
is
very
high
quality.
P
It
just
dumps
you
in
a
parking
lot,
but
the
path
itself
is
good
and
from
there
you
know
it
feels
like
you're
trespassing
in
an
elementary
school
playground,
which
I
kind
of
think
you
literally
are,
and
then
you
can
get
to
that
bridge
over
over
the
bypass
next
slide.
Please,
and
that's
that
that's
that
there's
no
further
it
just
dumps
you
out
on
garley
Pike,
not
a
friendly
place
to
bike
the
cars
do
go
about
40
or
50
miles
an
hour
there,
because
it's
basically
a
country
road,
there's,
no
sidewalks,
no
bike
facility,
nothing!
P
This
is
what
happens
when
you
install
the
most
expensive
kind
of
infrastructure,
a
gosh,
darn
Bridge.
There
is
nothing
more
expensive
and
we
didn't
listen
to
planners.
If
we
listened
to
planners
we'd
have
something,
but
we
spent
the
money
we
over
engineered
it.
We
under
planned
it-
and
you
know
it's
the
side.
Parks
is
currently
in
the
process
of
spending
about
a
quarter
million
dollars
on
that
bridge.
They're,
going
to
beautify
it
they're
going
to
put
a
sign
on
it.
P
That
says:
welcome
to
Bloomington
it's
going
to
have
back
lights
and
special
rusted
burnished
metal,
and
they
want
to
spend
all
that
money
without
a
single
biker
pad
Improvement
for
crying
out
loud,
a
quarter
million
dollars
next
slide.
Please
anyways
so,
but
I
know
that
a
few
people
from
Arlington
Valley
trailer
park
do
use
that
bridge
I've
seen
them
there.
So
I
followed
their
path.
So
what
they
do
is
they
throw
caution
in
the
wind?
P
P
So
this
is
that
connector
path,
two
things
jump
out
at
me:
first,
is
a
trespass:
I
am
standing
on
private
property
trespassing,
while
I'm
doing
that
they
installed
and
maintained
that
fence
that
tries
to
prevent
people
from
using
this
path,
but
they
just
go
around
it.
And
the
second
thing
you
can
see
the
mud
where
people
have
trampled
down
the
vegetation
people
use
this
path.
P
This
is
a
useful
piece
of
Transportation
infrastructure,
better
than
anything
the
city
has
provided
to
these
citizens-
and
you
know
this
property
was
for
sale
when
I
brought
the
attention
of
of
of
planning
staff
three
years
ago.
You
know
we
could
have
just
bought
it.
It's
vacant
next
slide.
Please,
then,
the
last
step
is
a
really
difficult
Crossing
of
17th
Street.
You
know
no
crosswalk,
nothing.
P
You
know
we're
got
a
big
side
path
project
there
and
it's
part
of
the
technical
standard.
When
you
install
a
set
path,
you
have
to
think
about
the
crossings.
They
didn't
think
about
the
crossings.
So
it's
still
going
to
be
awful.
So
if
I
use
four
awful
Connections
in
a
trespass,
then
I
can
hop
from
one
neighborhood
to
the
next
and
get
all
the
way
to
North
High
School,
because
that's
my
house
on
Maple
Heights
there.
P
These
connections
are
the
most
essential
part
of
the
network,
but
they're
mostly
missing
or
garbage,
and
this
is
what
happens
when
planners.
Don't
have
the
authority
to
build
bike
and
Peg
Networks
if
we
had
listened
to
planners
instead
of
Engineers
and
parks
and
all
the
different
people
and
deciding
Northside
connectivity.
We
wouldn't
have
this
problem
and
you
know
the
funny
part.
I
live
directly
on
kinzer
Pike.
It's
called
Madison
Street
where
I
live,
but
it's
the
same
street.
It
is
a
direct
shot
to
North
High
School.
P
If
I
want
to
throw
caution
to
the
wind
and
take
that
route
on
my
bike,
I
can
it's
a
direct
route
if
I
want
to
buy
a
car,
the
city
has
provided
me
a
premium
route.
Direct
I
have
one
more
bit
of
trivia
about
that
bridge.
I've
been
looking
at
maps
and
it
looks
like
it
was
built
in
1972
when
the
whole
bypass
was
built
for
50
years.
Q
Daryl
rubel
I
got
a
couple
comments.
There
was
a
person
here
a
while
back
to
us.
He
complaining
about
some
roads
that
had
been
built
in
Bloomington,
some
intersections
17th
and
Crescent
I
love
that
it's
big,
you
got
lots
of
room
to
turn.
You
know
some
people,
you
just
cannot
satisfy
no
matter
what
you
build,
but
I,
actually
absolutely
love
that
17th
and
Crescent.
It's
big
but
I,
repeat
myself,
but
you
Mr
Alexander
needs
to
buy
a
car.
He
complains
so
much
about
walking,
buy
a
car
dude
please,
but
anyway.
Q
The
reason
I'm
here
really
is
the
city
of
Bloomington
utilities
they
go
in
and
they
do
jobs
around
Bloomington
them
guys
are
professionals.
Man,
I
know
a
lot
of
them
guys
down.
There
utilities
you
know
when
they
do
a
utility
cut
across
the
road
they're
there,
the
next
day
or
maybe
even
the
same
day
and
they'll
fill
that
in
they
may,
you
know,
dig
it
out
and
they'll
put
their
Asphalt
in
it
and
them
guys
will
ride
on
the
money
them
guys
come
in
and
fill
them
in
real,
quick,
but
I
had
an
experience.
Q
Q
Q
But
you
know
when,
when
these
developers
come
into
Bloomington
and
and
destroy
our
town
that
really
destroy,
but
they
destroy
a
lot
of
our
roads,
they
do
their
utility
cuts
and
a
lot
of
them,
don't
even
fill
them
in
you
know
they
leave
them
like
that
for
people
to
hit
and
utilities.
The
first
thing
when
someone
hits
something
like
that
in
Bloomington,
the
first
person
they
blame
is
a
city.
All
the
city
is
doing
a
job
there.
You
know,
and
they
get
blamed
for
unnecessary
stuff,
that
they
had
nothing
to
do
with.
I.
Q
Think
that
my
personal
opinion
is
when
it
when
these
developers
come
into
Bloomington
to
do
their
Road
Cuts,
they
need
to
put
a
sign
by
the
where,
where
they're
working,
so
we
know
who
these
people
are
I
had
a
HEPA
time
and
I
still
haven't
found
out
really
who
that
was
that
done
that,
but
put
us,
they
haven't,
put
a
sign
out
there.
This
work
is
done
by
so,
and
so
so
when
they
tear
my
car
up-
or
you
know
someone
else's
car,
we
know
who
to
who
to
sue
for
damages.
There's
nothing.
Q
You
know,
and
utilities
utilities
the
city
of
Bloomington
utilities
guys
get
blamed
for
that
stuff,
because
that's
the
first
thing
person
they
think
of
is
utilities,
but
putting
us
up,
we
need
to
make
them
put
the
developers
put
a
sign
out
there.
It
says
this
is
who
is
doing
this
okay
I
see
I
wish
I
could
have
wrote
a
lot
of
guys
come
up
here.
You
know
and
have
a
little
speech
ready.
Q
I,
don't
do
that
man
mines
come
from
here,
I'm,
just
you
know,
there's
you
know
it's
just
who
I
am
I'm
going
to
tell
you
straight
from
the
heart.
Another
thing
too.
This
thing
out
here
by
the
bike.
The
beeline
is
on
Rogers
over
here
man.
Well,
who
put
that
in
there
man?
That
is
a
travesty!
That
thing
when
you
hit
it
you're
going
airborne.
Q
You
know,
I
was
told
it
was
a
traffic
calming
device.
What
that
thing's
dangerous?
What
about
some
young
mother
comes
through
there
with
the
baby
and
a
little
a
little
carrier
in
the
passenger
seat
and
that
baby
gets
thrown
out
of
that
by
hitting
that
thing
who
put
that
in
there
that
needs
to
be
gone,
that
that
needs
to
be
smoothed.
Q
Q
Oh
another
thing
too,
you
know
the
Bloomington
place
in
in
you
know
the
Bloomington
Police.
They
can't
get
guys
and
gals
to
come
work
there,
because
the
homeless
people,
when
the
police
officers
go
to
the
deal
to
homeless,
they
get
disheartened
man
because
they
can't
do
their
job.
That's
why
they
can't
get
police
officers.
That's
why
they're,
30
or
40
short.
None
of
them
want
to
come
here
and
stay
because
of
that.
Q
You
know
drive
up
walnut
at
the
same
right
park.
They
got
tents
there
during
the
day.
I
guess
you
can
camp
in
a
park
during
the
day,
but
that
don't
look
good
on
the
city,
man.
That
is
a
public
park
that
I'd
like
to
take
my
grandchildren
into,
but
I
can't
you
can't
you
drive
by
there
and
see
it.
But
anyway,
my
last
thing
I've
been
watching
The
Invasion
at
the
border.
Q
Then
people
coming
through
there
there's
not
a
single
one
of
them
carrying
an
American
flag.
You
see
a
hundred
thousand
of
the
people
coming
up
here
and
they're
all
bringing
Fentanyl
and
heroin
in
their
backpacks
they're,
not
checked
that
backpack
is
not
checked,
but
when
you
go
to
the
airport
you're
searched
thoroughly.
Why
are
they
being
able
to
come
up
here?
Then
backpacks
are
full
of
drugs
to
kill
our
children.
A
We
do
have
one
business
item
to
take
care
of
there,
but
do
you
first
do
the
inner
any
of
the
interview
teams
have
appointments
to
recommend
seeing
none?
Okay,
we
have
an
item
for
the
approval
of
bylaws
Amendment
for
the
city
of
Bloomington
Capital
Improvements
Mr
Lucas.
Do
you
want
to
provide
any
context
for
this
or
you.
O
Happy
to
and
I
know,
Corporation
Council
Beth
Kate
is
also
here
in
case.
There
are
questions
the
council
may
or
may
not
remember
when
discussing
the
city
of
Bloomington
Capital
Improvements
board
that
was
recently
set
up.
The
bylaws
for
that
board
provided
a
mechanism
for
amendment
that
included
Council
approval
for
certain
types
of
bylaw
amendments
and
one
of
those
types
is
any
change
to
the
appointment
process
or
or
a
member
membership
on
that
board.
The
board
itself
just
recently
approved
of
an
amendment
that
would
change
how
vacant
seats
are
filled.
O
Currently,
the
bylaws
provide
that
vacant
seats
are
filled
by
the
board
itself.
The
board's
amendment
that
they
have
asked
you
to
approve
tonight
would
change
the
rule
so
that
the
appointing
entity
either
the
mayor
or
the
council,
would
fill
any
vacant
seats
that
come
up.
I
think
that's
the
extent
of
it.
I
don't
know
if
Corporation
Council
Kate
has
anything
to
add,
but
the
amended
language
was
included
in
your
packet
and
if
there
are
questions,
one
of
the
two
of
us
would
be
happy
to
answer
those
okay.
A
D
A
Been
moved
and
seconded
are
there
any
questions
for
Miss
Kate.
A
C
A
I
see
no
questions
with
that.
Let's
go
to
public
comment.
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
offer
public
comments
on
it's
a
good
question?
I.
I
Believe
we
have
a
motion
on
the
table
that
it's
a
debatable
motion,
but
we
don't
typically
take
public
comment
like
on
the
motion:
okay,
not
that
the
chair
couldn't
but
I'm
just
clarifying.
Procedurally,
what
okay
is
happening.
A
L
I
have
a
question
since
it
is
debatable,
but
if
I
can
ask
a
question,
please
maybe
Ms
Kate
can
answer
it.
One
thing
I
haven't
asked
is:
is
there
a
particular
statute
under
which
the
bylaws
for
the
cbci
were
were
created
under,
like
I
mean
under
what?
What
is
the
authority
that
the
administration
used
to
create
these
bylaws
in
the
first
place.
S
L
S
Corporation
Council
Beth
Kate,
yes,
councilmember
Roland.
There
is
the
Indiana
nonprofit
corporation
act,
and
that
is
a
state
statute
under
which
nonprofit
organizations
are
created,
empowered
and
it
speaks
to
the
adoption
of
bylaws,
which
is
something
that
happens
typically
at
the
incorporation
meeting.
So
the
first
meeting
of
the
organization
it'd.
L
Be
helpful
to
to
to
be
able
to
look
that
up
it's
it's.
Is
it
in
statute.
H
Yes,
so
in
both
the
current
language
and
the
proposed
language,
it
says
the
director
selected
to
Temporary
field
of
temporarily
fill
a
vacancy
Shall
Serve
for
the
unexpired
term
of
their
predecessor
in
office.
Does
this
preclude
them
being
appointed
for
a
full
term?
Subsequently,
I
don't
have
the
full
bylaws
in
front
of
me.
S
L
Sorry
one
more
question
I
had
about
the
bylaws
is
that
it
says
the
serves
notice
under
article
11,
but
it
says
specifically,
the
directors
proposed
the
following
textual
amendment
to
article
11,
but
then
it
changes
language
in
Article,
5,
Section,
7
and
I.
Think
that's
a
little
confusing.
S
Sorry,
the
change
is
to
Article
5
Section,
seven,
it
they're
empowered
to
do
it
under
article
11
and
they're.
Following
that,
so
I
see
what
you're
saying
yeah.
T
L
And
do
we
do
we
make
a
motion
to
amend
this,
or
do
we
have
to
read
the
text?
We
could
read
it
properly
so
that
it
says
prayer
and
not
to
doesn't
matter
I,
don't
care
that
doesn't
matter.
Thank
you
anyway.
C
Thank
you
all
I
really
want
to
say,
is
and
I'm
glad
that
this
is
brought,
but
what
I'd
also
like
to
see
moving
forward
is
an
alteration
of
appointees.
Again
they
go
three
from
Administration
and
two
from
this
body.
Thank
you
it's
my
comment.
Thank.
L
Because
for
me,
I
agree
with
him
that
we
should
have
three
and
two
and
I
understand
that
it
may
well
be
the
prerogative
of
the
administration
to
create
this
I.
Don't
think
it's
a
judicious
way
to
do
so
without
cooperating
more
directly
with
Council.
We've
seen
this
pattern
from
the
administration,
so
I
wonder
if,
when
the
cpci
actually
needs
to
get
our
approval
to
disperse
money,
whether
we're
going
to
be
willing
to
do
so
because
we
weren't
consulted
in
its
organization
and
that
this
motion
even
has
to
be
conducted.
Thank
you.
L
B
F
B
B
B
Ordinance
2310
to
amend
Title
20,
unified
development,
ordinance
of
the
Bloomington
municipal
code
regarding
amendments
and
updates
set
forth
in
Bloomington
municipal
code,
20.03
and
20.04.
The
synopsis
is
as
follows.
This
petition
contains
amendments
in
Chapter,
3
of
the
Udo
related
to
chicken
flocks
and
chapter
four
of
the
Udo
related
to
maximum
parking
standards.
K
Ahead,
thank
you:
Jackie
Scanlon
development
services
manager,
the
plan
commission
heard
case
Zeo
1223
on
their
April
10
2023
at
their
April
10
2023
hearing
and
voted
to
send
the
petition
to
the
common
council
with
a
positive
recommendation
with
a
vote
of
nine
zero.
K
So,
as
you
know,
you
saw
earlier
this
year,
our
annual
update
to
the
Udo
changes
to
parking
maximum
table
table
4-10
was
originally
part
of
our
proposal
and
the
plan
commission
voted
to
remove
the
parking
maximum
proposal
from
the
large
update
so
that
we
could
have
provide
more
information
and
discussion
with
them.
K
K
So
there's
one
amendment
in
this
proposal
related
to
chicken
phlox,
because
our
current
use
specific
standards
reference
a
chicken
flock
and
the
proposal
is
related
to
allowing
multiple
chicken
flocks,
so
that
has
been
changed
to
make
that
plural,
so
there's
a
chicken
flock
portion
and
then
a
much
larger
parking
maximum
portion
which
I'll
discuss
table
4-10
in
the
Udo
lists
all
of
the
uses
from
the
use
table
of
chapter
three
and
assigns
maximum
parking
standards
to
those
uses
So.
K
One
question
we
received
at
plan
commission
is:
why
do
we
need
parking
maximums?
So
there
are
a
couple
of
reasons.
The
first
we
discussed
is
that,
obviously
for
consistency
for
petitioners,
it
is
a
little
bit
odd
that
47
of
our
uses
have
maximums
and
the
remainder
do
not
so
proposing
to
add
maximums
for
consistency,
so
that
the
expectation
is
that
we
do
have
maximums.
K
We
were
able
to
look
through
the
history
of
the
Udo
update
that
we
did
with
the
consultant
when
we
updated
the
code
in
2019
and
2020,
and
when
we
looked
at
the
previous
Udo
that
was
in
place
in
2019,
a
number
of
the
uses
that
are
now
listed
as
No
Limit
had
person-based
limits
at
that
time,
which
means
based
on
number
of
people,
for
example,
working
at
the
business,
and
that
is
a
hard
standard
for
us
to
regulate.
So,
for
example,
Vehicle
Impound
storage
was
listed
as
one
space
per
employee
on
largest
shift.
K
So
we
had
an
number
of
uses
like
that
in
the
old
code,
We
Believe,
going
back
through
those
documents
that
the
consultant
recommended
as
a
way
to
address
person-based
limits
that
they
change
the
a
number
of
those
uses
to
No
Limit
and
that
the
use
itself
would
be
limiting.
So
we
are
proposing
to
change
those
No
Limits
to
site-based
regulations,
as
are
other
uses.
I
mentioned
already
have
so,
for
example,
a
site-based
would
be
a
certain
number
of
parking
spaces
per
square
foot
of
the
use
of
the
building.
Again.
K
Secondly,
we
believe
that
the
proposal
is
in
line
with
the
policy
guidelines
of
the
comprehensive
plan
which
want
us
to
minimize
the
area
of
land
dedicated
to
parking
or
basically
storage
of
vehicles,
and
in
this
case
the
code
uses
that
you
see
that
we're
discussing
tonight
are
mostly
temporary
storage
of
vehicles,
so,
for
example,
going
into
a
business
and
parking
while
you're
there
not
for
long-term
planning
for
storing
of
your
cars.
So
something
again,
that's
not
full
all
the
time.
K
K
The
first
time
we
talked
with
plan
commission,
where
they
decided
to
take
the
parking
maximum
out.
We
had
a
member
of
the
public
attend
that
hearing
with
questions
about
specific
uses.
So
you
can
see
some
of
those
uses
reflected
in
the
staff
report,
for
example
jail.
So
we
want
to
make
clear-
and
we
did
to
the
plan
commission
as
well,
and
they
would
like
to
make
clear
to
you
that
we
are
not
trying
to
regulate
out
the
use
of
Motor
Vehicles.
K
K
We
looked
at
uses
that
are
already
regulated
in
the
Udo,
the
47
other
uses,
and
we
looked
at
uses
that
we
are
proposing
to
regulate
and
how
those
are
regulated
in
other
communities
or
how
how
we
also
looked
at
guidance
from
our
professional
planning
organization,
the
American
Planning
Association,
on
what
they
would
recommend
for
regulating
those
uses.
That
again,
we
might
not
have
similar
uses
here
to
compare
to
so
first
trying
to
compare
the
uses
without
maximums
internally
and
also
with
other
communities
in
Indiana
and
then
especially
for
again.
K
The
uses
that
we
don't
have
here
so
some
of
the
ones
that
were
raised,
for
example
like
Stadium,
how
those
are
treated
in
other
communities
and
basically
all
of
our
uses
that
currently
lack
maximums.
So
those
that
type
of
analysis
was
included
in
your
packet
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
about
those,
for
example,
for
the
jail
comparison.
K
We
showed
how
many
spaces
they
that
jails
that
were
in
the
process
of
being
built
or
proposed
in
the
last
I
believe
three
years,
how
many
spaces
those
facilities
actually
proposed
for
their
site,
as
well
as
how
many
R
regulation
would
allow
and
then
Stadium
again
was
another
one
that
was
raised.
So
we
included
examples
for
that
as
well,
so
those
are
kind
of
specific
uses
and
I
believe
hold
on
just
a
second.
K
We
wanted
to
I
think
one
of
the
tables
was
a
little
bit
off,
so
we
can
address
that
in
a
bit.
Sorry,
I,
don't
have
it
right
there
in
front
of
me,
I
will
say
so.
K
Those
are
very
specific
uses,
but
for
the
more
General
Uses
that
we
see
every
day,
we
tried
to
compare
the
use
like
what
is
actually
going
on
in
the
building
for
each
use,
with
similar
uses
that
were
already
in
code
that
are
comparable,
where
we
haven't
seen
issues
with
the
number
of
parking
spaces
allowed
for
those
uses,
so
that
is
kind
of
our
starting
point.
We
are,
of
course,
open
to
changing
these
numbers.
K
You
know
if
anyone
here
has
specific
ideas
and
additionally,
we
do
track
variances
for
this
particular
regulation
that
we
do
for
a
parking
maximum.
So
since
2020
we've
had
five
parking
maximum
variances
three
were
for
restaurants,
so
we
have
proposed
in
this
update
to
increase
the
allowable
parking
maximum
for
restaurants,
for
example,
when
we
have
those
variances,
we
ask
those
petitioners
to
provide
us
information
about
their
uses
in
other
communities
and
how
many
spaces
are
being
used
per
hour.
For
example.
K
So
the
department
believes
that
adding
maximums
to
the
allowable
amount
of
surface
parking
for
all
uses
that
we're
proposing
is
in
line
with
City
goals
that
work
to
encourage
Green
Space.
It
encourages
space
to
be
used
by
people
in
buildings,
as
opposed
to
designating
that
space
for
vehicles
only
while
still
allowing
area
for
vehicle
parking
again,
which
we
know
many
places
need,
but
allowing
areas
for
the
other
places
as
well.
K
So
I
think
one
thing
we
wanted
to
particularly
address
with
planned
commission
and
then
again
here
tonight
was
a
question
that
was
raised
by
a
planned
commission
member
that
this
proposal
is
especially
important
for
those
areas
of
town
that
have
yet
to
be
developed.
So,
for
example,
when
you
saw
the
rezone
for
the
Fullerton,
Pike
and
I-69
property,
it's
quite
large
and
while
we
have
impervious
surface
coverage,
maximums
that
do
also
limit
development
on
a
site
for
large
sites,
for
example
of
that
scale.
Meeting.
K
So
if
they
were
to
choose
a
use
that
didn't
have
a
maximum
parking
limit,
then
they
would
basically
be
able
to
put
in
as
much
parking
as
they
could
fit,
which,
on
a
site
like
that,
would
be
acres
and
Acres
of
parking
which
doesn't
seem
to
us
to
be
compatible
with
the
long-term
goals
of
the
community.
So
this
regulation
helps
because
we
do
have
a
handful
of
sites
like
that
that
will
hopefully
develop
within
the
lifespan
of
the
studio.
K
K
So
when
we
see
uses
that
we
think
may
end
up
needing
a
lot
of
parking,
they
may
need
to
be
more
creative
and
think
about
a
model
of
shared
parking
or
structured
parking
so
that
they
can
use
the
land
that
they
have
in
a
more
efficient
way,
as
opposed
to
if
they
need
600
parking
spaces
because
they're
building
a
stadium.
And
now
we
have
three
or
four
acres
of
parking,
so
that
is
something
that
we
think
the
comprehensive
plan
clearly
does
not
desire.
K
So
those
situations
we're
trying
to
avoid
those
sort
of
outliers
that
are
less
common,
but
we
do
think
will
occur,
and
so
the
department
thinks
that
the
numbers
that
we
have
proposed
are
reasonable
enough,
that
we
will
be
able
to
catch
those
outliers
and
again,
we
are
always
open
to
change
items.
Go
to
the
board
of
zoning
appeals.
We
hear
from
members
of
the
public
and
we
track
those
things,
and
we
come
to
this
body
annually
to
make
changes,
and
we
are
open
to
doing
that
as
more
information
presents
itself.
K
H
Yes,
thank
you.
Miss
gallon
the
increased
in
maximums
for
the
fitness.
Centers
I
always
find
it
ironic.
When
people
you
know
have
to
drive
to
a
fitness
center,
they
could
get
fit
on
their
way
there.
Of
course,
I
do
the
same
thing,
but
I
just
was
wondering
if
you
could
talk
about
the
variances.
You
said
there
were
a
few
that
have
been
approved
or
have
been
considered
for
the
current
Maxima
maximums
sure.
K
So
we
had
a
oh
shoot:
a
fitness
center.
There
is
a
storage
unit,
a
storage
unit
use
is
going
in
on
South
Walnut
and
there's
an
existing
fitness
center
and
they
share
development
space.
And
so
when
the
storage
unit
came
through,
the
fitness
center
is
old.
It
was
developed
under
old
regulations
and
it
has
a
lot
of
parking
so
because
they
were
building
a
new
building.
They
need
to
bring
the
site
into
compliance
and
they
were
going
to
need
to
lose
parking.
K
So
they
were
able
to
basically
indicate
through
a
parking
study
that
at
that
location,
because
there's
no
street
parking,
because
there
is
an
opportunity
for
shared
parking,
because
it's
largely
surrounded
by
residential
in
because
of
where
it's
located
related
to
many
of
its
users.
K
It's
not
you
know
in
the
downtown,
where
there's
opportunity
for
structured
parking
that,
because
of
the
way
the
use
operates
where
they
have
classes
that
are
stacked,
that
they
often
that
they're,
basically
almost
always
over
capacity
for
the
spaces,
and
so
they
so
the
way
that
they
show
that
to
us
is
not
just
telling
us
that
that's
true.
We
ask
them
to
do
parking
studies
over
the
course
of
a
week
for
different
days,
so
that
we
can
see
when
the
busier
times
are
and
then
what
usually
happens.
K
This
happened
as
well
with
the
restaurants
that
we've
done
is
then
we
analyze
those
numbers
and
try
to
come
to
a
number
that
we
think
is
reasonable.
That's
still
meeting
as
close
to
our
goals
as
we
can,
but
trying
to
be
realistic
with
them
being
able
to
operate
the
business
as
well.
L
Yes,
thank
you
for
this.
First
of
all,
a
quick
procedural
question:
did
the
department
talk
with
the
chair
of
the
parking
commission
about
having
the
commission
review
this.
L
I'm,
a
big
fan
of
all
the
strikethrough,
no
limits
in
here
I
count
more
than
50
No
Limits
that
are
struck
through
here.
But
I
am
a
little
concerned
about
the
few
that
are
being
increased.
In
particular
fitness
centers,
which
has
already
been
asked
about,
and
restaurants
I'm
trying
to
understand.
Is
it
because
is
the
Department's
policy
to
increase
these
because
people
who
own
restaurants,
fitness
centers,
have
simply
asked
for
it
or
applied
for
variances
and
that
we're
trying
to
come
into
to
to
meet
current
practice?
K
N
K
For
the
restaurant
one,
for
example,
we've
had
three
over
the
course
of
those
years
where
they
were
able
to
demonstrate
to
us
that,
at
their
particular
locations
in
other
cities
and
for
each
I
believe
it
was
multiple
locations.
So
not
just
one
more
but
five
more
that
if
they
that
in
locations
with
similar
characteristics
to
theirs
that,
in
order
for
their
business
to
be
viable,
that
they
needed
more
parking
than
we
allow.
K
K
It
is
always
right-wing
competing
interests
between
wanting
to
encourage
wanting
to
encourage
more
bike,
ped,
which
you
know
we
do
in
a
lot
of
other
ways
wanting
to
be
realistic
for
what
the
business
interests
need
to
be
able
to
operate
and
trying
to
bring
them
closer
to
kind
of
our
goals
for
more
green,
less
vehicle
focused,
and
so
we
kind
of
work
with
each
one
and
the
variants.
L
Well,
the
dilemma:
I
find
myself
in
when
I
hear
that
explanation
is
that
in
essence,
we
are
and
I
don't
know
what
the
cities
were
that
and
where
they
claim
that
in
their
other
other
cities,
that
they
had
this
demand
for
parking,
but
where
it
makes
us
subject
ourselves
to
the
equivalent
of
the
Udo
in
those
cities
and
if
they
have
lower
standards
than
we
do
for
or
or
less
ambitious
goals
than
our
Udo
than
how
are
we
not
basically
factoring
it
out
to
them?
L
I
mean
can't
they
figure
out
a
way
to
make
10
spaces
per
I
mean.
How
do
you
think
10
spaces
per
thousand
is
too
much
can't
they
I
mean
can't
they
I
mean
this
is
the
same
issue
with
the
CVS.
In
Nashville
years
ago,
we
were
trying
to
change
the
design
of
the
CVS
on
the
North
side
that
was
built
on
the
North
side.
L
We
didn't
want
it
to
not
abut
one
of
the
streets
and
the
CVS
comported
with
the
standards
in
the
city
of
Nashville,
the
town
of
Nashville
right
over
here,
because
they
have
much
higher
architectural
standards.
So
why
are
we
allowing
the
I
mean?
Can
you
can
you
speak
to
those
other
cities?
Are
they
more
or
less
dense
than
Bloomington?
Do
you
know
anything
about
their
udos.
K
Yeah
so
I
would
say
no.
We
did
not
look
up
their
zoning
regulations.
We
did
try
to
ask
for
we.
Typically.
What
we
typically
do
is
ask
for
facilities
that
are
similar
characteristics,
for
example,
so,
for
example,
for
restaurants,
on
West
Third,
no
street
parking
no
opportunity
for
shared
parking.
You
know
near
a
highway
like
that.
That's
why
they're
locating
here,
how
do
those
similar
businesses
operate
in
other
locations
and
I
would
say:
we've
seen
examples
from
towns
that
are
similarly
sized
to
ours
or
bigger
or
smaller.
K
We
kind
they
kind
of
run.
The
gamut
I
totally
understand
your
perspective.
I
would
say
we
still
think
the
numbers
are
reasonable.
We
did.
We
weren't,
like
gonna,
just
take
the
door
off
because
they
said
they
needed
more
space.
We
have
had
the
conversation
with
a
number
of
restaurants
who
want
more,
and
you
know
we
have
to
we.
We
always
still
leave
what
we
think
we
determine
what
we
think
is
a
reasonable
amount
and
that's
what
we
always
recommend
to
the
board
of
zoning
appeals
or
that's
what
we're
recommending
here.
M
First
I
will
say:
I
think
it
makes
sense
for
this
to
go
through
the
parking
commission
first,
but
you
are
looking
at
about
the
recommendation
for
the
hour.
Udo
is
like
25
of
the
number
of
seats,
and
you
gave
four
examples.
M
A
F
F
No
one
is
doing
that
so
I,
don't
know
it
just
seems
nice
to
like
not
require
it,
even
though
I
even
think
a
stadium
build
is
like
not
something
necessarily
in
our
future.
K
F
K
Anyway,
right
agreed,
so
one
thing
that
came
out
at
the
first
plane
commission
hearing
I
think
and
that
we
tried
to
do
is
that
these
numbers-
these
proposed
regulations,
are
very
liberal,
like
they
are
regulations,
because
I
do
think
for
the
outliers.
It's
important
that
we
have
them
in
there,
but
they
are
still
quite
high
and
then
the
other
things
in
the
Udo
will
on
smaller
Lots
help
to
keep
that
number
down
like
they
do
in
town,
the
maximum
I'm.
Sorry,
the
required
landscape
space
and
the
maximum
impervious
surface
coverage.
K
We
are
happy
for
you
to
change
these
numbers.
I
think
we
are
trying
to
weigh
a.
There
was
a
bit
of
a
shock
value
to
add
these
in
some
parts
of
the
community
and
so
trying
to
weigh
what
that
we
think
that
they're
necessary
with
the
desires
of
you,
know
a
wide
swath
of
people.
M
It
does,
and
I
mean
just
with
the
stadium
Focus
again
like
I,
would
I
would
assume.
Of
course,
the
stadium
in
Lafayette
has
parking
next
to
it.
My
guess
right,
but
like
then
it's
most
likely
that
the
market
is
providing
that
and
the
stadium
did
not
have
to
since
they
have
zero
spaces.
So
if
we
decrease
hours
it
would
potentially
be
like
something
the
market
might
provide
if
it
didn't
seem
sufficient
for
the
use.
K
K
They
could
build
a
parking
garage
or
you
know,
go
into
an
agreement
with
another
business
and
have
a
parking
garage,
so
that
obviously
doesn't
probably
apply
to
many
of
our
smaller
businesses,
but
to
some
of
those
that
could
be
larger
and
more
impactful
based
on
their
site,
they
may
be
looking
to
do
structured
parking
and
then
structured
parking
is
only
limited
by
the
design
requirements
for
a
garage
not
by
a
total
number
of
spaces.
L
O
It
if
there
are
amendments
members
want
to
propose
tonight
those
need
to
be
in
writing.
If
the
council
adopts
any
of
those
amendments,
any
changes
would
be
sent
back
to
the
planned
commission
for
their
consideration.
The
plan
commission
gives
that
an
up
down
vote
within
45
days.
If
the
plan
commission
rejected
any
Amendment,
it
would
come
back
to
the
council
one
last
time
for
another
up-down
vote.
L
Okay,
and
what
is
the
deadline
for
this?
When
did
it
come
certified
to
us.
O
This
was
certified
to
the
council,
April
18th.
L
Okay,
so
there's
90
days,
there's
time
for
this,
not
only
to
I
mean
we
have
90
days
to
send
it
back
to
the
plan
commission,
not
for
the
plan
commission
to
make
to
for
everyone
to
do
a
final
decision
on
it
right,
correct.
O
L
O
L
L
That,
okay,
good,
because
I
you
know,
would
like
to
see
it
reviewed
by
the
appropriate
commissions.
This
is
a
big
change,
although
again
I'll
say
that
well,
I'll
leave
it
for
comments.
I've
got
other
questions,
I'll
hold
them.
Thank
you.
H
Yes,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
Ms
ganlin
about
the
maximums
for
stadium
parking.
You
said
that
that
this
was
generated
some
some
public
concern.
H
Do
you
mean
that
some
people
wanted
no
maximums
for
stadium
parking,
okay
and
as
council
member
rosenbarger
mentioned,
you
know
this
may
never
come
up
since
IU
is
excluded,
but
wouldn't
we
want
if
I
guess,
I'm
I'm
struggling
with
allowing
so
much
surface
parking
if
a
stadium
were
to
be
built
by
some,
you
know
for-profit
entity,
wouldn't
we
want
to
encourage
them
to
have
structured
parking
for
almost
all
of
it.
I
don't.
K
Yeah,
so
what
we
tried
to
do,
as
I
mentioned
was
look
at.
We
looked
at
the
other
communities,
but
then
we
also
looked
at
some
of
the
guidance
from
the
American
Planning
Association
and
for
one
space
for
every
four
is
a
minimum
in
a
number
of
places
and
you'll
recall
a
number
of
years
ago.
I
would
pre-2015
around
that
time.
When
we,
when
we
updated
the
maximum
parking
in
the
old
code,
they
were
our
minimums
and
then
we
made
them
maximums.
K
So
we
felt
that
it
was
appropriate.
We
felt
that
four
to
one
would
work
better
for
our
community
as
a
maximum
instead
of
a
minimum.
But
yes,
if
you
all
decide
that
it
should
be
less
I,
don't
think
that's
something
we're
opposed
to
again
we're
trying
to
kind
of
weigh
all
the
interests
did
that
answer
your
question.
H
A
Let's
go
to
public
comment,
quick
show
of
hands
in
in
Chambers
I,
or
stand
up
and
walk
to
the
podium.
That's
a
good
clue
and
Mr
Lucas.
Can
you
extend
our
invitation
on
Zoom?
Please.
O
U
Evening
Council,
this
is
Chris
brimji
from
the
greater
Bloomington
Chamber
of
Commerce
and
a
parking
commission
member
tonight,
I
I,
don't
know
if
I'm
supporting
the
the
amended
Udo
as
a
whole
is
complicated.
I,
don't
know
chicken
flocks,
but
I
did
want
to
speak
to
the
restaurant.
Maximum
increase
I
been
to
a
few
bza
meetings
where
this
this
came
up
and
the
sort
of
the
case
that
I've
heard
is
also
from
our
members
is
an
issue
where
there
are
no
street
parking.
U
It's
not
in
a
neighborhood
of
like
on
West
3rd
Street
and
it's
employees
that
need
to
park
there
and
it
becomes
sort
of
difficult
based
on
their
business
model.
On
how
many
you
know,
employees
can
then
Park
and
with
this
labor
market,
how
it
currently
resides
it's.
It's
that's!
That's
an
issue
and
I
know
parking
in
general,
I've
talked
with
council
members,
Smith
on
Downtown
parking
for
service
workers,
so
I
I
think
the
this
is
something
that
is
that
should
be
duly
considered.
U
Has
an
increase
for
those
maximums
I
I,
can't
sort
of
speak
to
some
of
the
other
areas,
on
stadiums
and
and
and
whatnot,
but
I
think
at
least
the
the
restaurant
one.
If
you
kind
of
consider
those
outside
the
city
core,
it's
something
that
should
be
should
be
increased
thanks.
V
A
L
G
No,
it
was,
it
was
controversial
in
the
beginning
when
the
we
had
no
limits
in
it
and
then
individuals
who
were
related
to
the
development
Community
wanted
it
to
be
different,
and
and
so
we
had
a
very
robust
discussion
and
then
we
came
back
a
few
weeks
later,
and
this
was
kind
of
the
the
compromise
that
was
worked
out
between
some
of
the
members
of
the
plan
commission.
G
With
the
the
plan,
the
plan
commission
group
from
the
city-
and
it
seemed
like
it
was
the
workable
solution,
because
the
No
Limits
made
everybody
uncomfortable
and
so
I,
there's
not
much
more
than
that
council
member
volan.
It
was.
It
was
some
robust,
good
thought,
and
then
this
is
the
kind
of
the
compromise
solution
that
came
out
of
it
and
made
it
made.
Everybody
feel
a
little
bit
better.
L
Well,
I
mean
before
I,
make
a
motion
I'd
like
to
comment
on
what
I've
heard,
but
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
postpone
the
consideration
of
this
ordinance
for
I
mean
I
I'm,
not
making
the
motion
yet
I'm,
just
expressing
the
motion
I'd
like
to
make,
which
is
just
postpone
it
for
a
month
to
the
first
or
second
session
in
June.
That
will
give
time
for
this
to
be
heard
by
the
parking
commission,
which
would
be
appropriate.
We've
heard
two
different
angles
on
it
and
we
can
have
a
robust
debate
there.
L
This
is
a
a
significant
issue
that
the
commission
was
set
up
to
consider,
but
it
also
will
allow
time
to
develop
an
amendment
and
I
mean
we
could
postpone
to
next
week.
Yeah,
but
I
think
that
would
be
much
to
I
mean
the
plan.
Commission
deliberated
for
quite
a
while
on
this
and
I
think
that
it's
a
big
enough
change.
That
I
mean
again
I
want
to
say,
I
endorse
the
vast
majority
of
the
changes,
we're
putting
limits
where
there
weren't
limits
before,
but
there's
a
couple
of
increases,
especially
the
one
about
restaurants.
L
That
concerns
me.
This
is
the
stadia
is
a
questionable
one
as
well,
so
I
think
we
should
take
more
time
on
it,
and
so
what's
the
10
70
24
31,
the
June
7th
meeting,
might
be
a
good
enough
time,
if
not
the
June
14th
meeting,
but
I'd
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
postpone
and
I'm
agnostic,
whether
it's
June,
7th
or
June,
14th
I
leave
it
to
the
schedulers
so
I'll
make
that
motion.
I
put
I
moved
to
postpone
consideration
of
this
ordinance
to
the
meeting
of
June
7th.
A
E
L
I
I
think
this
broader
question
of
when
things
go
to
boards
and
commissions
and
whatnot
and
my
general
preference
is
for
things
to
go
through
commissions,
gets
a
little
more
interesting
when
there
are
multiple
potential
commissions
that
could
review
something.
So
this
went
through
the
plan
commission,
which
is
sort
of
the
designated
body
statutorily
to
review
and
recommend
changes
to
the
unified
development
ordinance,
not
to
say
this
isn't
within
the
purview
of
the
parking
commission.
It
certainly
is,
but
but
I'm
a
little
less
convinced
of
the
need
to
send
it
to
them.
I
In
this
case,
on
the
basis
of
kind
of
redundancy,
I
guess
I,
think
of
it
more
as
people
trying
to
stay
in
spheres
that
are
that
are
not
redundant
or
overlapping.
So
it
doesn't
mean
that
the
parking
commission
wouldn't
have
role
in
policy
development,
around
parking
and
other
things,
but
or
initiating
policy
development.
I
guess
I'm
curious
for
staff's
perspective,
with
respect
to,
as
well
as
the
maker,
the
Motions
perspective
perspective,
with
respect
to
our
approach
on
bringing
legislation
through
commissions
when
there's
potential
overlap
or
redundancy
among
commissions.
K
You
know
I
am
a
staff
person
for
the
statutory
boards
and
commissions
in
planning,
so
plan.
Commission
Board
of
zoning
appeals,
hearing
officer
those
types
of
things,
so
I
am
not
as
familiar
with
what
can
and
can't
go
to
parking
commission
I
think
they
can
ask
to
see
whatever
they
want.
I
think
it's
probably
ultimately
something
that
I
would
need
to
discuss
with
director
Robinson,
because
obviously
this
is
a
code
update
that
I
don't
think.
K
We've
sent
anything
through
parking
Commission
in
the
past
for
updates
to
title
20.,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
the
department
preference
on
adding
additional
you
know.
Regulatory
review
is.
E
I
L
But
first
I'd
like
to
point
out
that
ordinance
1811
was
a
product
of
the
parking
commission
to
change
code.
Title
20
is
no
different.
It's
a
piece
of
code,
the
fact
that
it
has
a
different
statutory
process,
because
it
simply
means
that
there's
greater
scrutiny,
not
lesser
scrutiny
but
I
second
I
would
suggest
that,
with
all
due
respect
to
the
plan
commission,
their
focus
is
you
know:
land
use,
planning,
they're,
not
necessarily
focused
on
the
economic
impact
of
of
parking,
the
commission.
The
parking
commission
doesn't
think
about
traffic
or
safety.
L
It
just
thinks
about
capacity
and
it's
very
much
a
measuring
economic
impact,
but
I
mean,
if
anything,
the
planning
department
which
staffs
the
parking
commission
should
be
thinking
that
anything
having
to
do
with
the
capacity
of
parking
which
this
code
very
much
is
about,
should
be
going
to
the
parking
commission
before
it
goes
to
plant
commission,
not
us
having
to
do
it
after
finally,
I'll
point
out
that
Ms
Gamlin,
when
talking
about
parking,
perhaps
didn't
think
about
it,
but
she
she
characterized
the
way
that
people
thought
about
it
in
terms
of
the
word
need
that
people
need
parking
and
I
would
argue.
L
That
need
is
another
way
of
saying
claiming
a
demand,
for
there
are
people
who
are
claim
I
mean
these
restaurants
are
claiming
that
they
have
a
demand
for
parking,
but
that's
we
don't
use
the
word
need
at
the
parking
commission
anymore.
We
talk
about
supply
and
demand,
because
otherwise
I
mean
need,
is
sort
of
implying
that
you
must
have
parking
and
it
must
always
be
a
certain
minimum.
So,
for
those
reasons,
I
thought
that
it
was
important
that
we
take
a
step
back.
We
have
plenty
of
time
in
this
process.
L
It'll
give
the
commission
a
chance
to
weigh
in
much
like
the
traffic
commission
weighed
in
on
another
ordinance
tonight
and
it'll,
give
us
a
chance
to
respectfully
develop
any
amendment
that
might
be
appropriate.
Thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
one
comment,
I
will
say
well,
I
won't
get
into
the
need
and
supply,
and
all
that
many
of
us
that
drive
vehicles.
We
need
parking,
okay
and
we
don't
sit
on
those
commissions,
but
we
are
out
here
in
the
city.
We
look
for
Park
and
we
try
to
do
business.
We
take
care
of
stuff
and
we
need
parking.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
a
debate
on
how
much
and
all
that
but
need
is
need.
Now.
My
question:
Miss
Scanlon,
if
recall
me
and
I,
didn't
say
it
in
my
nose.
C
L
Councilmember
Sims,
no
one
wants
to
get
into
a
debate,
but
you
say
need
is
need
you're
saying
you
need
parking.
What
I
hear
is
you're
demanding
parking
and
I
get
it.
If
that's
the
only
way
you
get
around,
but
not
everybody
gets
around
that
way
and
I
would
respectfully
disagree
that
you
know
if
you
want
to
make
it
that
simple,
you
can
I,
don't
think
it's
that
simple
and
I
would
actually
ask
that
you
consider
your
words
in
this
in
this
case,
I
think
it
makes
a
difference.
Thank
you.
A
D
Yes,
I
just
wanted
to
hear
from
the
staff's
perspective
on
the
on
the
recommendations
postpone.
K
Okay,
I
I,
would
say,
I
think
as
we've
demonstrated,
we
want
to
get
it
right.
So
if
this
body
thinks
that
sending
that's
parking,
commission
is
going
to
help
that
happen,
then
that's
fine
I
do
want
to
clarify
just
based
on
some
comments
by
councilmember.
Roland
parking
is
a
land
use
issue.
It's
definitely
a
land
use
issue.
It's
a
land
use,
so
it
is
completely
within
the
purview
of
the
plan
commission
to
make
those
decisions
and
have
that
discussion
in
almost
everything
they
see
with
little
exception
has
parking
in
it.
K
So
if
we're
say,
if
you
or
all
are
saying
that-
because
this
is
over
the
threshold
where
it's
you
know,
it's
100
parking
we're
talking
about,
and
so
that
should
go
to
parking,
commission
I
think
that's
different
than
saying
issues
related
to
parking
should
go
to
park.
All
issues
related
to
parking
should
go
to
parking
commission
and
that
plan
commission
doesn't
have
a
purview
there
because
they
do.
But
you
know
I
I,
guess
I'm
a
little
I'm
a
little
to
me.
K
Parking
commission
is
a
new
thing
for
me:
I,
don't
that's
not
something
that
my
side
of
the
department
works
well
on.
So
there
are,
you
know,
I,
don't
know
if
assistant
director
Rosenberger
might
have
a
comment.
K
I
think
we
would
prefer
that
the
recommendations
sent
by
the
plan
commission
and
recommended
by
the
staff
be
approved
tonight,
as
we've
said,
but
again
we
do
want
it
to
be
right.
So
if
the
you
know,
majority
of
you
think
that
you
would
like
more
input,
then
we
are
completely.
You
know
on
board
with
making
that
happen
as
well.
Thanks.
H
Yes,
my
support
for
the
motion
is
not
so
much
about
having
it
reviewed
by
the
parking
commission.
I
think
that
I
would
agree
with
councilmember
Flaherty
that
we
need
to
consider
as
a
body
the
role
of
our
different
boards
and
commissions
and
have
a
more
regular
consultation
with
them
and
kind
of
not
do
it
legislation
by
legislation,
but
in
this
case
my
reason
for
supporting
the
delay
is
that
I
would
like
to
explore
some
amendments.
H
I
think
that
I
would
I
would
like
to
explore
a
decrease
in
the
maximum
for
stadiums
and
even
restaurants.
I
understand
that
there
were
three
variances
approved
for
restaurants.
There
are
three
cases
where
the
city
found
that
there
was
a
good
case
to
allow
more
parking.
H
I,
don't
see
anything
wrong
with
that
process.
Let
us
stick
with
the
current
maximum
and
then
the
restaurant
make
a
case.
If
there's
no
on-street
parking,
no
other
parking
nearby,
they
can
make
that
case
and
it
can
be
granted
just
like
the
the
three
in
in
the
recent
past
so
anyway.
Those
are
my
thoughts,
so
this
this
time
would
allow
us
an
opportunity
to
develop
amendments.
Thank
you.
O
I
wanted
to
just
make
a
point
of
order
here,
a
more
appropriate
motion,
maybe
to
table
the
ordinance
that
would
comport
with
guidance
from
Roberts.
That
generally
recommends
not
postponing
an
item
of
business
beyond
the
next
regular
session.
That
would
allow
the
council
to
take
this
up
at
any
later
meeting
upon
emotion,
it's
a
little
more
cumbersome,
but
if
the
council
learns
that
there's
a
reason
to
take
this
up
earlier
than
than
June
7th
I
realize
there's
only
one
one
other
meeting
but
scheduled
before
then.
O
L
L
I
take
Mr
Lucas's
point
and
I
agree.
I'm
going
to
I,
see
Ms
rosenbacher
here
I'm,
going
to
ask
her
for
a
comment
in
a
minute.
I
do
want
to
say
and
I
will
I
will
amend
the
motion,
but
first
I
want
to
say
I
hope
no
one's
trying
to
characterize
what
I'm
saying
is
that
some
other
parking
commission
should
supplant
the
plan
commission
simply
that
it's
there
for
a
reason.
One
of
the
reasons
it's
there
is
I
hope
you'll.
L
All
remember
that
the
ordinance
that
established
it
called
for
merchants
to
be
on
the
commission
for
a
reason,
as
Mr
Angie
pointed
out
I'm,
you
know,
while
I
have
a
certain
opinion
about
certain
line
items
here,
I'm
trying
to
look
out
for
what
might
be
seen
as
both
sides
of
the
issue.
That's
another
reason
why
we
would
want
to
take
parking
specific
questions
to
the
parking
commission
and
just
to
give
one
more
illustration
of
why
this
is
significant.
I
had
spoken
to
a
developer
of
very
large
complexes
about
how
much
parking
it's
a.
L
He
in
this
case
had
to
put
in
a
project
that
he
put
up
a
few
years
ago
and
his
parking
was
always
maximized
as
much
as
possible
for
multi-family
development
and
but
I
asked
him
why
he
couldn't
reduce
that
number.
He
said
he
pointed
to
other
parking
complexes
that
have
unlimited
parking
and
says
I
have
to
compete
with
them,
and
so,
unless
we
take
steps
to
rethink
the
assumptions
we
make
about
parking
at
every
different
type,
we're
going
to
keep
having
to
sort
of
fight.
L
W
Rosenbarger
assistant,
director
of
plain
and
transportation
I
wanted
to
clarify
a
little
bit
on
commissions
and
sort
of
how
we
what
we
have
sent
to
different
commissions
within
planning
and
transportation.
We
tend
to
send
Title
20
items
just
to
plan
commission
and
maybe
a
reason
that
gets
challenging
and
I
would
say
it
is
challenging
to
coordinate
review
of
Title
20
items
with
other
commissions
is
because
I
mean.
As
you
understand,
plan
commission
does
have
the
authority,
but
it's
also
so
broad.
W
We
rely
on
plan
commission
to
have
that
broad
land
use
expertise
and
that
when
we
start
touching
on,
and
so
we
invite
more
people
to
comment
and
to
be
a
part
and
weigh
in
via
the
plan
commission
process,
because,
for
example,
you
know
when
you
say
it's
a
climate
change
issue,
we're
like
okay,
should
it
also
go
to
the
the
commission
on
sustainability?
Should
we
be
taking
this
to
the
environmental
commission
if
it
is
about
Transportation?
Would
we
also
take
it
to
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
safety
commission?
W
If
it's
about
people
turning
off
of
Third
Street
or
maybe
we
would
ask?
Why
isn't
there
on
street
parking
on
Third
Street?
That
could
be
parking
commission
and
the
traffic
commission,
and
so
it
is
the
intersection
of
a
lot
of
land
use,
questions
and
and
interfacing
issues.
So
in
our
department
we
typically
Title
20
stays
with
planned,
commission
and
I
think
we
haven't
taken
it
to
the
commissions
before
to
the
other
commissions,
whereas
the
traffic
parking
and
bicycle
and
pedestrian
commission
weigh
in
and
oversee
title
15.
W
L
The
other
two
commissions,
because
it
doesn't
always
deal
with
title
15,
it
does
have
concerns
that
fall
into
Title
20,
but
I
would
also
say
that
you
know
when
councilmember
Smith
told
me
that
this
was
a
big
discussion
at
plan
commission.
It
was
something
of
a
surprise
to
me.
I
wasn't
aware
that
it
was
happening.
I
can't
follow
everything,
but
we
do
have
in
the
plan
commission
process
a
90-day
window
that
would
allow
us,
at
least
after
the
plan
commission
has
taken
it
up
to
consult
with
the
appropriate
commission
for
a
title.
L
20
change
I
mean
what
I'm
suggesting
is
not
while
I
suggested
that
the
the
parking
commission
could
be
consulted
before
the
plan.
Commission
I
can
see
how
that
might
be
onerous,
but
it
certainly
can
be
consulted
after
we've
seen
that
we
have
the
time
to
do
it.
So
I,
don't
think
it's
anyone's
done
anything
negative
here.
A
D
O
C
B
A
D
C
B
The
synopsis
is
as
follows:
this
ordinance
adopts
an
amended
traffic
calming
and
Greenways
program.
A
traffic
calming
and
Greenways
program
sets
the
standard
for
the
prioritization
and
placement
of
neighborhood
traffic
calming
and
related
traffic
control
devices
and
requires
a
consistent
procedure
for
resident-led
and
staff-led
processes.
A
B
E
D
That
I
have
discussed
previously
that
led
me
to
sponsor
this
ordinance,
but
I'm
happy
to
address
it.
If
my
colleagues
would
like
to
discuss
I
regard
this
as
a
honest
proposal
to
Simply
re-establish
Council
participation
into
the
traffic
alming
and
green
lease
process
recall
that,
prior
to
2019,
we
had
the
ntsp,
which
is
the
neighborhood
traffic
safety
program.
D
So
what
this
entails
is,
as
I
said,
to
to
re-establish
Council
participation
and
the
conclusion
of
the
process,
but
it
would
behoove
us
to
be
involved
throughout
the
process,
obviously,
at
the
beginning
and
and
and
at
the
end
throughout
the
process,
so
I
see
it
as
a
check
and
balance
we
prior
to
2019.
It
was
a
given
that
the
council
was
involved
in
any
permanent
alterations
of
roadways,
recall.
Currently,
we
we
still
are
anticipated.
D
In
some
extent,
we
just
approved
a
series
of
stop
signs,
for
instance
that
in
some
ways
has
I
think
much
less
significant
than
than
some
of
the
proposed
Greenway
programs.
So
these
projects
can
be
well.
Let
me
establish
why
I
think
Council
should
be
involved.
These
Greenway
projects
can
be
very
expensive.
D
The
proposal
for
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
Greenway,
for
instance,
is
probably
in
the
neighborhood
of
about
four
hundred
thousand
dollars,
but
staff
would
know
better
at
this
point,
and
so
it
is
in
part
a
responsibility.
I
think
of
the
councils.
I
said
in
terms
of
its
budgetary
fiduciary
responsibility
over
songs,
the
expenditures
that
are
that
at
large.
D
It
allows
us
to
evaluate
priorities
along
the
way
too.
We
have,
for
instance,
many
different
possibilities
for
Greenways.
For
instance,
we
have
areas
of
the
city
that
are
very
safe
to
walk
and
bike.
We
have
other
areas
that
are
that
are
not
so,
and
so
it
allows
us
to
evaluate
those
and
particular
projects
with
respect
to
priorities
and
determine
if
there
are
opportunity
costs
that
should
be
considered.
D
D
We
have
a
unique
role
in
that
respect
in
terms
of
our
responsibility
obligation
to
constituents
to
be
responsive
to
their
to
their
needs
and
their
their
opinions,
and
so
I
think
we
have
a
unique
role
to
play
in
that
in
that
regard,
it
balances
power
between
the
mayor
and
the
council.
Currently,
the
American
obviously
has
control
over
the
planning
and
transportation
department.
D
The
mayor
also
appoints
the
majority
of
the
members
of
the
bike
and
pet
safety
commission
that
under
the
tcgp
would
be
the
final
body
for
approval.
The
bike
and
pet
safety
commission
is
also,
although
I
think
they
do
find
work
and
have
us
expertise
in
matters
of
biking
infrastructure.
Again
we
have
our
concern.
Probably
our
greatest
concern
is
is
budgetary
as
as
the
council
so
I'm,
certainly
respectful
of
the
expertise
of
planning
staff
and
the
input
of
the
bike
commission.
D
This
is
simply
a
step
to
provide
further
expanding
Democratic
input
from
residents
in
the
process
to
provide
a
better
outcome,
and
but
besides
the
aforementioned
reasons,
you
know
this
is
something
that
was
long
established
for
20
years.
Council
Council
input
and
participation
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that
and
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
W
And
transportation
department
didn't
do
a
full
presentation,
but
just
prepared
some
comments.
Staff
is
not
supportive
of
the
ordinance
change
and
we
have
discussed
that
a
bit
at
earlier
at
an
earlier
council
meeting
other
than
the
signatures
requirement
that
was
removed,
it
hasn't
changed
and
our
stance
hasn't
changed.
So
a
few
points
just
to
bring
attention
to
I
want
to
reiterate
that
the
traffic
calming
and
Greenways
program
does
not
identify
what
is
or
is
not
a
neighborhood
Greenway
in
our
community.
W
W
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
about
how
projects
were
prioritized,
how
we
go
about
selecting
and
so
forth,
resident
the
resident-led
projects
allow
residents
to
identify
traffic
calming
needs
and
uses
objective
evaluation
criteria
to
base
decisions
on
when
on
which
project
should
be
selected.
We
see
a
lot
of
demand
for
the
resident-led
program
and
even
this
year,
I
believe
there
are
11
projects
that
have
been
requested,
the
traffic
calming
and
when
we
Implement
traffic
calming
projects
throughout
the
community,
the
toolbox
of
options
is
limited.
There
is
a
toolbox.
W
We
can
use
different
tools
to
do
that,
but
we
do
talk
about
the
different
tools
with
residents
when
we
do
neighborhood
Greenways
and
with
the
resident-led
projects,
but
they
are
based
on
professional
design
and
Engineering
standards.
I'm
not
allowed
as
a
planner
to
design
a
speed
bump.
We
rely
on
our
Engineers
to
do
that
and
often
we
pay
paid
Design
Consultants
to
do
that.
Who
are
engineers
as
staff.
We
think
the
process
is
working.
We
have
done
four
projects.
W
One
is
in
process
with
this
project
on
one
of
the
projects,
the
Hawthorne
and
Weatherstone
neighborhood
Greenway,
there's
an
optional
third
meeting
and
we
held
the
third
meeting
we
could
tell
the
project
was
contentious.
We
were
getting
lots
of
feedback
from
residents
and
we
held
a
third
meeting
for
that
project.
W
The
result
of
that
third
meeting
I
would
say
was
that
a
lot
of
residents
supported
or
shared
support
of
the
project
and
some
residents
shared
that
they
appreciated
the
changes
staff
had
made
I
can't
say
that
all
the
residents
or
100
of
people
said
they
want
it
to
happen
in
that
meeting,
but
the
ones
who
said
we
appreciate
the
changes.
You
have
made
noted
that
staff
had
done
a
lot
to
change
that
my
impression
was
the
residents
who
still
didn't
like
it
did
not
want
it
to
be
a
neighborhood
Greenway.
W
So
we
do
make
annual
budget
requests
for
design
and
construction
of
these
projects.
That
is
usually
actually
within
the
engineering
budget.
Since
we
have
since
we're
two
separate
departments,
we
collaborate
with
engineering
and
that's
where
those
requests
come
in
and
we'll
add
a
note
from
Council
Members
council
member
rolla's
presentation.
W
W
If
a
third
meeting
is
necessary,
then
the
design
gets
all
the
t's
crossed
and
the
eyes
dotted
and
it
goes
to
bid
through
the
bidding
process
and
we
try
to
structure
it
so
that
we
can
put
the
projects
out
to
bid
at
the
end
of
the
calendar
year
in
order
to
be
constructed
the
next
year.
All
these
things
do
kind
of
take
a
surprising
amount
of
time.
We
hear
that
from
residents
too,
but
we
have
work
to
set
it
up
so
that
projects
can
be
installed
within
about
18
months
of
being
approved.
W
The
reasons
we
set
that
up
and
then
we
try
to
make
the
process
predictable,
is
when
you
work
with
people
and
design
something
with
them
and
talk
about
something
happening
in
their
neighborhood.
It's
easy
to
forget
that
or
it's
easy
for
a
design
to
get
stale.
If
there
are
multiple
years
in
between
so
we
did
create
the
whole
program
trying
to
think
about
the
realities
of
construction,
Cycles
bidding
and
some
predictability
in
that
model.
W
Some
concerns
we
have
with
how
this
is
drafted
is
that
it
there's
no
shared
criteria
or
evaluation
criteria
for
staff
to
work
from.
So
if
projects
come
to
council,
how
can
we
know
ahead
of
time
if
something
is
likely
to
be
approved
or
not
approved?
There's
also
no
required
time
clock
from
when
a
design
is
ready
to
win.
W
Council
would
need
to
introduce
that
in
the
way
we
see
with
rezone
requests
that
if
it
doesn't
come,
it's
automatically
approved
and
we
don't
know
either
what
would
happen
if
the
idea
is,
if
Council
would
vote
projects
up
and
down
or
would
Council
be
amending
a
design
to
remove
a
speed
cushion
or
to
change
something
that
has
been
done
with
a
lot
of
expertise
and
care.
If
you
move
a
speed
cushion
or
you
move
a
bump
out,
it
has
repercussions
for
drainage
and
other
things
so
staff.
We
are
open
to
changes
on
in
the
program.
W
If
people
are
commenting
tonight,
I
would
be
interested
to
hear
from
residents
how
they
feel
about
more
meetings.
I
know,
sometimes
it's
seen
that
more
meetings
give
more
opportunities,
but
often
it
can
be
a
burden
we
hear
from
presidents.
So
there's
a
lot,
you
know
it's
8,
40
and
Council
meetings
are
really
difficult
for
people
to
predict
and
I
think
it's
just
a
real
challenge
right.
W
It's
very
difficult
to
get
this
dialed
in,
but
anyone
who
was
looking
at
this
on
the
agenda
has
no
idea
what
time
it
will
be
heard
and
what
time
they
should
show
up
and
how
long
they'll
have
to
stay,
and
we
do
know
that's
it's
really
hard
for
people
to
be
able
to
have
that
time
and
a
lot
of
people
don't
have
nine
to
five
jobs
who
work
in
the
service
sector.
So
it's
something
to
consider
some
changes
we
think
could
be
useful.
W
We
would
like
to
work
on
making
sure
Council
knows
which
projects
we're
pursuing
each
year.
I
think
there
are
lots
of
ways.
We
could
do
better
with
that.
What
if
we
plan
an
annual
presentation
on
Greenways
and
traffic
calming
so
we
can
talk
about
which
projects
are
being
constructed
that
year
and
which
projects
are
lined
up
to
be
designed.
I
feel
like
that
would
honestly
be
really
great
a
great
time
to
talk
about
the
projects
in
the
works
and
make
sure
the
council
members
are
aware
of
what's
in
the
pipeline.
W
It
would
also
help
because
you
all
would
know
ahead
of
your
constituents
and
help
us
spread
the
word
about
projects
too.
Other
options
would
be.
If
you
did
a
vote,
we
would
love
for
it
to
happen
at
the
beginning.
Not
at
the
end.
Voting
at
the
end
is
so
much
uncertainty
and
an
example
it
it
does
take
staff
time,
which
is
public
money,
but
also
money
that
we
allocate
in
the
budget
for
the
design
contracts.
D
D
Yeah,
thank
you.
Okay,
awesome,
I'll
speak
up
too
so.
I
think.
The
way
to
prevent
the
uncertainty
is
exactly
what
Miss
Rosenberger
just
stated,
which
is
to
update
the
council,
for
instance,
as
we
often
have
been
updated
by
staff
about
proposed
projects
and
I.
Think
then,
then
the
uncertainty
is
removed
for
her
and
for
her
staff
and
for
the
council
as
well
as
we
proceed.
D
If
council
is
involved
only
at
the
beginning,
then
we
have
really
little
responsibility
for
the
outcome
at
the
end,
and
while
it's
true
that
we
approved
a
green
waste
plan,
it's
very
ambiguous.
What
a
Greenway
can
be.
It
can
be
a
anything
from
a
marked
site
path
on
South,
Downs
and
and
Sheridan,
which
functions
very
well.
D
So,
lastly,
I
want
to
take
exception
to
the
third
meeting
that
was
pursued
as
an
option
that
was
only
pursued
after
I.
Think
I
introduced
the
tcgp
revision
proposal.
D
The
second
meeting
was
very,
very
contentious:
I've,
never
seen
such
a
negativity
expressed
by
the
public
at
a
public
meeting
and
I
think
it
was
because
they
didn't
they.
They
were
blindsided
by
what
the
outcome
was
proposed
to
be
and
when
they
asked
staff
they
were
told
by
staff
that
the
bidding
process
would
occur
within
a
week.
D
So
there
wasn't
going
to
be
a
third
meeting
at
all.
That
was
done.
You
know
post-hoc
after
this
debate
and
legislation
was
being
formed.
So
again,
I
I
think
that
Council
involvement
appeared
for
20
years.
I
think
that
this
is
something
that
we
we've
been
involved
in
the
past
and
Mr
Lucas.
Isn't
it
clear?
Isn't
it
true
that
all
title
15
projects
are
reviewed
and
passed
by
us.
O
D
Right
so
so,
this
just
re-establishes
our
involvement,
as
we've
had
for
two
decades
prior
to
2019..
Thanks
for
the
opportunity.
W
You
I
just
want
to
qualify
or
clarify
because
it
seems
like
some
of
our
intent
was
stated
staff
fully
intended
on
having
a
third
public
meeting
for
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
project.
Not
thanks
and
I
know.
It
was
mentioned
that
these
are
considered
expensive
projects
in
terms
of
infrastructure
and
transportation.
Neighborhood
Greenways
are
a
great
price.
A
sidewalk
costs
three
to
four
million
dollars
per
mile
to
build
a
neighborhood.
Greenway
might
cost
four
hundred
thousand
I,
don't
know
if
it
could
be
up
to
six
hundred
thousand
for
a
mile.
W
So
that
is
an
incredible
price
for
for
the
level
of
infrastructure
and
I
know
this
one
even
like
a
far-fetched.
One
I
think
the
Fourth
Street
Garage
cost
about
30
million
dollars.
So
in
terms
of
infrastructure
it
is,
it
is
a
pretty
good
deal,
I
would
say
and
in
terms
of
how
things
are
approved.
It's
true
Council,
of
course,
approves
everything
in
title
15.,
but
rarely
is
the
design
brought
as
an
approval.
So
even
with
the
council,
sidewalk
committee
I
know
that
council
members
approve
Where
the
Sidewalk.
W
We
design
the
sidewalk
and
approve
where
it
will
go,
but
they
don't
come
back
and
reapprove
to
make
sure
that
something
specific
happened
or
examine
the
cross
slope
or
things
like
that,
so
sidewalks
actually
aren't
codified
their
locations,
so
those
don't
even
come
through
in
title
15,
but
they
are
approved
via
Council
sidewalk,
so
just
to
clarify
that
most
of
the
things
in
title
15
are
more
of
oh
I'm.
Sorry,
what's
the
word
like
traffic
regulations
are
a
big
part
of
title
15.
thanks.
M
I
think
I
had
a
question
I
think
for
staff.
I
know
it's
been
a
long
time
since
we
have
been
here,
but
the
last
time
we
talked
about
this
staff
put
forth
some
recommendations.
I
think
you
said
tonight
too
about
getting
approval
earlier
in
the
process
and
also
another
one
was
that
traffic
calming
projects
require
one
council
member
to
write
a
letter
of
support
and
I
think
a
recommendation
was
to
require
more
council
members
to
write
a
letter
of
support
for
a
traffic
common
project
and
I
just
wanted
to
know.
W
No
I
don't
believe
those
options
have
been
discussed.
I
am
aware
with
the
resident-led
process
right
now.
It
requires
a
letter
from
one
council
member.
Yes,
that's
it.
M
Is
that
something
you
would
still
recommend
increasing
the
number
of
council
members.
W
I
would
say
we're
open
to
it.
I
do
know
it
I've
heard
from
some
community
members.
It
can
be
challenging
to
get
in
touch
with
with
council
members.
I
know
you
all
are
very
busy
and
there's
a
lot,
but
it
would
be
so
we're
open
to
it,
but
I
think
it
would
be
great
to
hear
from
people
as
to
their
experience
with
that
too.
L
Yes,
thank
you.
Thanks
for
the
presentation
and
the
responses,
the
debate
there
Casper
Morello,
would
you
say
that
council
is
still
in
charge
of
roadways
in
general,
regardless
of
Greenways?
In
other
words,
one
of
the
implications
of
your
proposal
would
be
that.
Well,
why
don't
we
also
regulate
the
design
of
any
street
that
gets
built
in
a
new
subdivision?
Any
street
that
gets
altered.
L
D
I
think
the
roadways
are
probably
more
predictable,
as
I
said,
there's
a
lot
of
ambiguity
about
what
a
Greenway
is
so
currently,
the
greenway
that
is
proposed
is
essentially
altering
an
existing
Greenway.
The
Greenway
already
exists
in
Hawthorne
Highland,
it's
existed
for
some
time.
It's
marked
with
a
sign.
It's
a
low
volume,
low
traffic,
Street,
I,
I
bike,
it
I
know
other
people
that
bike
it
and
actually
walk
in
the
street
without
problem.
D
So
this
particular
proposal
is,
is
a
very
large
one
with
a
lot
of
engineering
aspects
to
it,
and
that
is
an
alteration
of
the
roadway
that's
going
to
affect
it's
going
to
affect
the
roadway
for
other
vehicular
traffic
and
so
forth.
I
think
the
predictive
quality
of
a
roadway
is
pretty
well.
You
know
established
as
a
residential
Road.
D
L
Call
it
ambiguous
when
I
think
you
mean
complex,
that
Greenways
are
more
complex
than
typical
roads,
but
like
I
I'm,
not
seeing
why
the
complexity
of
an
effort
to
change
a
road
to
make
it
more
accessible
by
non-motor
vehicle
traffic
raises
it
to
a
level
that
it
should
be
considered
by
the
council
when
everything
else
goes
through
an
executive
process.
That's
well
known
and
well
established.
L
You
know
that
there's
a
reason
we
changed
the
ntsp
a
few
years
ago,
and
it
was
for
this
reason.
So
that's
why
I'm
trying
to
understand
why
you
would
undo
this
change
only
for
this
class
of
of
a
roadway.
D
L
D
As
if
well
let
me
put
it
a
different
way,
there
is
a
spectrum
of
engineering
projects
that
could
be
applied
to
create
a
Greenway
I
lived
such
a
Greenway
and
that
Greenway
has
sharrows
and
is
marked
as
a
Greenway.
That's
all
it
is
so
it's
a
it's
a
very
low
budget
Greenway
and
it
seems
to
function
so
in
terms
of
fiduciary
oversight.
I
think
that
I
would
say
that
we
need
to
evaluate
in
terms
of
misapplication
of
resources
and
opportunity
costs
in
terms
of
over
an
engineering
projects.
D
D
We
did
give
it
up,
but
I
think
that
what
I'm
seeing
right
now
is
it's
a
deficient
process
and
that's
what
I'm
hearing
from
many
many
people
constituents
of
mine.
So
the
project
is
sufficient
because
it
did
not
include
sufficient
public
input.
D
L
Okay,
well,
I
think
that
that
that
concern
has
been
answered
adequately
by
staff.
There
was
a
third
meeting.
It
was
a
much
calmer
meeting
but
again
you're
bringing
up
the
the
you
know.
We
also
eliminated.
D
It
wasn't
going
to
happen.
As
I
said,
we
have
an
email
from
staff
saying
that
the
the
project
was
going
out
to
bid
after
the
second
meeting,
so
the
so.
The
third
meeting
happened
essentially
because
well
I
mean
it
was
probably
a
mix
of
a
lot
of
outraged
people,
but
also
I,
think
my
proposal
for
a
tcgp
alteration.
W
Yes,
I
forgot
to
respond
to
that
earlier,
so
I
am
not
aware
of.
It
became
I,
guess
a
rumor
or
confusion
that
people
thought
the
project
was
going
to
bid
a
week
after
the
second
meeting
it
wasn't
I,
don't
know,
I
can
double
check
with
engineering
staff
because
they
do
that
part.
More
I
am
happy
to
double
check
on
that
it
kept
getting
said
by
residents
at
the
second
meeting.
W
We
did
not
send
the
project
to
bid.
It
was
not
Our
intention,
I
guess
you
could
say
in
some
places
a
product
it
could
have
gone
amazingly
well
and
then
it
could
have
gone
to
bid
I,
don't
think
it
was
ready
to,
but
it
wasn't
and
I
don't
think
we
said
this
project
is
going
to
bid
in
one
week
period,
so
I'm
confused
on
it
and
interested
forward.
D
I'll
have
the
resident
that
inquired
send
it,
but
I
was
at
that
second
meeting
and
I
inquired
of
Ms
Rosenberger.
If
this
project
proposed
project
was
going
to
go
to
the
bike
and
pet
safety
Commission,
which
was
I
think
about
two
weeks
after
that
second
meeting
for
review
and
presumably
approval
and
she
responded
Yes.
D
So
to
me
that
was
an
expedited
process
now
between
the
first
meeting,
which
was
simply
a
schematic
of
where
the
greenway
would
go
in
the
second
meeting,
which
was
an
entirely
already
engineered
project,
there
was
no
opportunity
for
the
for
the
public
to
be
aware
of
of
what
alteration
was
going
to
happen.
That's
why
there
was
such
anger.
L
I
Sounds
like
maybe
there's
some
confusion
about
what
going
to
bid
means
or
what
going
to
bike
ped
safety
commission
means.
Do
you
think
it's
possible
that
council,
members
or
residents
misinterpreted
the
next
step
in
the
process,
as
quote
unquote
going
to
bid?
That's
it.
Okay,
thanks.
W
Sure,
honestly,
I
don't
have
enough
information,
so
I
would
be
happy
to
see
that
email
that's
being
referenced,
I
guess
also
as
staff.
Sometimes
it's
a
challenge
because
it
does
depend
on
how
the
meeting
goes
and
how
ready
the
project
is,
but
we
were
following
the
adopted
process,
so
the
the
design
of
a
neighborhood
Greenway
is
presented
at
the
second
meeting
in
order
to
get
feedback
on
the
design.
W
If,
if
that
meeting
goes
well
and
people
don't
raise
any
major
concerns,
it
can
move
forward
from
that
second
meeting
to
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
safety
commission
for
review
and
approval.
It
does
require
a
30-day
comment
period
from
before
it
can
be
heard
by
the
bicycle:
pedestrian
safety,
commission
and
once
a
design
is
finalized,
it
can
go
to
bid
I'll
have
to
find
more
details.
I
do
remember
that
residents
said
this
project
is
going
to
bid
in
a
week,
and
we
did
not
know
why
they
thought
that
so
I'm
I'm
just
unsure.
I
Small
follow-up,
if
that's
okay,
which
is
that
I
believe
councilman
roller
referred
to
sharrows
on
the
ground
as
a
Greenway
and
what
staff's
opinion
with
respect
to
what
makes
a
Greenway
or
not
and
whether
or
not
sharrows
constitute
a
Greenway.
Thank
you.
H
Yes,
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
safety
commission
met
on
Monday
and
considered
this
proposal.
Could
somebody
from
the
staff
please
tell
us
what
they
decided.
W
I
was
checking
if
the
staff
liaison
wanted
to
the
bicycle
pedestrian
safety
commission
did
review
it.
They
voted
unanimously
in
opposition
to
the
changes
and
discussed
if
I'm,
remembering
from
the
minutes,
the
not
preferring
the
political
nature
of
something
going
to
council
compared
with
using
other
criteria
to
evaluate
projects.
W
H
You
I
also
wanted
to
hearken
back
to
the
days
before
the
to
the
tcgp
when
we
had
the
neighborhood,
what
was
it
called
neighborhood
transportation
and
Greenways
program,
or
something
like
that
and
I
remember
when
we
we
voted
to
replace
that
program
with
the
the
tcgp.
There
were
many
reasons
for
it.
Can
you
review
please
for
us
some
of
the
reasons
for
replacing
the
old
program.
W
Sure
the
old
program
think
resulted
in
almost
zero
successful
traffic,
calming
projects
being
implemented.
It
required
residents
to
vote
and
return
ballots
and
actually
similar
I
think
to
Historic
preservation,
designation.
It
isn't
about
the
number
of
ballots
returned
and
what
that
vote
is
it
to.
In
order
for
a
project
to
happen,
it
had
to
receive
51
of
eligible
votes
so
out
of
all
the
ballots
that
were
mailed,
not
just
out
of
the
ballots
returned.
W
So
sometimes
you
could
receive
more
guesses
for
a
project
to
move
forward,
but
you
didn't
receive
enough
per
the
number.
So
I
did
I
used
to
describe
that
as
a
higher
threshold
than
how
we
elect
President
of
the
United
States,
because
that's
well
actually
electoral
anyway,
and
then
all
the
projects
were
approved
at
Council
as
a
final
step
as
well,
but
I'm,
not
sure
I,
know
it
was
before
my
time.
At
the
city,
there
was
a
lot
of
controversy
over
traffic
calming
on
West
3rd
Street
and
I
heard.
W
D
Can
I
just
respond
to
that
because
I'm
not
I'm
not
trying
to
to
be
clear?
This
particular
ordinance
revision
doesn't
contain
the
threshold.
Any
change
in
the
threshold
number
for
neighborhood
driven
drone
projects
and
I
I
also
know
of
projects
that
were
approved
that
have
been
very
effective
for
traffic
calming,
for
instance,
on
Circle
Drive
and
Sheridan
and
Mitchell
that
received
100
by
the
way
of
the
resident
support.
G
Thank
you,
Miss
Rosenberg,
thanks
for
the
presentation
and
talking
to
us
about
this,
because
it
is
it's
confusing
for
me,
even
though
I've
been
thinking
about
this
for
a
while.
With
with
all
these
different
things
going
back
forth,
is,
is
there
a
Greenway
near
this
Greenway
that's
going
to
be
developed?
Is
there
already
an
existing
Greenway.
W
So
there
are
markings
on
the
ground
on
Hawthorne
and
signs,
because
basically,
what
we've
considered
the
threshold
for
something
to
be
a
Greenway
has
increased
over
time
as
there's
more
research
and
experience
from
other
cities
about
what
creates
a
more
comfortable
Street
for
people
walking
and
bicycling.
So
so.
W
G
T
G
Sure,
from
from
the
different
from
your
constituents,
but
what
is
the
majority
opinion
about
this
Greenway
project?
What
what
do
they?
D
Well,
those
in
the
neighborhood
I
would
I
would
judge
it's
well
over
90
percent.
Maybe
more
are
see
it
as
unnecessary
because
it's
already
a
low
volume,
low
traffic
volume,
low
speed,
Road,
that's
easy
to
walk
on
and
to
ride
bikes.
D
Currently
what
the
proposal
is
is
to
have
Hawthorne
go
through
to
Weatherstone
at
the
dead
end.
Currently,
what
exists
is
Hawthorne
and
Highland
Greenway,
so
you
go
from
Hawthorne
and
then
you
go
one
block
east
to
Highland
and
that
extends
to
Weatherstone
through
a
pathway.
So
the
pathway
already
exists,
one
block
east,
so
they
Wonder
with
the
priorities
of
the
city
and
the
amount
of
money
that
we
have
and
expand
expenditure
for
this.
D
You
know.
Why
is
this
such
a
high
priority
when
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
problem
and
yet
other
needs
are,
are
not
met
and-
and
they
said
specifically
at
the
time,
the
a
a
walk
signal
at
Hawthorne
and
Atwater
was
a
priority
and
because
there
was
a
a
faculty
member
who
was
killed
there
trying
to
cross
and
it's
a
dangerous
place
to
cross.
D
So
they
saw
it
as
an
opportunity,
cost
and
and
may
I
just
say,
Mr
Lucas
you,
you
were
in
possession
of
that
email
right
now,
I
sent
it
to
you.
I
think
you
got
you
had
others
send
it
to
you.
I
removed
the
name
of
the
person
who
sent
the
email
to
staff
because
I,
don't
I,
haven't
gotten
her
permission
to
display
her
name,
but
the
emails
from
Mr
robling,
so
you're
welcome
to
display
that
or
or
send
it
to
council
members.
A
I
keep
trying
to
remind
myself
that
that
this
ordinance
is
about
more
than
just
the
Hawthorne
Greenway,
it's
about
a
process
that
we
use
and
so
I
keep
trying
to
do
that
that
set,
and
with
that
in
mind,
it
would
be
helpful
to
me
to
hear
about
the
Hawthorne
Greenway
or
any
other
Greenway
that
you
could
think
of
that
you've
worked
on
and
this
is
directed
to
Ms
Rosenberger.
A
Could
you
share
some
examples
of
changes
you
have
made
based
on
Resident
feedback,
so
post
meeting
two?
If
you
will
what
are
some
examples
of
changes
you
have
made
in
response
to
resident
feedback.
W
Sure-
and
you
mean
generally
I-
can
do
from
a
few
projects
if
you'd,
like
a
few
projects,
is
great
sure
when
we
well
so
first
input
impacts
the
design
at
various
stages.
The
purpose
of
the
first
meeting
is
to
go
to
Residents
without
a
design
and
ask
what
we
should
know
about
their
street
and
neighborhood
that
we
might
not
know
so.
Sometimes
drainage
comes
up,
sometimes
how
people
use
different
paths
comes
up
or
with
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
Greenway.
W
Something
that
came
up
was
how
kids
play
in
the
woods
in
between
Hawthorne
and
Weatherstone,
and
that
was
important.
So
we
do
take
all
that
initial
information
into
consideration
to
make
the
first
draft
design
too.
So
then,
one
of
my
favorite
design
feedbacks
was
with
the
East
Allen
Street
Greenway.
W
Someone
told
us
that
she
bikes
her
children
most
places
that
she
goes
and
that
her
children
ride
in
a
bicycle
trailer
and
that
if
she
always
had
to
go
over
a
speed
bump
on
the
bike,
that
it
would
wake
up
her
kids
because
they
fall
asleep
a
lot
when
they're
biking,
because
they
go
a
lot
of
places
in
town.
So
she
asked
that
the
gaps
between
speed
cushions
be
wide
enough
for
a
bike,
trailer
carrying
a
child,
and
we
designed
for
that.
W
So
that
is
actually
a
design
standard
than
we've
used
on
all
the
Greenways
to
make
sure
people
biking
with
kids
can
fit
through
on
Hawthorne
Weatherstone.
We
heard
people
didn't
like
the
oh
I'm.
Sorry,
because
I
didn't
like
practice
with
the
design
before
I
came
so
I
might
like
honestly
flip
it
in
the
wrong
order.
But
it
was
that
people
either
didn't
like
the
bump
outs
more
or
didn't
like
the
speed
cushions
more.
W
So
we
changed
it
in
the
design
to
remove
some
of
them
and
to
use
the
tool
they
preferred
over
the
tool
they
didn't
want
to
see
as
much
but
I
kind
of
I.
Don't
remember
exactly
which
one
yeah
and
I'm
trying
to
think
of
more
one
time
with
a
resident.
There's
somebody
who
Gardens
a
ton
and
she
was
most
willing
to
have
a
bump
out
near
her
and
volunteered
to
put
her
gardening
into
the
bump
out.
So
that
was
a
consideration
with
the
design
as
well.
W
When
we
often
hear
or
something
with
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
was
residents
shared
how
Crossing,
First,
Street
and
Maxwell
were
barriers
to
them,
because
cross
traffic
doesn't
stop
on
those
streets,
but
Hawthorne
does
so
we
added
into
the
design
little
traffic
calming
on
Maxwell
and
First
Street.
We
call
it
Upstream
traffic
calming
so
that
Vehicles
would
be
traveling
at
a
predictable
speed
for
people
trying
to
cross
the
street.
So
those
are
some
of
the
examples.
I
can
come
up
with
yeah.
A
W
Yes,
I
mean
we
hear
conflicting
things
from
residents,
so
even
with
Hawthorne
Weatherstone,
some
residents,
I
wouldn't
actually
say
this
is
a
design
element,
but
are
they
don't
prefer
that
there
will
be
a
trail
connection
between
Hawthorne
and
Weatherstone
and
other
residents
Express
that
they
are
very
excited
about
that?
So,
inevitably,
there's
we're
not
going
with
what
somebody
has
asked
for.
In
that
case,
I'm
trying
to
think
of
others,
I
mean
I'll
have
to
think
on
it
honestly,
but
usually
we
do.
W
A
R
R
Is
that
kind
of
what
was
meant
by
that
statement
because
of
course
we
have
approved
a
lot
of
plans,
but
I
think
I'd
like
to
hear
a
little
bit
more
about
what
you
feel
is
an
elected
body's
responsibility
to
perhaps
alter
a
plan
if
it's
not
meeting
fiscal
or
if
it's
not
meeting
the
needs
of
our
constituents,
because
we
hear
from
them
as
the
elected
body
we
certainly
hear
from
them.
So
can
you
explain
a
little
bit
more
about
what
your
feelings
are
about
once
we
adopt
a
plan?
R
How
strictly
do
we
need
to
adhere
to
that
plan,
or
is
there
room
for
alteration
room
for
change?
The
council
absolutely
needs
to
have
some
say
in
is:
is
I
mean
you?
You
made
that
statement
and
I
just
kind
of
want
to
be
clear,
as
is
that
what
planning
and
transportation
feels
that
once
we
approve
a
plan,
there
can
be
no
changes.
That
Council,
then,
can
participate
in.
W
Sure
we
100
think
that
Council
can
approve
a
plan
and
then
change
a
plan
as
staff.
We
work
from
the
plans
as
working
documents
that
are
intended
to
be
implemented
so
I.
Don't
we
don't
have
other
processes
where
other
than
the
budget
approval
for
like
a
project
getting
approved
within
the
budget
would
be
another
helpful
example,
I
think
as
a
tool
of
a
project
getting
approved
and
reviewed
by
Council.
W
So,
for
example,
I
would
say
we
use
the
transportation
plan
and
expect
or
assume
that
the
expectation
is
that
Council
would
like
us
to
implement
it
as
with
the
community
and
that
we
try
our
best
in
the
plans
to
communicate
what
those
designs
will
be
so,
for
example,
I'm
assuming
through
Council,
plus
it's
Federal
funding,
there's
a
multi-use
path
on
17th
Street
and
that
multi-use
path
would
have
been
presented
in
the
budget
process
and
through
council's
fiscal
oversight,
would
have
voted
to
support
the
funding
for
the
multi-use
path
in
the
budget
and
to
make
our
match
for
the
mpo
project.
W
But
the
project
did
not
come
back
again
for
design
approval
to
make
to
review
the
design
of
the
project.
So
I
think
what
I
feel
concerned
about
is
the
separation
of
approving
a
project
and
approving
our
staff.
We
approving
the
project
versus
approving
the
design
of
a
project
at
the
end,
and
it's
so
I
would
say.
Yes,
of
course,
Council
can
amend
a
plan.
R
Is
it
fair
to
say
that
every
single
plan
within
any
adopted
plan
must
be
implemented,
or
do
we,
as
the
fiscal
body,
have
a
responsibility
to
kind
of
balance
the
you
know
what
is
the
priority
and
what?
What
are
we
hearing
from
our
constituents
and
how
do
we
then
adapt
those
plans
to
suit
the
needs
of
the
community
and
again
as
an
elected
body?
This
is
our
fiscal
responsibility
as
well
as
our
Representatives.
W
Logistically,
it
can't
all
happen,
and
it
can't
all
happen
immediately,
but
I
think
that's
where
project
prioritization
and
discussions
around
that
come
into
play,
but
I
do
want
to
differentiate,
approving
and
prioritizing
a
project
versus
reviewing
and
voting
on
the
design
of
that
project,
and
those
are
two
different
levels
of
oversight
in
terms
of
yes,
we
approve
move
forward
with
this
project
and
then
again,
yes,
we
want
to
review
the
exact
design
of
this
project
as
well,
so
I
don't
think
we
see
both
of
those
happening
with
other
infrastructure
or
capital
projects
for
that
matter.
H
Yes,
Ms
Rosenberger.
Could
you
speak
to
the
importance
of
Greenways
for
connectivity
in
the
city?
Aside
from
their
impact
on
the
people
who
live
along
the
greenway,
the
impact
on
people
getting
to
different
places
in
the
city.
W
Streets
are
tricky
right:
they
connect
us
throughout
the
whole
community,
and
so
when
we
do
notice
for
a
project
we
tend
to
even
with
the
traffic
calming
program,
the
notice
is
about
proximity
to
the
project.
The
challenge
with
transportation.
Is
you
don't
live?
W
You
don't
have
to
live
right
there
to
use
a
street
in
the
same
way
that
probably
people
who
live
next
to
switch
yard,
Park
get
a
lot
of
use
and
enjoyment
out
of
switchyard
park
and
also
the
whole
Community
can
go
to
switch
yard
Park
and
enjoy
that
Park,
neighborhood,
Greenways
and
also
streets
for
that
matter
are
very
similar.
The
people
who
live
closest
are
likely
to
use
it
more,
but
streets
are
a
network
and
we
need
to
use
them
to
get
across
our
entire
Community.
W
Neighborhood
Greenways
serve
a
function,
and
the
goal
in
the
transportation
plan
is
to
create
a
network.
We
call
like
a
Bare
Bones
Network
across
the
community,
so
that
people
who
live
south
of
Hillside
or
or
farther
south
can
connect
on
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
people
who
we've
heard
from
a
resident
who
uses
the
West
Allen
Street
Greenway,
but
lives
farther
west
than
the
greenway
also
and
wasn't
included
in
the
notice.
A
M
Thank
you.
I
wanted
to
ask
I,
guess
staff
stuff
about
public
input,
because
it's
really
important
to
me
that
public
gets
good
opportunity.
M
Talk
about
this
and
like
understand
and
like
talk
about
their
opinions
and
what
they
want
on
these
city
streets
like
reading
through
the
bike,
ped,
commission
minutes
and
I.
Think
some
people
in
there
made
some
good
points
that
there's
are.
There
are
a
lot
of
public
meetings
and
then
there's
the
bike,
ped
meeting
that
the
public
and
digital
Outreach
and
that
they
were
seeing
adding
Council
meetings
as
a
barrier
to
participation
and.
F
M
Know
some
people
talk
about
adding
council
meeting
is
more
opportunity
for
participation
and
like
well
I
guess
what
worries
me
is
in
district.
One
we've
had
we've
had
a
traffic
calming
project
up
in
Crestmont
with
the
Bloomington
housing
authority
and
and
they
just
applied
for
another
one,
and
these
are
folks
that
I
think
almost
never
come
to
City
Council
meetings,
but
I
think
it's
because
they
got
to
plan
meeting
times
with
you
all
that
like
they
could
do
this
so
just
like.
W
Sorry-
and
that
was
to
me
right-
not
okay,
yeah
deciding
on
the
exact
amount
of
well
I,
guess
I
would
differentiate
between
public
meetings
and
public
input.
Public
meetings
aren't
the
only
way
or
time
that
people
provide
input
on
projects
and
it
it's
one
way
and
we
do
try
to
get
the
word
out,
because
a
meeting
does
allow
for
honestly
great
conversations
and
a
more
useful
dialogue,
but
there
are
other
ways
that
people
give
input
and
that
can
be
through
an
online
form
through
comments
or
through
emails
about
a
project
as
well.
W
We
do
a
lot
of
projects
and
I
would
say:
the
engineering
department
is
the
one
sort
of
leading
the
capital
projects
and
I
think
people
have
a
lot
of
Demands
on
their
time,
so
it
I
see
it
as
a
challenge
for
people
to
show
up
and
different
people
have
different
elements
of
their
life.
I
would
say
people
with
a
nine
to
five
or
who
maybe
don't
need
child
care
or
don't
have
children
it's
easier
for
them
to
come
to
meetings,
often
than
people
with
small
children.
W
People
who
are
working
other
hours
might
have
a
hard
time,
so
mainly
I
would
say
it's
a
challenge
to
get
the
word
out
about
meetings
and
it's
a
challenge
to
get
people
to
meetings
and
it's
a
challenge
to
separate
the
conversations
more
because
you
have
different
conversations
in
each
meeting.
So
sometimes
it's
even
fewer
meetings
can
be
better
when
you're
like
just
show
up
we're
going
to
have
one
conversation,
and
it's
really
important
to
come
to
this
one.
W
W
I'll
add
it
also
makes
it
unclear
when
they
should
come,
because
if
people
have
I
guess
we
all
have
limited
time,
which
one
is
the
meeting
they
need
to
come
to.
Do
they
need
to
come
to
all
four
or
all
five
do
they
need
to
only
show
up
to
one
it's
on.
It
is
difficult
and
that's
difficult
to
communicate
to
people.
F
L
Mr
Rallo,
you
said
that
we
have
an
obligation
to
the
needs
of
our
constituents,
but
there
was
no
referendum
among
every
voting
citizen
on
this
proposal
of
any
kind.
Does
your
statement
include
constituents
who
do
not
express
their
needs
directly
to
you.
L
D
Oh
yeah,
absolutely
yeah.
For
instance,
we
were
just
talking
about
Equity
concerns.
If
you
looked
at
page
18
in
the
transportation
plan,
the
neighborhood
where
this
Greenway
that
already
exists-
that's
calm,
people
use
people
don't
think
needs
to
be
modified,
is
described
as
the
best
biking
infrastructure
in
the
city.
There's
a
heat
map
on
on
page
18..
So
there
are
other
needs
elsewhere
where,
where
you
know
more
engineered
by
biking,
spaces
are
needed
for
people.
So
my.
D
L
Mean
I
don't
think
I
had
I
mean
like
you,
you
said
you
have
an
obligation
of
the
needs
of
our
constituents,
but
I
mean
as
contentious
as
that.
Second
Weatherstone
meeting
was,
did
it
represent
everyone?
L
Did
it
represent
everyone
who
is
a
citizen,
a
voting
citizen
affected
by
or
even
non-voting
citizen
like
you're,
making
a
claim
that
you
have
an
obligation
of
the
needs
of
your
constituents,
but
you're
only
talking
about
the
ones
who
show
up
and
are
loud
and
so
to
what
extent
do
people
who
are
either
not
loud
or
weren't
at
that
meeting
matter
in
your
assessment
of
the
situation.
D
Yes,
I
just
described.
Why?
Because
I
believe
you
know
there
was
an
argument
made
that
this
was
a
misplaced
investment,
and
so
you
know
when
you've
got
a
limited
amount
of
dollars
and
you
need
to
establish
biking
infrastructure
and
I.
I
was
the
chair
of
the
Platinum
bike
task
force,
I'm
I'm,
very
much
in
favor
of
biking
and
ped.
L
I've
never
seen
such
negativity
expressed
by
the
public
at
a
public
meeting
in
reference
to
the
second
Weatherstone
Greenway
project
meeting
I
have
seen
far
worse
protests
that
you
were
also
at
not
the
least
of
which
was
the
protests
against
the
Bearcat
that
interrupted
the
state
of
the
city
in
2018,
and
that
when
we
held
a
meeting
to
hear
the
protests,
this
chamber
was
full
of
people
who
were
very
angry.
So
how
do
you
reconcile
these
two
ideas
that
somehow
we
have
an
obligation
of
these
for
our
constituents?
L
But
we're
only
are
we
only
addressing
those
who
are
very
loud
and
those
people
who
who
either
don't
speak
up
or
who
are
too
quiet
to
speak
up?
Are
we
really
representing
them
when
we're
responding
to
the
loudest
people.
D
The
the
anger
was
manifest
because
the
the
people
felt
they
hadn't
been
consulted
and
there
was
no
time
for
input
and
you
should
have
I
think
in
your
inbox.
By
now
the
email
from
Ryan
from
planning
and
transportation
dated
October
18th,
where
it
says
the
bidding
would
begin
on
the
project
a
week
after
the
second
public
hearing
on
October
24th.
D
L
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
that
I
don't
see
the
mail
yet
it
may
have
if
it
was
forwarded,
it
might
be
dated
October
and
shows
up
in
October
in
my
list,
but
again
I
would
submit
that.
You
haven't
really
answered
my
question,
but
that's
it
for
now.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
E
W
Respond
and
clarify
councilman
Morello.
Thank
you
for
forwarding
the
email.
It
was
really
helpful.
It
is
an
email
that
staff
said
the
project
was
going
to
bid
in
a
week.
That
happened.
The
email
happened.
It
was
a
mistake
because
they
conflated
a
different
project,
which
was
the
Maxwell
Lane
traffic
calming
project.
We
clarified
it
at
the
meeting,
but
I
understand
it
was
stated
in
an
email,
and
that
is
very
confusing
and
I
know
that
residents
were
confused
on
that.
W
A
O
I
see
Four
Hands
already
up
on
Zoom.
If
there
are
now
five,
if
there
are
additional
members
of
the
public
on
Zoom,
that
would
like
to
comment
on
this
ordinance.
Please
use
the
raise
hand
feature
to
let
us
know
you
can
find
that
in
your
control
bar
under
the
reactions,
tab
or
the
more
tab,
you
can
also
send
a
chat
to
the
meeting
host.
To.
Let
us
know,
you'd,
like
to
speak,
looks
like
we're
now
up
to
seven
on
Zoom.
A
X
My
name
is
Jack
wallinger
and
I'm.
A
resident
of
elm,
Heights
and
I
oppose
ordinance.
2308
first
I
believe
that
the
city's
boards
and
commissions
play
a
really
important
role
in
our
city,
governance
and
policy
process
and
I
was
pretty
pleased
to
see
that
this
ordinance
was
sent
to
the
bike
in
pedestrian
commission
for
consideration
and
as
you're
all
aware
that
commission
voted
unanimously
to
recommend
a
no
vote
on
this
ordinance
and
I.
X
You
know
I
hope
that
you
all
consider
that
when
you
end
up
voting
on
this
ordinance,
I
also
speak
as
someone
who
regularly
commutes
by
bicycle
and
has
had
to
be
wary
of
motorists.
Traveling
at
unsafe
speeds
on
residential
streets
and
neighborhoods
such
as
First
Street
in
the
elm
Heights
neighborhood
and
higher
traffic
speeds
are
obviously
tightly
linked
with
higher
rates
of
pedestrian,
cyclist,
Fatality
and
as
Bloomington
experiences.
X
Increased
rates
of
traffic
injuries
and
deaths
I
think
that
unnecessary
obstruction
of
traffic
calming
measures
and
Greenways
in
our
neighborhoods
will
cost
lives
and
I
I
fear
that
ordinance
2308
will
add
a
layer
of
delay
to
this
process.
That
is
entirely
unnecessary
and
I
hope.
My
reasons
for
opposing
this
ordinance
are
clear
and
I
urge
every
member
to
vote
against
it.
Thank
you.
A
Y
Carol
Canfield
regarding
the
proposed
amendment
I,
would
urge
the
council
to
vote
in
favor
of
it.
I
think
it
is
important
in
general
that
the
more
eyes
that
see
proposed
plans
that
affect
the
public,
the
better
and
especially
the
eyes
of
the
council,
that
oversees
anything
affecting
the
city
as
a
whole,
and
that
certainly
includes
any
traffic
issues
that
arrive.
Y
It
concerns
me
that
the
council
was
removed
from
this
process
and
that
second
public
meeting
on
the
resident-led
proposal
process
was
eliminated
in
a
simple
majority
of
51
was
reduced
to
the
lesser
of
30
percent
or
24
affected
housing
units.
This
reduces
the
number
of
people
who
may
even
know
about
a
proposal.
Let
alone
have
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
it.
Y
Also
Network
users
who
may
use
the
affected
roadway
really
have
no
representation,
which
the
council's
oversight
and
input
would
restore
I'm.
Learning
that
the
fewer
people
who
know
about
a
project
or
a
proposed
project,
the
result
is
usually
not
necessarily
in
the
best
interests
of
the
populace
so
more
eyes,
not
fewer.
Please.
Thank
you.
Z
I'm
Tracy
b
I'm
a
walker,
a
biker
at
a
Transit.
This
is
really
high:
I'm,
a
walker,
a
biker
and
a
Transit
user
I've
even
been
known
to
drive
I'm.
Also
a
parent
and
The
Reluctant,
president
of
the
Maple
Heights
neighborhood
association,
a
neighborhood
that
is
full
of
children,
full
of
people
who
walk
bike
some
by
choice.
Some
not
we
are
in
desperate
need
of
traffic
calming,
if
not
sidewalks.
Z
Actually,
we
need
sidewalks,
but
sidewalks
are
expensive
until
recently
limited
City,
sidewalk
funds
were
a
political
process
and
Maple
Heights
did
not
benefit
as
much
as
other
neighborhoods.
Many
of
our
residents
aren't
as
politically
engaged
as
other
neighborhoods
they're,
not
they're
too
busy
they're
working.
They
have
children.
Z
Now
I
hear
the
introduction
of
making
traffic
calming
a
political
process
I'm
trying
to
lead
my
neighborhood
toward
taking
on
traffic
calming,
and
it's
daunting
we're.
Looking
at
years.
This
sort
of
added
layer
of
bureaucracy
will
slow
the
process
further
and
make
it
less
accessible,
less
Equitable,
not
more
so
I
would
urge
you
to
vote
against.
AA
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Mark
stosberg
I
just
happen
to
come
from
a
traffic
calming
meeting
with
the
Park
Ridge
East
neighbors
and
the
city
staff.
There
mentioned
explicitly
that
there
would
be
a
third
meeting
if
they
they
needed
to.
It
sounded
like
it's
a
standard
part
of
the
process.
Now
I
was
the
author
of
a
2020
sidewalk
Equity
audit
I.
That
report
analyzed
how
Equitable
the
city
council
had
been
funding
sidewalks
through
2004,
and
it
found
that
that
it
had
not
the
process
had
not
been
Equitable.
AA
In
particular,
there
was
a
almost
50
percent
of
the
projects,
went
to
one
District
district,
four,
currently
represented
by
Dave
Rollo
and
compared
to
best
practices
for
Equity
A
Fault
In.
The
current
design
was
the
political
override.
Even
if
there
was
an
objective
process
with
Equity
metrics,
the
city
council
could
throw
that
out.
The
city
council,
six
of
the
nine
positions
are
represented
to
specifically
advocate
for
a
particular
part
of
the
town
and
with
limited
funds.
It
is
in
their
job
description.
AA
I
mean
part
of
what
they
do
is
they
represent
an
area
to
bring
funds
there.
So
when
you
add
this
political
override,
if
you
represent
a
wealthier
part
of
town
where
people
have
more
time
to
pretend
to
participate
in
five
hours,
City
Council
meetings,
it
works
better
for
you.
If
you
have
a
system
that
has
a
district
with
more
people
who
believe
the
system
works
for
them.
That
works
better
for
you.
AA
But
if
you
want
a
more
Equitable
system,
then
that's
one
built
on
an
objective
criteria
that
does
not
have
a
political
override
at
the
end.
So
when
there's
a
suggestion
to
keep
doing
things,
how
we've
been
doing
them
for
the
last
20
years
when
it
comes
to
Transportation
Equity?
Well,
you
know
the
data
spoke
for
itself
that
that
system
was
broken.
It
was
not
Equitable
and
if
we
want
to
do
things
better
with
more
Equity,
we
move
need
to
move
away
from
a
system
with
political
overrides
towards
focusing
on
the
more
objective
system.
AA
A
V
Name
is
Katie
Yoder
and
I
am
commenting
to
express
my
strong
opposition
to
the
amendment
being
voted
on
tonight.
Excuse
my
voice.
I've
been
yelling
at
people,
speeding
down
my
street
just
kidding,
to
quote
a
neighbor
requiring
a
majority
of
city
council
members
to
vote
in
favor
turn
Solutions
into
a
political
popularity
contest.
V
Of
privilege,
rather
than
Solutions
Based
on
data
and
research,
please
also
consider
the
money
spent
in
salaried
City
Planning
staff
time
who
should
Professionals
in
their
field,
who
should
have
to
leverage
to
act
and
such
in
navigating
the
added
red
tape.
I've
heard
members
comment
on
too
much
top-down
big
government
and
giving
the
planning
department
too
much
power
and
Council
participation
has
gone
to
the
wayside.
V
It
is
important
to
note
that
this
body
has
already
approved
the
budget
approved
the
comp
plan
that
makes
safe
Greenways
a
priority
in
the
city
appointed
and
approved
members
of
the
bike,
and
pet
committee
approved
the
traffic
calming
program
guidelines.
The
oversight
has
happened,
you
all
were
there
adding
another
layer
of
bureaucracy
is
unnecessary.
An
impression
has
been
presented
by
some
council
members
and
residents
that
these
Greenways
fall
out
of
the
sky
and
are
suddenly
being
built,
and
this
is
simply
not
the
case.
In
fact,
I
can
speak
Ad
nauseam
about
the
process.
V
My
own
neighborhood
applied
for
resident-led
calming
and
now
are
part
of
a
half-led
Greenway
project.
I'm,
a
I'm,
a
member
of
the
public
and
I,
feel
very
engaged
in
the
process
to
comment
on
what
Miss
rosenbarger
said
about
the
burden
on
residents
to
attend
meetings.
Tonight,
I've
missed
swim
lessons
with
my
kids
bedtime
and
soon
my
own
bedtime
and
I
promise.
You
I
don't
want
you
to
be
hearing
my
voice
right
now,
because
it
sounds
awful
and
I've
got
some
immense
privilege
in
being
here,
I've
been
participating
in
this
process
for
years.
V
In
my
neighborhood
and
I
know,
not
everyone
has
the
bandwidth
to
attend
more
meetings.
I
will
know
and
I'm
sorry
to
do
so,
but
this
feels
pertinent
to
this
process.
Our
own
District
Council
representative,
was
unresponsive
to
our
request
in
our
to
write
us
a
letter
and
we
had
to
reach
out
to
an
at-large
member.
V
But
if
you
want
to
continue
to
participate,
come
to
the
meetings
hot
off,
the
presses,
like
Mark
stasberg,
said
I
just
biked
over
here
from
our
own
Greenway
meeting
in
Park
Ridge
East
tonight
down
the
seven
line,
which
was
great
even
at
this
early
stage,
and
there
was
a
representative
from
sorry
I'll
wrap
up
here-
we're
not
going
to
get
exactly
what
we
want
every
time
and
I'm
sorry
to
the
neighbor
that
didn't
get
what
they
wanted.
But
this
is
not
the
case.
Citywide
I
am
participating.
I
am
here.
AB
Of
course
they
don't,
but
they
need
some
and
they've
proven
it.
You
know,
for
instance,
there's
you
don't
want
to
establish
a
pattern
that
we
don't
want
to
listen
to
the
public.
You
know
and
opening
up
the
I
the
discussion
of
lower
Cascades
as
an
example
of
that
you
know,
and
you
get
most
of
it
right
and
I
get
it
that
lowering
that
to
30
percent
I
understand
how
hard
it
is
to
get
50
percent.
That's
not
even
in
question
it's
just
when
you
get
it
wrong.
Where's
the
where's.
AB
The
way
to
resolve
that
problem.
This
even
protects
you.
It
gets
keeps
the
mistakes
from
happening
and
I
know
mo
I
know
all
our
council
members
support
this
and
this
what
I
don't
like
is
attacking
people
that
oppose
these
plans.
As
in
specifics
saying
that
you
don't
agree
with
these
underlying
ideas
and
that's
not
fair-
and
it's
not
true,
you
know
when
I
do
a
remodeling,
we
start
with
a
a
plan,
an
architect's
drawing,
and
sometimes
we
run
into
a
problem.
AB
Sometimes
there's
something
we
didn't
anticipate
and
sometimes
the
big
drawing
doesn't
deal
with
the
small
details
and
that's
what
neighbors
know
and
that's
what
people
in
the
area
know
and
thinking
you
know
better
than
all
of
them
is
really
a
mistake
in
a
day
in
a
day,
and
that
doesn't
happen
very
often,
but
when
it
does,
where
do
people
go?
They
have
to
go
to
their
Council
and
the
council
goes
I'm.
Sorry,
we
all
well.
We
didn't
other
people
voted
on
this
plan
years
ago,
so
we
can't
do
anything
about
it.
AB
We
can't
fix
these
small
details
and
there's
no
way.
You
know
this
is
a
thousand
foot
view
of
the
plan
when
you're
down
on
the
street
level.
There's
something
that
you
didn't
see.
You
can't
imagine
that
everybody
imagined
every
possible
problem,
and
maybe
sometimes
a
stop
sign
is
the
right
answer
and
you
know
seven
lines
sounded
really
good
on
paper,
but
then
people
started
running
into
each
other
and
where's
the
adjustment
to
that
one
extra
stop
sign,
even
though
the
engineer
said
these
should
all
be
changed.
AB
So
I
was
in
part
of
the
whole
thing
when
it
started
originally,
and
it
was
a
neighborhood
driven,
ntsp
driven
from
the
bottom
up,
and
you
don't
want
it
to
be
top
down.
You
want
to
work
together.
It
sounds
like
you
do
most
of
the
time,
but
to
just
say
no
oversight
for
us.
We've
got
this.
You
council
members,
even
if
your
people
complain
about
problems
and
come
to
you
when
they
haven't,
it
hasn't
been
done
right.
Sorry,
you're!
You
can't
do
anything
about
it
too.
AB
AC
All
right,
third
time's,
a
charm
right,
okay,
my
name
is
Paulie
terracone.
It's
been
an
odyssey
to
get
here.
I've
gone
to
multiple
meetings.
Where
this
item
has
been
postponed,
I've
lost
my
opportunity
to
speak,
then
my
comment
was
cut
short
last
week
and,
considering
all
of
this,
do
we
honestly
think
that
full-time
students,
working
parents
and
people
living
in
poverty
largely
have
the
means
to
participate
in
these
lengthy
meetings
where
it
is
demonstrably
unpredictable
that
they'll
even
have
the
chance
to
provide
input
on
the
matter?
AC
I
speculate
that
even
supporters
of
this
ordinance
know
that
these
meetings
are
largely
inaccessible.
Knowing
that
this
effort
was
born
as
an
intentional
obstacle
to
one
particular
Greenway
in
one
particular
neighborhood,
we
have
to
disentangle
this
particular
project
from
the
conversation
and
recognize
that
the
legislation
being
considered
affects
all
traffic
calming
in
perpetuity.
Let's
leave
the
traffic
calming
hearings
in
the
neighborhoods
most
elect
directly
affected,
as
is
already
procedure,
we've
not
even
begun
to
discuss,
who
is
more
susceptible
to
injury
or
death
as
a
result
of
being
struck
by
a
vehicle
nationally.
AC
According
to
Smart
growth,
America
black
indigenous
or
people
of
color
are
more
than
six
times
as
likely
than
white
people
to
be
killed
by
an
automobile
while
walking
residents
in
neighborhoods
of
the
lowest
earning
quintile
of
the
population
are
more
than
76
percent,
more
likely
to
be
killed
in
traffic
violence
than
the
national
average.
We
we
can
have
a
critical
conversation
about
disparities
in
resource
allocation,
as
it
relates
to
this
tcgp
without
creating
additional
barriers
for
those
who
need
safer
infrastructure
the
most
so
who
in
Bloomington,
actually
needs
this
safer
infrastructure.
AC
Great
question,
thanks
for
asking
after
compiling
each
conclusion
between
a
vehicle
and
pedestrian
or
bicyclist
from
2013
through
2012
mapped
by
census
tract,
it
was
found
that
the
most
senses
that
most
census
tracts
of
Bloomington
had
Collision
counts
between
4
and
37.
Out
of
the
last
10
years.
The
two
exceptions
were
tracks:
2.02
campus,
with
a
count
of
65
collisions
and
1.00,
which
is
downtown
with
a
count
of
87..
AC
These
tracks
have
a
median
age
of
about
20,
far
below
the
Monroe
County
median
of
30,
a
median
annual
income
of
five
thousand
seven
hundred
dollars
for
campus,
and
only
12
000
for
downtown
compared
to
Monroe
County's
median
annual
income
of
about
52
000.,
most
interestingly
20
percent
of
residents
in
each
of
these
tracks
have
moved
to
Bloomington
in
the
last
year
from
another
state
How
likely
are
they
to
even
know
who
their
representatives
are
How
likely?
Are
they
to
even
know
where
City
or
city
hall
is?
AC
My
guess
is
not
that
many
any
no
one
who
participated
in
public
comment
for
ordinance,
22-35
self-reported
to
be
from
neighborhoods
in
these
tracks,
regardless
of
whether
they
opposed
or
supported
the
ordinance,
and
yet
these
residents
are
subject
to
the
consequences
consequences
of
the
decisions
made
tonight.
It
is
clear
who
has
the
most
access
to
these
Council
meetings,
and
it
is
not
residents
who
live
in
the
areas
of
Bloomington,
most
dangerous
to
bicyclists
and
pedestrians.
The
inequities
of
this
ordinance
cannot
be
explained
away.
AC
So
that's
the
precedent
for
politics
in
the
city
that
is
frankly
frightening,
particularly
given
the
extensive
danger
faced
by
vulnerable
Road
users
every
single
day.
We
are
tired
of
fearing
for
our
lives
with
every
commute
and
we're
tired
of
fearing
for
the
lives
of
our
friends,
our
neighbors
and
the
children
of
our
friends
and
neighbors
I
plead
for
any
council
members
who
are
undecided
on
this
ordinance
to
do
the
Equitable
thing
and
vote
no
on
ordinance
23.08.
Thank
you.
A
AD
Okay,
can
you
hear
me
now?
My
name
is
Matt
calledy.
AD
Hi
I'm
tuning
in
tonight,
I
wanted
to
against
the
ordinance
I
do
appreciate
the
changes
from
the
initial
initial
proposition
there
dropping
the
vote
threshold,
but
I
still
really
can't
support
it,
as
it
is.
I
agree
with
bike
and
PED
in
that
regard.
AD
I
believe
that
the
that
it's
actually
fiscally
irresponsible,
rather
than
more
responsible
vetoing
something
after
all
the
effort,
energy
and
money
was
spent
through
planning
is,
is
just
not
it's
not
the
fiscally
responsible
way
to
go
about
it.
I
I
heard
tonight
from
staff
that
they're
not
opposed
to
council
input,
but
at
the
end
it
just
doesn't
make
sense
if
Council
wants
to
be
involved
with
every
one
of
the
projects,
I
would
suggest
a
means
of
doing
so
way
earlier
in
the
process
in
order
to
not
waste
money.
AD
P
Hello,
my
name
is
Greg
Alexander.
The
reason
I
keep
asking
30
million
dollars
for
sidewalks
is
that's
the
minimum
it
might
take
to
contemplate
a
connected
network
with
sidewalks
anything
less
than
that
and
we're
still
looking
at
disconnected
segments.
P
That's
why
the
Greenways
program
is
so
important.
It's
our
only
realistic
plan
for
a
connected
by
a
competent
Network
across
the
city.
I
hear
a
lot
of
people
basically
asking.
Why
is
there
a
Greenways
program
instead
of
doing
spot
interventions
at
dangerous
intersections
around
town?
We
need
to
do
both
all
successful
Vision
zero
programs
have
both
parts.
One
part
does
interventions
on
a
high
Injury
Network
one
part
establishes
a
low
stress
Network.
We
need
to
do
both
I
hear
a
lot
of
people
asking.
Why
are
we
doing
Hawthorne
when
it's
already
safe?
P
The
thing
is
it
isn't
safe?
Last
year
the
council
demanded
that
staff
make
a
priority
out
of
the
intersection
in
front
of
mayor-elect
Thompson's
house,
even
though
it
had
zero
reported
crashes.
If
zero
reported
crashes
is
too
dangerous,
you
should
know
every
single
intersection
along
the
length
of
Hawthorne
has
multiple
reported
crashes.
Just
the
slowest
neighborhood
part
of
Hawthorne
ruling
out
Second,
Street,
Atwater
and
third-
has
has
three
crashes
a
year.
P
It
isn't
safe
enough
yet
to
be
considered
part
of
a
low
stress
network,
but
behind
those
complaints,
I
think
you
see
a
lot
of
legitimate
frustration
that
we
aren't
doing
enough
anywhere
else.
I
heard
someone
complain
that
phase
one
of
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
Greenway
project
doesn't
do
anything
for
the
intersections
in
phase
two,
that's
a
legitimate
complaint.
Why
are
we
going
to
be
waiting
years
for
phase
two
when
the
need
has
already
been
identified?
P
I've
heard
complaints
about
neighborhoods
in
the
North
and
the
South
of
the
city
that
are
desperate
for
low
stress
connections,
while
we're
still
basically
working
close
to
campus
downtown.
That's
legitimate
complaint
too.
At
this
pace
it
will
take
decades
to
reach
the
edge
of
the
city.
One
thing
that
is
definitely
true
is
that
if
we
just
build
the
Hawthorne
Greenway
and
then
stop
there,
it
would
be
a
waste.
People
are
right
alone.
This
Greenway
isn't
worth
much
if
we
are
building
a
connected.
P
Network,
that's
a
central
Link,
but
if
we
don't
build
the
rest
of
the
network,
it's
just
a
weird
way
to
choose
traffic
calming
the
Greenways
program
has
one
huge
improvement
over
everything.
That's
come
before
it's
run
by
planners
the
projects
aren't
selected
by
engineering,
Public,
Works
parks
department,
it's
run
by
planners,
so
they're
trying
to
build
a
connected
Network.
That's
what
planners
do
that's
why
we
start
in
the
middle
and
work
our
way
out.
If
individual
neighbors
are
Exempted,
it
destroys
the
concept
of
a
connected.
Network
I
have
so
many
criticisms
of
the
Greenways
program.
P
It
is
so
timid.
The
planners
basically
hit
a
brick
wall
every
time
they
want
to
do
even
a
minor
intervention
on
a
Major
Street
where
a
Greenway
crosses
it.
They
can't
do
that.
The
resulting
infrastructure
is
substandard
because
it's
underfunded
and
over
constrained,
but
it
is
the
only
program
that
is
building
a
connected
Network.
We
need
a
connected
Network
for
the
quality
and
comprehensiveness
of
the
network.
They
are
planning,
the
cost
is
Tiny.
It
is
by
far
the
biggest
bargain
you
will
ever
see
in
transportation
infrastructure
spending.
Thank
you.
AE
It
said
it's
a
political
agenda,
it's
also
an
elected
group
and
it's
a
group,
that's
city-wide
and
I
think
it
allows
for
more
public
input
and
I
I
trust
the
city
council
I,
would
trust
them
and
I
would
trust
them
at
the
end
of
the
process
and
I
would
feel
safer
with
that
and
I
feel
that
the
chances
of
acquiring
Equity
would
be
better
with
the
city
council
because
everybody
could
be
involved
and
if
it's
contentious,
then
let
it
be
contentious.
AE
A
A
T
This
is
fiduciary
reasons,
especially
with
the
current
inflation
issues
that
we're
experiencing
and
recent
taxes
issues
you
know
increases,
so
we
need
to
slow
it
down
a
little
and
make
sure
we
get
these
projects
completed
correctly
for
the
benefit
of
our
residents.
These
are
important
projects
and
I.
Don't
say
that
the
the
ones
that
we
were
talking
about
tonight
are
not
important,
but
we
just
need
to
make
sure
that
they
get
done
correctly.
N
AF
Dream,
but
the
only
thing
I
don't
like
about
it
is
that
they
just
put
in
a
stop
sign
along
it.
If
you
wanna
have
fewer
people
in
cars
which
we've
got
to
do
for
climate
change,
you've
got
to
make
the
cars
uncomfortable
so
okay,
but
the
thing
about
this
this
process
we're
talking
about
tonight,
is
I
I,
don't
want
a
bike
next
to
cars.
So
it's
fine.
You've
got
quiet
streets
through
your
neighborhood,
but
we
want
more
people
biking
on
streets.
We
want
more
people
out
of
cars
and
into
bikes.
AF
I
just
came
from
a
visit
in
the
Netherlands
where
32
000
people
were
on
a
bike.
Trail
I
was
on
32
000
people
a
day
and
cars
were
guests
on
those
roads.
So
look
my
dream
is
I
live
on
7th
Street
we've
got
fifth,
sixth,
seventh
street.
Can
we
take
one
of
these
roads
just
think
about
this
people?
This
is
the
Future
Let's
make
one
of
these
streets,
probably
not
Kirkwood,
maybe
six
or
seventh
no
cars.
Only
bikes
and
cars
are
guests.
AF
That's
a
saying
in
the
Netherlands
cars
of
death,
okay,
but
Ben
about
this
ordinance
in
2010.
My
neighborhood,
fixed
Street,
had
gotten
traffic
calming,
and
that
meant
people
who
were
Savvy
about
Bloomington
thought
we'll
just
zoom
down
7th
Street
and
I'm
telling
you
my
street.
My
sidewalk
in
front
of
my
house
is
about
three
feet:
wide
cars
were
going
next
to
me
at
least
40
miles
an
hour.
AF
It
was
so
dangerous
and
people
in
our
neighborhood
and
on
7th
Street
realized
it
and
so,
and
so
two
of
my
neighbors
and
I,
we
went
to
every
household
in
this
neighborhood.
That's
250,
households,
it's
pretty
cool
to
go
to
Every
household
in
your
neighborhood
and
we
got
to
have
traffic
calming
in
our
neighborhood.
Now
at
that
time,
the
City
Planning
Department
only
gave
us
the
option
of
traffic
circles.
So
sometimes
people
in
my
neighborhood
complain.
AF
AF
So
there's
a
dream
for
you
and
I'm
against
this
ordinance,
because
let
me
tell
you
if
I
went
to
every
household
in
this
neighborhood
with
my
two
colleagues
burhan
altaran
and
Tom
up
Lynn
and
we
knocked
on
all
the
doors
and
we
talked
to
all
our
neighbors
and
we
got
everybody
on
board.
And
then
the
city
council
came
on
top
and
had
to
have
a
decision.
That
would
be
undemocratic
and
we
get
so
little
power
as
a
neighborhood.
Anyway,
it
would
be
horrible.
Thank
you.
A
N
Hello,
my
name
is
yeah,
so,
first
of
all
I'm
using
a
step
line
Greenway
every
day
during
my
bike,
commute
and
I
also
must
say
that
Greenway
is
why
I
can
commute,
and
it's
like
how
I
navigate
a
lot
of
town,
so
I'm,
very
thankful
about
it
and
yeah
I
think
that
an
important
thing
we
should
consider
is
really
separating
this
particular
project.
The
whole
Sun
project
from
the
process
that
govern
every
Greenway
project.
N
N
So
it
seems
like
there
were
some
mistake
during
the
past
processes,
but
this
ordinance
feel
like
an
overreaction
and
with
a
very
with
a
very
high
risk
of
throwing
the
babies
with
the
best
water.
That's
why
I
would
urge
the
council
to
vote
against
the
ordinance,
so
miss
rosenberg's
argument
against
the
ordinance
makes
a
lot
a
lot
of
sense
to
me.
So
I
believe
that
no
counseling
member
pointed
out
that
there
are
other
similar
processes
where
Council
provide
oversight
both
at
the
beginning
and
at
the
end
like,
given
the
lack
of
other
similar
processes.
N
This
sounds
a
little
bit
strange
to
me
also,
there's
some.
There
seem
to
be
no
proposal
about
like
creating
objective
criteria
to
assess
the
product.
So
given
the
lack
of
like
similar
processes
and
lack
of
objective
criteria,
this
really
feels
like
too
much
oversight
and
although
the
intention
may
be
good
I
believe
it
may
create
a
lot
of
unnecessary
delay.
N
So
to
me,
this
ordinance
does
sound
like
unnecessary
overreach
by
the
council.
So
I'll
show
me
other
council
members
to
vote
against
it.
Thank
you.
A
AG
Hi
I'm,
Paige,
Anderson
and
I
live
on
East
Morningside
Drive,
which
is
currently
being
considered
for
a
Greenway
project
and
I
want
to
Echo
one
of
my
neighbors,
who
just
spoke
that
we
have
been
properly
consulted
on
on
this
project
through
meetings,
the
member
who
said
that
everybody
could
be
involved
in
city
council
proceedings.
I
just
have
to
say
that
we've
heard
many
arguments
the
contrary
as
to
why
it's
very
hard
for
everyone
to
Simply
come
to
a
city
council
meeting
late,
where
it's
nearly
10
o'clock
at
night.
AG
I
believe
that
planners
are
qualified
and
I
want
data,
backed
solutions
for
my
road.
At
this
meeting
it
was
shared
that
a
driver
hit
70
miles
per
hour
on
a
road
already
designated
as
a
Greenway
which
has
faded
sharrows
on
it.
We
need
proven
design-based
measures
and
I
trust
our
city
planners
to
help
us
with
this
I
want
to
know.
Will
one
of
our
children
be
killed
before
we
can
actually
see
these
things
put
in
place.
AG
Even
though
we've
known
for
years
that
this
is
a
problem,
we
can
debate
which
measures
will
allow
emergency
vehicles
to
still
be
able
to
pass
through
safely,
but
I
just
hope
that
an
emergency
vehicle
won't
have
to
come
to
my
street,
because
the
child
has
been
hit,
because
this
ordinance
has
held
things
up,
because
these
measures
are
being
needlessly
delayed.
I
oppose
this
measure.
AH
I
want
to
First
want
to
say
that
to
claim
that
common
Council
involvement
is
purely
political
is
intended
to
operate
as
effective
polarization
and
it's
UNH.
It's
an
unhelpful
Construction
that
propagates
a
harmful
myth.
No
one
is
calling
for
removal
of
any
of
the
existing
meetings
as
part
of
the
traffic
calming
Greenway
program.
What
is
being
proposed
this
evening
is
restoring
common
Council
involvement.
AH
Restoring
common
Council
involvement
will
bring
helpful
focus
and
attention
to
project
improvements,
identify
an
advance
potential
synergies
for
balanced
funding
allocation
and
convening
a
customary
opportunity
that
will
support
greater
public
inclusion,
And
Timely
participation,
it's
not
a
setback,
it's
actually
enriching
the
process.
I
know
it.
It
seems
like
there
would
be
more
more
time
spent,
but
in
the
end
these
are
permanent
alterations
of
our
roadway.
We
want
to
get
it
right.
AH
There's
been
much
said
this
evening
and
my
comments,
which
I
had
composed
or
would
just
recite
some
of
what's
already
been
said,
but
I
do
want
to
offer
one
point
of
clarification
and
and
I
know:
we've
spent
a
considerable
amount
of
time
talking
about
some
specific
projects,
but
in
particular
the
two
that,
with
which
I'm
most
familiar
the
traffic
calming
project
on
Maxwell
Lane.
There
were
problems
with
the
process
and
I
could
go
into
greater
detail.
I
don't
have
time
tonight
to
do
so,
but
neither
was
the
objective
rubric
followed.
AH
AH
It
was
only
after
ordinance.
22
I
believe
35
was
proposed,
was
a
third
meeting
scheduled
now.
Maybe
there
was
one
already
scheduled,
but
it
would
have
been
helpful
for
that
to
be
stated
at
the
second
public
meeting
when
the
response
was
no
major.
Changes
would
be
made
so
adoption
of
ordinance
2308
tonight
will
provide
for
a
consistent
and
coherent
consideration
of
all
traffic
calming
and
Greenway
program
projects.
T
A
AH
E
E
AH
A
A
W
We're
going
to
make
space
if
because
he
is
familiar
with
the
project
and
leads
it
as
staff,
so
we
would
rather
see
if
we
could
make
space
for
Mr
Duncan
to
comment
as
staff
I
understand.
Thanks.
A
L
AI
I
am
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
coordinator
with
city
of
Bloomington,
and
the
planning
and
transportation
department
and
I
am
the
direct
overseer
of
the
traffic
coming
in
Greenways
program.
There
was
a
lot
said
tonight.
It
seems
like
the
two
main
points
of
contention
are
Council
oversight
and
public
Outreach
and
the
levels
within
that
in
terms
of
council
oversight.
I
said
this
Monday
evening
at
the
bike
pet
safety
commission
meeting
I
would
love
more
Council
involvement.
I
would
love
to
meet
with
you
all
talk
with
you.
Let's
discuss
what's
going
on
with
these
projects.
AI
A
couple
weeks
ago,
we
mailed
out
over
230,
240
or
so
mailers
to
Residents
along
that
street.
So
all
residents
within
a
300
foot
radius
of
that
street
get
a
mailer
to
tell
them
about
the
program.
What
it's
for,
what
we're
trying
to
do
and
to
invite
them
to
public
meetings
and
to
fill
out
an
open
comment
form
online
if
they
can't
attend
those
meetings
this
evening.
Actually
serendipitously
was
the
first
public
meeting
of
that
process.
AI
We
had,
we
met
at
Parkridge,
East
Park.
We
had
about
35
to
40
members
come
pretty
promptly
at
5
30..
It
was
a
nice
big
Lively
crowd
to
talk
about
traffic
calming
and
their
experiences
in
the
neighborhood
and
as
a
planner.
Yes,
we
have
an
idea
of
what
we
might
want
to
do
with
the
Morningside
neighborhood
Greenway,
but
I
personally,
we
as
a
staff
want
to
hear
from
The
Neighbors
about
their
experiences.
They
experience
things
that
we
won't
have
because
they
lived
there.
They've
been
living
there
for
years
and
it
was
eye-opening.
AI
There
were
sure
we
I
I
made
my
talking
points
about
what
we
want
to
do.
What
we're
trying
to
do
in
the
process
they're
in,
but
when
it
went
to
the
Q
a
portion,
they
shared
some
experiences
that
I
just
would
not
have
considered.
They
were
talking
about
different
intersections
and
why
this
happens
and
why
that
happens.
AI
Talking
about
different
aspects
of
living
there
that
someone
who
doesn't
live
there
I
just
would
not
have
gotten
simply
from
the
traffic
data
and
the
studies
that
we
see,
so
that
is
part
of
this
public
process
of
getting
them
involved
it.
It
should
be
more
of
a
bottom-up
approach
and
I.
Think
tonight
was
a
great
example
of
that
in
that
there
were
people
who
wanted
all
types
of
traffic
coming
all
over
the
place.
AI
There
were
people
who
wanted
different
types
of
traffic
calming,
and
we
talked
about
how
we
can
fit
those
in
to
make
a
design
that
works
for
everybody.
And
tonight
we
didn't
come
to
this
meeting
with
a
specific
design
in
mind.
It
was
just
to
ask
questions
to
have
them
open
up
about
their
experiences,
and
they
did
that
in
fold.
AI
It
was
an
hour
and
a
half
plus
of
great
stimulating
conversation
of
what
they
want,
and
so
we
can
take
their
experiences
with
our
professional
expertise
and
combine
that
and
make
a
safe
and
effective
neighborhood
Greenway
along
this
Corridor
to
connect
it
to
the
seven
line
and
downtown
with
that.
Just
to
continue
about
what's
coming
up
on
that
process
and
what
was
communicated
to
neighbors
this
evening
was
that
we
will
take
their
comments,
review
them
and
especially
if
neighbors
couldn't
attend
that
meeting.
Take
their
responses
from
the
open
comment.
AI
Form
online
really
take
a
look
into
what
those
mean
and
when
we
come
back
later
this
summer,
with
a
second
public
meeting,
we'll
come
to
them
with
a
rough
design
of
what
we
want
this
Greenway
to
look
at,
but
it
will
have
their
comments
in
mind.
One
common
thing
that
I
said
tonight
is
that,
yes,
we
have
neighborhood
Greenways
that
were
built
with
this
traffic
coming
in
Greenways
program,
Allen,
Street,
Graham
and
wallstrin
7th,
Street
Etc.
AI
So
I
just
want
to
express
to
you
all
that
public
is
involved
in
tonight.
They
were
heavily
involved.
It
was
wonderful
to
see
and
if
any
member
of
public
wants
to
talk
to
me
about
traffic
coming
and
what
it
is
and
how
to
make
the
neighborhood
safer.
I
am
more
than
happy
to
do
so,
but
in
terms
of
public
Outreach,
the
process
that's
in
place
right
now,
I
feel
at
least
from
my
experience,
engages
the
public
adequately,
but
not
too
much
where
they
feel
like
they
have
to
come
to
every
single
meeting.
AI
Again
it
it's
a
tough
balance
between
over
engagement
and
under
engagement
and
from
what
we've
seen
so
far
with
past
projects
and
see
it
seems
like
the
process
in
Hand
Works.
Well
again,
there
are
always
improvements
that
can
be
made
to
any
process,
but
just
from
my
experience
as
a
planner
and
the
one
who
oversees
this
traffic
calming
program
tonight
at
East,
Morningside
in
Park,
Ridge
East
was
one
example
of
the
Wonders
that
this
process
can
do.
Thank
you.
W
One
I
think
there's
there
were
so
many
comments,
so
one
concern
being
the
level
of
detail.
That
is
a
part
of
the
greenway
plans.
They
are.
They
are
detailed
designs.
The
process
is
that
we
don't
go
to
the
first
meeting
with
a
design
that
we
are
asking
people
about
their
street
and
their
neighborhood
and
then
create
a
design
that
we
talk
about
at
the
second
meeting
and
go
over
with
residents.
W
We
do
think
residents
know
their
streets
and
neighborhood
very
well
and
we
take
that
input.
But
it's
not
a
10
000
foot
view
with
Consultants.
We
go
and
walk
the
corridor
first,
so
that
they're
familiar
with
it
and
work
on
understanding
more
about
the
places
that
that
they'll
be
creating
a
design
for
too
so
and
I
know.
There
was
one
comment,
I
think
about
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
process.
We
do
send
out
mail,
we
don't
send
certified
mail,
so
I
can.
W
R
You,
council,
member
Sandberg
follow-up
question
for
Mr
Duncan,
because
I
I
hear
your
enthusiasm
for
the
community
meetings
and
I
I
want
to
make
it
clear
that
in
expecting
that
Council
have
a
stronger
role
in
all
this
I
think
having
Council,
who
is
maybe
the
representative
for
that
District,
whether
it's
you
know,
one
part
of
the
city
or
another,
be
a
part
of
that
initial
conversation
would
go
a
long
way
to
maybe
alleviate
you
know
any
of
the
future
concerns
that
are
up.
R
But
my
question
to
you
is
how
how
involved
are
public
safety
personnel
and
even
our
sanitation
workers
or
the
the
directors
that
also
are
going
to
have
to
have
some
say
into
when
we
are
engineering
our
streets
in
a
different
way?
How
does
that
impact
safety
and
their
ability
to
navigate
the
streets.
AI
AI
Fine,
because
that
that
is
an
important
aspect
of
any
Street
in
Bloomington
and
the
engineer
on
hand
was
there
to
answer
it,
but
every
project
that
we
that
we
have
traffic
coming
Greenways
included
is
run
by
our
Police
Department
fire
department
and
EMS
to
make
sure
that
they
are
okay
with
it
and
Beth.
You
can
add
if
you'd
like
to
but
I
believe
every
project
that
has
been
that
has
gone
through
this
program
has
been
run
through
those
bodies.
W
That's
correct:
we
check
in
with
emergency
services
and
public
works
on
different
sanitation
things
and
all
the
emergency
service
responders.
So
we
also
engineering
leads.
We
have
an
internal
City
projects,
meeting
to
coordinate
on
larger
projects
as
well.
So
there's
the
internal
coordination
happening
on
that.
Thank.
A
A
This
is
going
to
be
one
of
those
questions
where
here's.
What
concerns
me
help
me
feel
better
about
this
all
right.
This
that's
kind
of
the
general
gist
of
my
question
I'm
concerned
about
what
happens.
Post-Meeting
2.
A
I'm
concerned
that
in
post
meeting
one
people
can
talk
about
their
neighborhood
and
and
that
planned
staff
is
skilled
enough
at
running
a
meeting
to
actually
elicit
good
feedback.
A
W
Ms
Rosenberger
I'll
start,
and
you
can
add,
if
I
miss
anything
so
I
think
the
best
example
are
the
projects
we've
done
so
far.
There
is
another
meeting.
It
is
the
review
by
the
bicycle
on
pedestrian
safety.
Commission,
so
I
know
we're
kind
of
describing
the
two
Outreach
meetings,
but
there's
an
optional
third
meeting
after
and
then
we
can
had
a
fourth
like
we
wouldn't
be
precluded
from
having
another
meeting
and
then
it
goes
for
review
to
the
bicycle
pedestrian
safety
commission
also,
which
residents
can
come
to.
W
Of
course,
it's
a
public
hearing,
commission
and
so
in
the
times
in
the
four
neighborhood
Greenways
we
have
designed
and
installed
so
far,
Ralston
and
Graham
and
Broadview
East
7th
Street
in
Green
Acres.
W
Yeah
West
Allen
Street
in
mcdole
gardens
and
then
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
neighborhood
Greenway
I
would
be
interested
in
feedback
from
the
community
that
I
think
staff
has
appropriately
determined
when
a
third
meeting
was
needed
and
when
the
feedback
from
residents
necessitated
a
third
meeting.
So
what
we've
seen
is
that
usually
at
the
second
meeting,
there's
a
design
of
the
greenway,
we
walk
through
the
design
and
talk
about
it
with
residents
and
get
feedback.
Sometimes
it's,
oh
okay.
W
We
need
to
move
this
speed,
cushion
five
feet,
and
sometimes
it
is
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
where
there
was
just
a
lot
of
feedback
and
we're
like
we
need
a
full
meeting.
This
isn't
an
immaterial
change
that
needs
to
happen.
There
need
to
be
a
lot
of
changes,
so
I
I,
don't
know
if
I'd
answered
it,
but
there's
the
opportunity
for
more
discussion
and
changes
with
the
third
meeting
and
still
with
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
safety.
Commission
and
I
would
say,
with
the
other
meetings.
W
I
know
like
with
West
Allen
council
member
Piedmont
Smith
was
there
and
when
we
had
those
meetings-
and
they
were
different
people
reviewed,
it
said
they
were
all
right
with
it
and
it
didn't.
We
didn't
get
material
feedback
that
necessitated
another
follow-up
meeting.
So
I
think
it's
a
challenge
since
that
feels
subjective,
but
it
seems
that
staff
I
would
say,
have
done
a
good
job
making
that
decision.
So
far
of
the
four
projects,
we've
done.
Three
proceeded
without
a
third
meeting
and
one
needed
a
third
meeting
and
we
called
it.
W
A
Council
member
Rallo
of
response
and
then
council,
member
Rosenberger,
a
question
or
whatever.
Okay
so
remember,
Rallo,
go
ahead!
Sorry
yeah.
D
I'll,
probably
breathe
again,
I
see
no
harm
in
Council
oversight
if,
if
the
process
is
done
properly,
if
it's
done
correctly-
and
this
helps
ensure
public
involvement,
because
we
will
be
in
a
position
of
of
the
final
vote
on
on
what
stands
to
be
major
projects,
so
I
I
I,
don't
see
why
it's
so
problematic
having
the
council
involvement
in
that,
if
the
process
is
done
properly,
we
should
be
in
agreement,
seems
to
me
thanks.
M
M
Have
just
a
couple
of
follow-up
questions
from
the
recent
comments,
so
Mr
Duncan
talked
about
loving
count.
Would
love
more
Council
involvement
in
this
to
like
teach
us
about
what
the
process
is,
what
Greenways
are
and
safety
features
there
I
think
that
sounds
important
to
me,
because
at
least
two
council
members
tonight
weren't
sure
what
a
green
white
is
so
I
understand
like
educating
and
going
along
the
process
sounds
very
good
council
member
Sandberg
also
said
having
a
rep
at
these
meetings
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
M
So
I
think
you
know
District
reps
and
then
at
large
is
I'm
I,
don't
know
if
we
get
invited
to
these
meetings.
I
think
it
is
true,
we're
all
very
busy
and
if
we
get
invited
that
is
wonderful,
but
if
not
I
would
love
to
be
invited.
But
my
question
then,
is
just
around
like
talking
about
how
we
might
be
more
involved.
M
I
feel
like
this
amendment
really
misses
the
mark
of
what
what
maybe
could
be
changed
in
this
program
and
if
we're
talking
about
Equity,
it
doesn't
necessarily
mean
creating
more
opportunities
or
like
pressuring
people
to
show
up
more
I
mean
just
tonight
like
the
the
numbers
from
the
The
Greenway
meeting
in
Park
Ridge
East
about
40
people
went
to
that
when
we
didn't
even
have
20
show
up
tonight
to
talk
about
this
amendment,
I
think
that
says
something.
But
what
about
some
other
options
like
would
staff?
M
Would
staff
consider
other
options
where
we
have
like
built-in
Equity
to
our
transportation
measures
like
we
have
a
sidewalk
committee
and
what
we've
done
in
that
committee
is
built
in
an
equity
rubric,
so
staff
recommends
projects
to
us,
and
then
we
have
this
final
say
over
those
projects.
But
it's
based
on
the
equity
rubric,
and
could
we
do
something
like
that
here?
Where
we
create,
you
know
either
it
gets
added
to
the
sidewalk
committee
or
it
becomes
you
know,
just
its
own
committee
or
the
transportation
committee
where
there
is
that
Council
oversight.
W
W
Sure
I'm
interested
in
what
the
it
seems
like
the
goal
of
this
is
to
review
if
public
engagement
was
done
properly
and
the
detailed
design
of
the
projects
so
I'm
curious.
What
Equity
criteria
would
be
used
to
that
by
Council
to
evaluate
the
design
of
the
project?
Maybe
you're,
saying
staff
would
propose
that
I
would
say,
as
staff
were
much
more
interested
in
something
that
has
set
criteria
for
evaluation
in
order
to
set
projects
up
for
Success,
so
that
residents
and
staff
can
know
if
we
have
followed
ABC.
W
M
Okay,
okay,
yes,
I
would
I
mean,
and
maybe
council
member
all
you
would
want
to
weigh
in
on
this.
So
it
would
be
similar
to
this
sidewalk,
maybe
where
we
approve
a
budget
for
a
project
and
then
that
project
gets
taken
on
so
it
would
be
where
there
wouldn't
be
a
finished
design
of
that
green
light.
It
would
be
oh
there's
this
Equity
rubric.
D
So
you're
I'm
I
have
a
vague
idea
of
what
you're
getting
at
so
the
reason
I
chose
that
the
council
would
have.
The
final
say
is
that
I
don't
believe
that
the
council
is
just
simply
going
to
hear
a
de
novo.
You
know
never
having
heard
it
before
that.
D
You
know,
because
the
council
would
be
the
final
say
it
would
everything
prior
to
the
council
would
would
be
in
alignment,
so,
in
other
words,
staff
would
would
take
care
to
have
the
meetings
with
the
public
because
they
would
report
to
us
that-
and
there
would
be
you
know,
as
assistant
director
Rosenberger
said,
that
updates
could
be
given
to
us
on
particular
projects
at
Council
meetings
to
say:
here's
what's
coming,
here's
what
we
have
in
mind
and
and
here's
a
preliminary
idea,
okay
of
what
it
consists
of
so
those
sorts
of
things,
I
think,
would
be
very
helpful
to
us
in
term
in
in
terms
of
equity
too.
D
So
if
staff
were
to
report
for
instance,
that
you
know
this
Project's
being
done
and
in
this
neighborhood-
and
we
say
well,
that's
interesting
is
it?
Is
it
a
high
priority
compared
to
an
underprivileged
neighborhood?
That
also
has
a
Greenway?
Maybe
maybe
we
ought
to
concentrate
on
that?
D
I
see
this
as
sort
of
a
dynamic
process.
I
don't
see
it,
as
you
know,
we're
all
sitting
in
Judgment
at
the
end
and
we're
going
to
give
thumbs
down.
In
fact,
I
see
it
as
just
simply,
as
someone
said
more
eyes,
more
eyes
on
the
project
and
and
because
we're
ultimately
accountable
to
the
public,
because
we're
elected
that
it
seems
like
it's
our
responsibility.
D
These
are
major
roadway
changes
and
we
should
say
at
the
end
it
was
all
done
properly.
Everything
is
I
mean
clearly
not
everyone's
going
to
like
it
right,
but
that's
clear
about
that's
certain
about
everything
we
do
I
mean
some
people,
don't
like
the
outcome
of
certain
policies
But.
Ultimately,
we
approve
to
The
Greenway
plan,
so
we
believe
that
Greenway
should
exist.
D
I
believe
safe
biking
should
exist,
but
I
I
think
it's
it's
not
working.
Well.
Now
it's
working
very
poorly
now
and
I
think
that
our
involvement
at
the
end
would
make
everything
and
bring
everything
into
alignment
from
the
beginning.
To
the
end
gigabyte,
if
that
it
helps
answer
it,
so
I'm
not
a
I'm,
not
averse
to
the
other
aspects
of
this,
but
I,
don't
think
it's
a
substitute
for
us
at
the
end
saying
everything
was
done
well.
This
is
a
good
project,
absolutely
proceed.
M
Okay,
yeah
I
think
it's
still
just
like
on,
like
it's
like
an
oversight
that
we
don't
see
in
any
other
space
where
we
work,
and
we
don't
do
that
with
the
sidewalk
committee,
but
I
guess
I
would
like
to
follow
up
with
your
comment
to
staff.
Do
we
I
mean
I
know
the
Hawthorne?
This
is
like
spawned
by
the
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
Greenway.
M
W
Do
you
think
it's
going
well,
we've
done
four
Greenway
projects
two
have
been
designed
and
installed
the
again
Ralston.
W
What's
it
called
I'm
getting
so
tired,
it's
Ralston
and
Graham
and
Broadview
East
7th
in
Green
Acres
those
are
installed.
We
hear
positive
things
of
people
using
them.
Also,
sometimes
people
say
they
don't
include
enough
traffic
calming
I've
heard.
So
we
hear
both
sides
honestly.
So
we
have
not
heard
other
complaints
about
the
process.
W
W
Also
to
answer
your
question
earlier.
Staff
is
more
or
finds
a
program
that
approves
projects
up
front
to
say.
Yes,
we
want
staff
to
pursue
designing
this
Greenway.
We
think
that
would
make
more
sense.
I
think
I
did
forget
to
stay
to
say,
I'm,
not
sure.
If
there
was
a
fiscal
impact
statement
with
it,
there
is
a
fiscal
impact
to
designing
projects
and
then
not
implementing
them
as
we
pay
for
the
design
and
it
doesn't
include
staff
hours.
So
staff
hours
are
also
a
cost
6.
F
H
Yes,
council,
member
Rallo:
what
is
the
fiscal
impact
of
this,
and
why
was
there
no
fiscal
impact
statement
submitted
per
our
own
guidelines.
D
The
fiscal
impact
of
of
returning
to
I
don't
see
the.
E
H
The
time
of
that
staff
has
put
in
the
time
that
the
engineer
which
is
usually
somebody
hired
through
planning
Transportation,
has
put
in
again
the
uncounted
hours
that
residents
who
have
done
the
resident-led
traffic
calming
I
suppose
that's
valuable
as
well.
D
D
Extra
meeting
or
two
for
us
an
extra
meeting
it
it,
it
requires
staff,
I
suppose
to
inform
us
as
these
projects
go
forward
and
then
in
a
final
meeting.
D
So,
for
instance,
you
know
we
approve
stop
science
at
the
one
of
the
previous
meetings.
It
would
be
something
like
that.
I
assume
so.
E
H
I
think
that
you
may
be
missing.
The
point
of
my
question
is
that
if,
if
there
is
a,
if,
if
we
can
say
Okay
half
the
time,
the
council
will
say
yes
half
the
time
the
council
will
say
no
just
because
we
have
nothing
else
to
go
on
so
half
and
half.
Then
what.
H
D
Well
then,
I,
don't
how
do
I
put
a
fiscal
impact
on
something?
That's
so
variable.
I
mean
I,
I,
assume
that
we're
I
I'm
in
favor
of
Greenways
and
so
I'm
going
to
be
very.
You
know
optimistic
about
a
process
that
then
includes
I
I
want
more
public
participation
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
meetings
are
adhered
to
and
I
would
like
more
Outreach
and
things
like
that.
Everything
that
staff
has
said
so
I'm
not
pessimistic
about
half
the
projects
are
going
to
be
denying
half
are
going
to
be
approved.
D
H
O
Just
that
the
memo
provided
along
with
this
ordinance
included,
a
note
from
councilmember
Rallo
is
sponsored
the
ordinance
that
there
were
no
anticipated
direct
impacts
on
City
revenues,
expenditures
or
debt
obligations.
So
that
was
noted
in
the
memo
whether
members
agree
with
that
assessment
or
not,
as
certainly
okay,.
O
L
L
So
if
a
council
member
wanted
I
mean
let's,
let's
set
aside
the
ordinance
at
hand
here
and
let's
talk
about
the
tcgp
as
it
is,
if
a
council
member
believed
that
a
project
under
the
tcgp
was
a
bad
idea
should
not
be
carried
out,
what
recourse
would
they
have
legislatively
to
reverse
the
action?
In
other
words,
is
it
true
that,
once
a
project
is
conceived,
it's
going
to
happen
no
matter
what,
because
staff
deems
it
I
mean,
we
have
title
15
authority
over
every
Traffic
Control
in
the
city.
L
This
is,
among
other
things,
a
form
of
traffic
control.
So
if
we
believe
that
Mr
rallo's
proposal
here
is
Overkill,
it's
too
much
what
recourse
might
he
have
under
normal
order
under
regular
order?
I'm,
not
sure
which
of
you
can
answer
that,
but
maybe
you
both
can.
O
Happy
to
weigh
in
and
if
Mr
rosenbarger
would
like
to
as
well
ideas
that
spring
to
mind.
The
council
has
a
number
of
blunt
tools
that
can
reduce
Appropriations
for
a
given
year
that
may
or
may
not
get
to
the
specific
project.
That's
causing
concern
the
council
for
several
years
under
the
ntsp
did
list
and
a
schedule,
the
location
of
traffic
calming
devices
and
the
type
of
device.
O
Beyond
that
you
know,
there's
certainly
informal
ways.
Council
members
can
can
look
to
influence
the
process,
but
as
written
the
tcgp
gives
gives
staff
the
ability
to
pursue
projects
and
gives
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
safety
commission
the
the
final
vote
for
for
projects.
Of
course
it's
been
mentioned.
Council
has
budget
oversight
so
through
the
annual
budget
process
or
appropriation
processes,
the
council
can
weigh
in.
But
that's
what
comes
to
my
mind,
Ms
Rosenberger.
W
Sure
I
think
if
the
intention
is
to
say
that
something
should
not
be
a
neighborhood
Greenway
the
best
process
to
do
that
is
to
amend
the
transportation
plan.
The
transportation
plan
does
identify
which
streets
will
be
neighborhood
Greenways
and
that
so
that's
it's
not
code,
but
it
is
something
Council
can
amend
if
I
still
feel
confused
that
if
the
intent
of
this
ordinance
is
to
take
something,
that's
recommended
to
be
a
neighborhood
Greenway
and
make
it
not
a
neighborhood
Greenway
I,
don't
think
it's
the
best
tool
to
do
that.
W
I
think
that
amending
the
transportation
plan
is
the
best
course
of
action
to
say
Our
intention
as
a
community
is
for
this
street
to
not
get
neighborhood
Greenway
treatments.
If
the
intention
is
to
review
and
modify
things
that
are
planned
for
neighborhood
Greenways
and
the
design,
then
a
process
modification
could
work.
I
would
add
some
things
that
are
additionally
not
in
title
15.
We
don't
have
bike
Lanes
codified.
We
don't
have
number
of
travel
lanes
for
Motor
Vehicles
codified.
W
We
don't
have
Lane
widths
codified,
so
there
are
a
lot
of
elements
of
the
transportation
system,
For,
Better
or
Worse.
That
aren't
codified,
but
that
I
do
think
I,
don't
know
I,
don't
feel
like
people
like
it,
but
that
amending
the
plan
is
a
great
course
of
action
to
to
communicate
that
intent
and
to
communicate
our
plans
as
a
community.
If
the
idea
is,
we
don't
want
this
to
be
a
neighborhood
Greenway.
L
So,
in
this
case,
I
mean
like
let's
say,
I
believe
that
this
ordinance
is,
you
know
as
addressing
a
single
example,
rather
than
a
horde
of
example.
There's
only
one
example:
that's
been
cited
as
problematic,
but
it's
been
a
big
issue.
L
Would
it
have
been
appropriate
for
accountable
Raul
to
bring
an
ordinance
to
amend
the
transportation
plan
and
with
that
I've
had
to
go
through
the
plan?
Commission.
W
S
W
Yes,
I
think
that
I
think
the
process
is
Council,
directs
a
resolution
and
then
it
goes
back
to
plan
commission
plan.
Commission
has
to
review
things
because
it
is
the
comprehensive
plan
and
then
bring
it
to
council.
L
Well
I
mean
so
then
the
question
becomes
if,
if
there's
a
neighborhood,
that
believes
very
strongly
that
a
city
intention
is,
is
wrong-headed
and
should
be
undone.
L
It
seems
natural
to
also
ask
for
some
kind
of
a
stop
work
order
and
that's
not
something
that
we
issue,
but
it
would
be
the
kind
of
thing
that
would
at
least
have
satisfied
the
neighborhood
in
this
extreme
case
that
they
that
that
they're
being
listened
to
and
that
the
project
is
not
going
to
go
forward.
L
O
I'm
not
familiar
with
with
any
ins,
any
example
of
that
happening
in
the
past,
I
I
would
hesitate
to
say
the
council
could
do
that,
especially
once
plans
have
been
approved
by
the
council.
That
includes
the
projects
staff
is
pursuing
their
their
following.
The
existing
tcgp
I
I
do
agree
with
them.
Mr
rosenbarger
that
the
council
has
the
authority
to
pursue
amendments
to
the
transportation
plan
that
would
go
through
the
plane
commission.
It
is
an
amendment
to
the
comprehensive
plan.
O
The
timing,
though,
of
that
I
I,
would
caution
the
Council
on
if
a
Pros
project
is
is
well
underway,
at
least
for
most
projects
that
involve
petitioners
that
aren't
the
city.
Essentially
once
once
an
application
is
submitted
or
a
request
is
made
for
a
project,
the
rules
that
apply
at
the
time
of
that
sort
of
apply
to
that
project.
O
So
if
the
rules
change
along
the
way
that
project
still
proceeds
under
under
the
rules
that
existed
when
the
petition
or
the
the
project
began,
so
I'm
not
sure
exactly
how
that
would
play
out
with
a
staff-led
project,
it
may
be
that
they
take
the
council's
direction.
If
the
transportation
plan
were
amended
to
express
an
intent
that
a
project
not
proceed,
staff
could
listen
to
that.
There
could
also
be
an
argument
that
they
they
began
the
project
and
if
the
you
know,
underlying
rules
changed
or
guidance
changed,
they
may
still
want
to
proceed.
L
Right
so
I
think
that's
the
concern
that
may
underlie
the
ordinance
that's
in
front
of
us,
which
again
I
think
may
be
too
much,
but
not
entirely.
I
mean
well
I
have
one
more
question
from
Ms
Rosenberger,
okay.
So
what
would
I
mean
if,
if
the
neighborhood
felt
that
after
the
second
meeting,
the
city
was
going
to
go
on
no
matter
what
they
said,
I
mean
I
think
that
his
introduction
of
2235
put
a
stop
to
it.
L
Or
would
the
staff
have
stopped
what
would
have
caused
staff
to
stop
I,
don't
even
know
how
to
phrase
a
question
just
to
stop
work
on
this
project
until
it
was
clarified,
do
I
misunderstand
it.
W
I
think
I
get
the
gist
of
the
question.
I,
don't
know
the
answer.
I
think
it's
complicated,
I
think
I
know
there's
this
View
that
these
projects,
it's
just
interesting
to
not
consider
this
about
safety
and
in
what
other
realm
do?
How
do
we
evaluate
safety
on
in
streets
in
other
contexts,
and
it
seems
like
neighborhood
Greenways
are
being
held
to
the
most
rigorous
standard
of
any
infrastructure
in
the
city
and
I
I.
W
Think
that's
surprising
when
the
goal
of
a
neighborhood
Greenway
is
to
have
people
drive
at
15
to
20
miles
per
hour,
so
in
that
we've
seen
them
work
effectively.
So
I
think
you
know
I
know:
there's
been
discussion
about
people
being
elected,
we
work
for
an
elected
representative
also,
and
there
are
repercussions
for
that
and
I
think
we're
sort
of
removing
safety
from
the
conversation
when
that's
part
of
it,
so
I
think.
On
the
one
hand,
it
feels
so
hypothetical,
it's
very
hard
for
me
to
to
know
the
best
path.
Honestly.
L
You
both
have
answered
my
questions.
Well,
I
appreciate
it.
Madam
chair,
Mr
Ella
wants
to
respond.
I,
don't
you
know
it's
up
to
you.
D
for
every
Greenway,
that's
proposed,
so
we
could
have
the
oversight
and
we
would
men,
title
15
and
proceed
that
way
in
this
case,
it's
not
just
about
eliminating
a
Greenway
The
Greenway,
essentially
most
of
it
exists.
In
other
words,
there
is
a
Greenway
that
exists
now
on
Hawthorne
Highland
to
Weatherstone.
Now
the
proposed
in
the
plan
was
a
pathway
that
appears
in
the
plan
that
connects
Weatherstone,
that's
okay,
and
now
we
can
be
in
agreement
on
that
now.
D
D
It's
the
process
that
was
I
saw
was
broken
and
it
may
work
in
many
ways,
in
which
case
we
have
nothing
to
fear
because
the
you
know,
maybe
that
was
just
the
the
the
odd
one
that
the
one
that
didn't
that
didn't
function
well,
for
whatever
reason
it
was
overlooked,
so
I,
don't
I,
don't
really
see
a
problem
with
the
council
oversight
in
this
I
I'm
kind
of
mystified
as
to
why
the
council
is
you
know,
or
maybe
I
should
throw
it
back
and
say.
H
Yes,
just
to
what
councilmemberello
just
said,
okay,
question
for
Ms
rosenbarger,
the
council
approved
the
transportation
plan
in
2019
that
had
these
Greenways
in
it
is
that
correct.
H
H
Thank
you.
Could
the
transportation
plan
be
revised
to
provide
more
details
as
to
the
design
of
a
Greenway,
or
is
it
really
a
case
by
case
basis?
I
think.
That's
part
of
the
concern
is
that,
even
though
it's
in
the
transportation
plan,
there
are
not
a
lot
of
details
as
to
what
a
green
way
is
or
could
be.
W
Sure
it
can
be
that
can
be
added
with
amendments
to
have
more
clarity
on
what
what
typical
neighborhood
Greenways
look
like
in
Bloomington.
What
are
some
tools
in
the
toolbox
and
and
so
forth?
Yes,.
D
A
D
I
just
said
something:
there's
such
variability
in
Greenways,
as
I
said,
some
Greenways
are
just
simply
Cheryl's
and
they're
called
Greenways.
That
was
my
understanding
of
a
potential
Greenway
and
some
are
very
heavily
engineered
and
oh
okay,
I
I
could
be
convinced
why?
But
the
variability
is
so
great
that
that
is
part
of
the
problem.
I
Thank
you,
councilman
Moralo,
for
for
bringing
this
ordinance
and
presenting
your
views
as
to
why
you
think
it's
a
good
idea.
However,
in
my
view,
the
ordinance
is
problematic
for
a
number
of
reasons
and
I
will
not
be
supporting
it.
First,
I
wanted
to
make
a
few
factual,
Corrections
and
just
initial
reactions
to
councilmember
Morales
presentation.
One
was
that
Greenway
projects
are
very
expensive
members
of
publicly.
At
this
point,
it's
the
opposite.
They
are
not
expensive.
They
are
an
incredible
value
proposition
for
the
value
they
deliver.
I
I
So
since
we
fund
those
things
so
inadequately,
it's
important
to
have
a
network
of
Greenways
that
connects
things.
Second,
is
the
council
member
Ella
talked
about
prioritizing
projects
in
different
parts
of
the
city
and
weighing
opportunity
costs?
This,
of
course,
is
exactly
what
the
transportation
plan
is
for.
It's
how
we
developed
recommendations
for
a
network
to
begin
with,
and
why
the
council's
approval
of
those
trade-offs
and
those
opportunity
costs
was
important,
talked
about
making
sure
the
process
works.
I
Well,
especially
with
respect
to
public
engagement,
this
ordinance
proposes
no
changes
to
the
public
engagement
process.
It
simply
adds
Council
veto
power
and
an
extra
meeting
with
respect
to
design
elements
at
the
last
minute,
councilmember
Alo
said
that
he
thinks
the
bike.
Ped
and
safety
commission
does
fine
work
and
has
expertise,
but
of
course,
he
did
not
consult
them
or
ever
present
the
ordinance
for
their
input
on
how
the
ordinance
could
be
improved
or
whether
or
not
it
should
move
forward.
I
Finally,
I
don't
find
compelling
that
the
sort
of
argument
that
we
should
be
looking
back
to
the
way
things
were
done,
five
or
ten
or
twenty
years
ago,
as
the
reason
to
continue
doing
them.
That
way,
the
process
was
changed
for
a
reason,
because
it
wasn't
working
well
and
needed
improvements
to
better
align
with
City
goals,
the
transportation
plan
and
objective
assessments
of
safety
and
need
a
few
main
concerns.
Additionally,
one
again
the
the
fact
that
the
bicycle
and
pedestrian
safety
commission
voted
unanimously
against
this
ordinance
suggesting
we
should
reject
it.
I
That
unanimous
conclusion
alone
is
fairly
compelling,
but
I
also
think
it's
a
problem
that
their
feedback
and
Views
weren't
considered
or
Incorporated
in
the
development
of
the
ordinance.
This
is
a
real
process.
Failure
to
me,
sort
of
ironically,
since
we're
talking
about
process
improvements,
so
I
think
it's
important
to
continue
to
work,
to
empower,
involve
and
value
the
input
of
our
resident
LEDs
boards
and
commissions.
These
are
some
of
the
most
motivated
and
engaged
residents
in
our
community
and
it's
a
disservice
to
to
not
involve
them.
That
way.
I
Second
I
worry
that
this
ordinance
is
a
level
of
micromanagement
with
respect
to
staff
that
that
is
really
best
positioned
to
expertise,
exercise
their
expertise
and
public
Outreach
capacities
that
really
fall
within
the
city's
executive
branch
duties.
So
I
was
trying
to
think
of
comparative
things
like
the
urban
Forester
decides
which
trees
to
plant
and
where
to
plant
them.
We
don't
insist
on
getting
to
make
that
decision
ourselves
at
the
last
minute
once
the
trees
have
been
bought.
I
But
if
we
wanted
to
change
what
species
we
are
allowed
to
plant,
we
might
do
that
if
we
wanted
to
change
the
soil
volume
standards
for
where
trees
Street
trees
go,
we
might
change.
You
know
the
unified
development,
ordinance
standards
and
code,
another
example,
you
know
we
don't
exercise
design
oversight
at
the
last
minute.
After
Park
staff
develops
a
new
playground
or
after
engineering
staff
redesigns
an
intersection.
I
Nowhere
else
in
the
city.
Do
we
exercise
this
sort
of
override
of
of
expertise
in
design
and
executive
function?
So
it
seeks
to
give
the
Council
of
veto
power
over
final
design
projects
that
we've
already
approved
multiple
times,
I.
Think
framing
this
simply
as
Council
involvement
is
misleading,
because
we've
already
been
involved
in
approved
the
projects
through
the
transportation
plan
through
budget
Appropriations
I.
I
Think
if
a
majority,
like
has
been
said
at
the
majority
of
the
council,
no
longer
supports
particular
Greenways
that
we
Anonymous
unanimously
adopted
in
our
transportation
plan,
then
we
should
work
to
remove
them
from
the
Transportation
plan.
Our
role
is
to
set
the
policy
direction
of
the
city
and
rely
on
staff
to
implement
the
policy.
We
should
be
working
at
a
systems
level,
not
an
ad
hoc
reactive
level.
To
me,
this
ordinance
is
the
opposite
of
a
systems
level
approach.
It
provides
for
ad
hoc
last
minute
review
that
is
highly
subject
to
being
politicized.
I
A
few
important
points
that
I
think
were
made
in
public
comment.
One
is
an
album.
Heights
resident
mentioned
an
important
issue
that
didn't
get
a
lot
of
air
tonight,
which
is
that
these
programs
seek
to
improve
safety
for
using
data-driven
approaches
for
pedestrians
and
bicyclists,
who
are
our
most
vulnerable
roadway
users.
I
When
we
have
public
feedback
from
10,
50,
80
people,
you
know
it's
a
it's
a
tiny
fraction
of
the
many
thousands
of
folks
who
are
engaged
in
our
street
Network,
there's
no
way
to
prioritize
the
voices
of
the
most
vulnerable
and
marginalized
in
that
system.
That's
not
what's
being
taken
into
consideration
when
we
sort
of
weigh
the
the
public
opinion
we
hear
from.
I
Similarly,
in
Park
Ridge
East,
it
was
mentioned
that
on
a
road
with
sharrows
on
it,
folks
have
been
clocked
at
70
miles
an
hour
council
member
Alo,
expressed
repeatedly
that
he
thinks
cheros
and
wayfinding
signs
constitute
an
adequately
safe
Greenway.
We
heard
from
staff
that
this
is
not
their
opinion,
that
this
is
not
a
Greenway.
His
repeated
insistence
of
this
point
that
this
is
an
adequate
Greenway,
despite
all
evidence,
expertise
and
data
on
safety,
including
actual
crash
data
on
Hawthorne
that
Mr
Alexander
shared
tonight.
I
This
insistence
from
councilman
moral
about
cherose
as
an
adequate
green
rate,
demonstrates
the
problems
with
substituting
council
member
opinion
on
roadway
safety
for
the
professional
views
of
experts
as
informed
by
data
and
the
experiences
of
members
of
the
public
I.
Think
a
couple
more
questions,
comments
from
bike:
ped
safety,
Commissioners,
really
drive
home.
Some
important
points,
one
shared
with
me.
I
If
the
representative
arm
of
our
democracy
feels
the
need
for
more
input
into
the
process,
especially
canceling
projects,
we
felt
it
would
be
much
better
if
that
were
done
earlier
in
the
process
as
proposed.
The
amendment
is
asking
for
veto
power,
citizens
and
staff
alike.
Could
have
spent
many
hours
working
on
the
process
only
to
have
it
rejected
at
the
end.
I
do
not
think
this
is
the
right
way
to
do
the
city's
business.
I
Similarly,
another
commissioner
said
to
my
understanding
the
criticisms
of
the
resident-led
program
that
were
raised
last
year
and
prompted
this
amendment
regard
to
public
engagement
component
of
the
process.
Yet
the
proposed
changes
do
not
at
all
address
the
public
engagement
process
to
be
sure,
Council
action
would
add
a
layer
of
oversight,
but
it
does
not
explicitly
address
the
concerns
at
hand.
Further,
the
proposal
to
insert
Council
action
at
the
end
of
the
process
is
rather
clumsy.
I
Just
to
say,
we
don't
think
this
is
a
good
idea
for
a
Greenway
anymore,
because
a
portion
of
the
community
we're
hearing
from
are
upset
about
it.
It's
just
the
wrong
approach
to
change
policy.
There
are
other
tools
that
have
been
demonstrated
to
make
those
changes
again:
Amendment
to
the
transportation
plan,
removing
funding
for
certain
projects
in
the
budget.
These
are
tools
that
are
the
council's
tools,
they're
the
appropriate
tools
to
use
amending
the
process
that
we
adopted
unanimously
to
make
public
involvement
more
Equitable
or
differently
structured.
I
All
those
things
are
viable,
but
I
think
it's
fiscally
irresponsible
and
really
not
our
role
to
exercise
veto
authority
over
design
and
then
finally,
just
final
point
that
I
think
this
is
really
all
been
responsive
to
one
project
and
a
certain
subset
of
residents.
I
Disagreement
with
the
the
the
existence
of
a
Greenway,
essentially
in
their
neighborhood,
and
so
the
fact
that
we're
trying
to
override
this
whole
process,
which
has
the
likelihood
of
killing
the
Greenways
program
altogether
because
of
the
uncertainty
it
creates,
and
the
fiscal
responsibility
I
think
that's
a
very
misguided
approach
to
trying
to
address
concerns
about
one
project.
Thank
you.
A
C
C
I,
maybe
someone
that
can
explain
that
to
me:
I've
heard
it's
political
in
nature:
it
becomes
politicized,
I
mean
I,
maybe
I'm
not
saying
it
correctly.
Why
can't
we
and
be
involved
and
I'm
not
talking
about
Hawthorne
and
that
this
is
the
bigger
thing
counsel
engagement?
C
C
That
is
Council
involvement,
I,
don't
get
it.
I
have
no
intentions
of
me
personally,
saying
I,
don't
like
this
Greenway
get
rid
of
it
and
we
waste
all
the
money
and
design
I've
been
on
the
sidewalk
committee.
I've
been
on
everything
since
I've
been
here
so
I
I
can
see
some
of
the
opposition
and
say:
well
you
guys,
overhanded
and
you're,
going
to
do
certain
things
that
we
don't
want
done.
C
C
Over
in
Broadview,
neighborhood
I
want
to
say
Ralston
and
Graham.
That's
when
council
member
stir
bomb
was
still
on
the
council
and
we
were
there,
he's
the
district
rep
I'm
an
at
large
person.
I,
don't
think
there
was
anyone
else
there
at
that
particular
yes,
Mr
Rosenberg
were
there
and
and
I
think
she
remembers
one
of
the
the
issues
that
I
had
with
this
traffic
calming
neighborhood
discussion
of
people
and
their
input.
C
Was
first
of
all
the
small
number
that
was
there
that
was
Voting
I,
don't
remember
what
the
vote
nine
to
seven
or
something
or
not?
I,
don't
remember,
but
I
do
remember
that
traffic
calming
the
the
little
humps
and
and
how
it
intersects
with
the
right
away
was
approved
and
I
thought
that
was
necessary.
One
of
the
biggest
issues
was
the
speeding
Transit
bus.
That
was
one
of
the
biggest
issues
that
I
recall
was
talking
about.
How
do
we
slow
down
the
transit
buses
now
part
of
that
conversation
was
also
the
turn.
C
Which
I
did
not
agree
with
I,
don't
think
many
of
the
residents
agreed
with
it
again
the
small
number,
but
that
was
allowed
to
remain
a
two-way
street
by
one
vote
as
I
recall,
maybe
two
very
very
close.
Actually,
they
both
were
close,
but
the
opposite.
So
we
put
traffic
comment
on
one
but
kept
the
other
two-way
and
what
I
heard
was
a
residence.
It's
like
that's
the
street
I
live
on.
C
Why
do
I
have
to
go
all
the
way
around
here
when
there's
no
real
rationale
in
for
safety,
for
a
one-way
Street
traffic
calming
I
get
that,
but
to
change
the
whole
direction
of
that
street.
For
people
that
have
been
living
there,
it
would
have
happened
without
Council
involvement.
C
That's
just
all
I'm
saying
I'm,
not
against
our
engineers
and
our
Planters
and
people
were
great
I
mean
I've
been
doing
this
for
a
couple
turns
not
near
as
long
as
some
of
my
colleagues
but
I
voted
for
these
I
think
it's
very,
very
important,
but
to
say
you've
already
approved
it.
You've
already
funded
it.
You
know
you've
already
given
authority
to
these
folks
to
do
certain
things.
Now.
You
guys
don't
have
anything
else
to
say
about
it
and
kind
of
back
out
of
the
way.
C
Maybe
that's
not
what
I'm
hearing,
maybe
that's
not
what
councilman
Morello's
saying,
but
that's
kind
of
the
fail
that
I
have
and
I
do
not
like
being
not
being
able
to
be
engaged
as
a
council
member,
so
it
could
go
either
way.
My
plan
would
be
to
support
and
and
I
hear
I
hear
what
I'm
hearing
and
I
agree
with
a
lot
of
it.
C
H
Yes,
I
would
just
first
of
all
like
to
talk
about
Council
engagement,
since
my
colleague,
councilmember
Sims,
brought
it
up.
I
think
Council
engagement
is
important,
is
necessary
and
should
be
pursued
for
the
issue
of
Greenways
as
well
as
most
other
issues
in
the
community.
H
Council
engagement
is
a
good
thing,
but
a
council
vote
at
the
end
of
a
long
process
that
takes
that
has
taken
account
of
data
on
the
ground
is
not
the
same
as
engagement
Council
engagement,
I
would
say
is
if
we
were
informed
earlier
in
the
process
about
a
Greenway
plan
that
has
been
either
brought
forward
by
residents
or
was
in
our
transportation
plan
and
is
now
being
considered
to
be
built.
If
we
could
be
informed
earlier
in
that
process,
we
could
meet
with
staff
individually
or
in
small
groups.
H
H
That
is
that
is
a
veto.
I
mean
at
that
point.
It
is
it's
either
a
veto
or
yeah
go
ahead
and
that
threat
of
that
and
I
call
it
a
veto
because,
as
far
as
I
understand
the
council
would
not
have
the
ability
to
amend
what
is
happening,
they
would
just
have
the
ability
to
say
yes
or
no,
and
that's
that's
what
a
veto
is
and
I
I
think
that
that
is
not
productive
at
all.
That
is
not
Council
engagement,
that
is
a
council
veto
power.
H
So
I
I
feel
very
strongly
that
if
you
want,
if
councilmember,
Rallo
and
others
in
the
community
want
greater
counsel
oversight
for
Greenways,
then
they
should
propose
a
revision
of
the
transportation
plan.
In
that
proposal
they
could
put
you
know
more
details
as
to
what
Greenways
are.
Maybe
even
have
you
know,
option
a
option
b
of
this
is
what
Greenways
are
and
have
it
match
up
with
our
where
Greenways
appear
on
the
map.
H
The
Proposal
could
then
take
out
whatever
Greenways.
They
feel
don't
need
any
work
on
them
at
all.
Don't
need
any
revisions
or
should
not
be
turned
into
Greenways.
They
could
take
that
out
and
bring
forward
that
proposal
and
that
the
council
could
then
discuss,
but
don't
bring
forward
a
last
minute
veto
power
over
what
staff
and
residents
have
spent
months
developing.
H
R
R
We've
been
called
a
waste
of
money,
we're
gonna
we're
bureaucrats
we're
going
to
cause
all
these
delays
and
I
want
to
assure
the
public
that
if
residents
initiate
and
welcome
traffic
calming
and
Greenways
projects
in
their
neighborhoods,
there
would
be
no
reason
for
any
of
us
on
this
Council
to
deny
it
there's
a
fear.
That's
been
whipped
up
from
the
residents
and
some
of
the
comments
that
we
get
and
we
get
emails.
This
is
not
the
only
opportunity
for
you
to
communicate
with
us.
R
We
hear
from
you
all
the
time
we
hear
from
you
in
our
constituent
meetings.
We
get
emails.
We
we
hear
all
kinds
of
negative
things
out
and
about
when
we're
living
our
lives
and
out
in
the
community,
but
there
seems
to
be
a
fear
of
residence
that
the
council
intent
here
that
that
council
member
rollo's
ordinance
here
is
for
us
to
kill
good
projects
that
you,
as
as
residents
neighbors
homeowners
may
see,
is
valuable
on
one
and
that's
not
the
case.
This
is
not
a
matter
of
us
vetoing
things
and
voting
no
on
things.
R
We
can
get
people
on
board
very
quickly.
There'll
be
no
reason
for
anybody
to
vote
no
on
anything,
it's
that
do
not
eliminate
the
importance
of
the
checks
and
balances
from
the
administration
who
hires
the
staff
and
the
council,
who
is
elected
by
the
people
to
be
involved
in
these
important
decisions.
Now
I,
don't
know
that
we
would
be
this
interested
in
it
if
we
hadn't
heard
such
of
such
opposition
to
some
of
the
things
that
were
being
imposed,
but
since
we
did
it
caused
many
of
us
to
think.
R
Yes,
things
are
out
of
balance
here.
I
have
never
in
my
time
on
this
Council
been
told
that
we
staff,
interacting
with
a
member
of
the
city
council,
needed
some
sort
of
a
fiscal
impact.
I
have
never
put
a
price
tag
on
any
of
my
conversations
with
staff
or
with
with
any
member
of
the
public.
That's
my
job,
that's
their
job,
to
communicate
with
the
city
council
in
a
way
that
ensures
we
have
good
oversight
of
these
expensive
projects.
R
R
That
is
just
wow.
That
was
a
mind
blow.
That's
our
whole
reason
to
exist.
If,
if
you
all
could
just
figure
it
out
yourselves,
why
would
you
even
need
a
city
council,
that's
responsible
to
you
and
responsible
to
this
budget?
We
must
have
involvement
in
these
important
decisions,
and
so
this
is
a
simple
matter
for
me.
It
just
restores
a
balance.
R
No
I,
don't
think
that's
right,
so
I
will
be
voting.
Yes,
I!
Don't
think
it's
all
that
complicated
we're
not
going
to
delay
things
we're
not
going
to
cost
any
more
money.
I
think
it
just
adds
that
level
of
oversight.
That
is
why
I
ran
for
office
in
the
first
place,
to
be
able
to
provide
that
as
a
public
servant
and
I.
Thank
you,
councilmember
Rallo,
for
sticking
your
neck
out
and
bringing
this
forward.
It's
not
been
easy.
D
Thank
you
a
very
interesting
evening,
I'm
really
kind
of
shocked
by
the
vehemence.
The
reaction,
I
I
agree
with
councilmember
Sims
I
I.
Don't
see
this
the
threat
of
of
council
oversight
on
something
that
is
as
significant
as
this
type
of
infrastructure,
which
will
fundamentally
change
threads
I,
I'm,
I'm
kind
of
surprised
by
that
and
I
I.
D
Don't
I
think
that
either
there's
a
lack
of
understanding-
or
this
is
some
kind
of
maybe
a
straw
man
or
something
are
being
proposed
that
that
this
is
all
about
veto,
and
this
is
a
veto
power
at
the
end,
I
mean
I.
I
can't
count
the
number
of
times
that
Council
has
taken
on
bridge
at
the
administration.
Coming
to
the
council
and
saying
you
know,
look
we've
we've
gone
through
this
whole
process.
D
We've
hired
these
Consultants
and
now
you
know,
don't
hold
this
up
whatever
policy.
It
was
because
all
these
sunk
costs
were
involved
and
therefore
just
go
ahead
and
rubber
stamp
it,
and
we
take
umbrage
at
that
because
no,
it's
our
it's
our
role
to
say,
where's.
The
data
you
know
have
have
the
has
the
process
been
working?
You
know
it's
not
just
review
at
the
final
step.
D
The
the
our
our
role
at
the
at
the
end
of
the
process
implies
that
we
will
be
informed
throughout
the
process
and
and
it
will
be
in
the
interest
of
planning
staff
to
come
and
say,
here's
what
we're
working
on
and
here's
what
it's
here's
what's
happened.
They
give
us
an
update,
and
here
are
the
meetings
that
we've
had
to
date.
D
So
I
would
be
shocked
if
we
only
heard
it
at
the
end
and
we
would
suddenly
veto
it
because
it
was
it
was
such
a
horrible
project.
I,
don't
I,
don't
intend
on
I
want
a
better
process
and
I
want
to
I
I
want
to
approve
of
the
Greenways
and
I
want
them
done
right
and
I
want
them
done
in
a
proper
process.
Speaking
of
process,
I
I'm
I'm
a
little
bit
behooved
too,
because
I
I
explained
in
a
previous
meeting
to
council
member
Flaherty
that
I
did
it
attend
a
bike
and
ped
safety.
D
Commission
meeting
the
item
was
put
on
the
agenda.
One
item
was
taken
off
and-
and
this
was
substituted
Suddenly
by
by
assistant
director,
Rosenberger
and
I-
wasn't
invited
to
that
meeting.
But
I
found
out
and
I
turned
up
to
answer
questions.
So
I
did
attend
that
I,
you
weren't
present.
You
could
have
watched
it
I
guess
it
was
recorded,
so
you
you
should
know.
I
and
I
explained
that
at
a
previous
meeting,
I
also
attended
the
the
meeting
where
people
were
upset
and
I
understood.
D
Why
and
a
council
member
Sandberg
attended
that
meeting,
but
councilmember
Flaherty
did
not
so
I
I'm,
taking
the
task
for
apparently
not
showing
up
the
meetings
when
I
indeed
did,
but
in
any
case
I'm
just
getting
back
to
the
to
the
matter
at
hand.
This
just
ensures
that
we
have
the
engagement
with
the
public.
We
are
the
elected
body
as
councilmember
Sandberg
said
it
expands
the
Democratic
process.
D
It
provides
that
kind
of
balance
between
the
administration
and
the
council
and
I
think
that
it'll
create
a
better
product
in
the
end.
So
I
can
only
guess
that
this
is
this
fear
of
the
council.
Involvement
is
because
there
is
a
certain
amount
of
of
power.
D
You
know
the
bike
and
pet
safety
Commission.
Of
course
they
voted
unanimously
against
it.
D
Councilmember
Flair
they
they
knew
about
this
for
six
months,
but
councilmember
Flaherty
went
to
them
in
the
past
week
and
said:
do
you
I
assume
you
want?
You
want
to
make
a
a
emotion
or
a
resolution
opposing
it,
and
they
did
because
it
does
diminish
their
power
they're.
Not
they
don't
have
the
final
say,
but
I've
attended
those
meetings
and
they
don't
talk
in
detail
about
the
fiscal
impacts.
D
So
all
the
work
that's
involved
in
this,
of
course,
is
like
any
other
product
that
we
oversee
like
the
budget.
Imagine
how
much
work
goes
into
the
budget
that
we
might
vote
against,
I
suppose,
but
we
don't
and
the
it
behooves
the
staff
to
give
us
a
good
product
to
convince
us
that
it's
fiscally
sound
and
that
is
worthy
of
approval.
D
Otherwise
I
don't
as
councilmember
Sanders
says,
I,
don't
know
what
role
we
have,
but
I
think
that
we
do
need
to
have
this
role.
For
for
the
balance
with
the
administration
and
for
oversight
and
and
to
to
have
be
more
responsive
to
to
constituents.
D
D
But
that
was
brought
forward
by
by
the
representative
from
kind
of
from
District
three
to
connect
District
three
to
campus,
and
it
happened
to
run
through
District
Four
I
didn't
advocate
for
it.
He
did
he
wanted
it
because
he
had
constituents
coming
to
him
and
now
actually
with
redistricting.
D
It
is
in
District
three
as
as
a
matter
of
fact,
so
there
are
things
that
are
missing
from
Mr
stocksburg's
report,
but
Equity
is
important
and
so,
when
I
see,
for
instance,
a
need
for
some
kind
of
traffic
calming
that
is
a
pedestrian
Crossing
at
Sheridan
and
Maxwell
and
I
met
with
staff.
I
met
with
the
engineers
and
I
said
what
can
be
done
and
they
said
we
could
re-engineer
this
entire
intersection
and
it
would
cost
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
and
I
and
I
said
what
about
a
stop
sign.
D
Well,
we
don't
navigate
for
stop
signs,
but
it
could
work.
It
could
work
here,
there's
no.
We
won't
object
to
it.
So
I
thought
well
that
stop
signs
under
a
thousand
dollars.
So
now
we
have
the
ability
to
use
that
hundreds
of
thousands
of
dollars
for
other
things
in
the
city
like
Jack,
Hawkins
or
like
other
side
or
other
projects
involving
Greenways
same
thing
with
this
project.
If,
if
I
see
a
project
that
I
hear
and
I
understand,
maybe
over
build,
that's
a
that's
an
opportunity
cost
for
the
greenway,
that's
needed
in
Maple
Heights.
D
That
I
can't
remember
her
name,
but
the
the
woman
who
spoke
passionately
about
the
need
for
it
in
her
neighborhood.
Album
Heights
really
doesn't
need
this
in
my
mind,
but
I
could
be
convinced
and
given
the
data,
but
that
wasn't
in
the
offing.
Really,
it
was
a
fast
track
process
that
left
out
public
input
so
just
to
ensure
that
that
happens,
I
think
Council
having
Council
involvement
is
a
good
thing
and
it's
not
a
boogeyman.
It's
it's
part
of
the
process
of
democratic
and
inclusion,
so
I'll
leave
it
there.
Thank
you.
G
Thank
you,
I'm
gonna
support,
this
ordinance
and
I.
Think
the
rationale
for
me
is
if,
if
there's
a
Greenway
project
or
an
or
some
other
project
in
in
the
city,
that
we
have
a
strong
mayor
model
here
in
Bloomington,
and
maybe
you
can
think
of
the
Cascades
issue
where
it's
been
brought
back
up
to
close
Cascades,
Road
Again
and
the
constituents
didn't
already
said
no,
and
we
already
voted
that
down.
So
it's
getting
brought
back
up
again
and
part
of
it
is
because
it,
it's
being,
you
know,
forwarded
by
the
administration.
G
G
If,
if
our
oversight
is
taken
away-
and
we
don't
do
that-
then
it's
not
it's
not
going
to
be
fought
for
by
our
for
by
on
our
on
our
constituents
behalf
by
us
and
I.
Think
that's
what
we're
here
for
I
know
that
councilmember
Raleigh
was
much
more
eloquent
in
saying
all
this,
but
that's
that's
our
fiduciary
oversight
and
I.
G
Don't
believe
this
is
going
to
affect
negatively
The
Greenway
projects,
but
we'll
see
that
it
feels
okay
to
our
constituents
and
we'll
align
with
that
and
hopefully
vote
that
that
way.
Thank
you.
L
When
the
ntsp
the
program,
the
tcgp
replaced,
was
created
in
1999
engineering
was
a
function
of
the
public
works
department,
then
it
moved
to
planning
before
becoming
its
own
department.
Just
a
couple
of
years
ago
after
the
tcgp
was
created,
the
fact
that
engineering
and
no
longer
planning
and
transportation
and
no
longer
this
body
designs,
speed,
bumps
or
chicanes
shows
how
much
the
way
the
city
approaches.
Street
design
has
evolved.
L
L
No
one
is
saying:
Council
should
not
have
say
well.
We're
debating
tonight
is
how
much
say
Council
should
have
Mr
Duncan's
argument
about
balancing
over
and
under
representation
is
telling
here.
That's
what
we've
been
trying
to
do
as
a
council
for
my
entire
tenure
to
strike
the
right
balance
I'm
going
to
take
it
face
value,
councilman,
morale's
assertion
that
introducing
this
ordinance
in
short
order
was
the
only
way
he
could
think
of
to
stop
what
he
thought
was
a
bad
outcome
caused
by
the
new
program.
L
L
The
political
concerns
of
these
residents
inspired
a
political
overreaction
from
their
District
representative
that
took
several
months
to
come
back
to
us
with
cooler
heads
prevailing.
This
is
the
same
man
who
brought
back
the
Fourth
Street
Garage
from
the
dead
in
Spring
2019..
He
has
knowledge
of
all
our
processes
he's
the
parliamentarian.
L
I,
don't
blame
him
for
trying
to
find
a
way
to
undo
something
he
doesn't
agree
with,
but
it
does
matter
how
he
does
it
if
we
undo
this
program.
One
consequence
is
we
return
to
those
messy
meetings
where
we
go
for
hours
after
hours
of
unrelated
preliminaries
and
there's
lots
of
Sound
and
Fury
and
citizens
on
either
side
of
an
issue
have
to
Wade
through
it
all.
L
L
The
same
principle
adheres
here
is
to
another
formerly
troubled
program.
The
reserved
on-street
parking
program
was
the
subject
of
tremendous
debate
over
individual
preferences.
We
killed
that
program
for
a
reason.
The
people
who
have
spoken
in
support
of
this
tonight
keep
saying
we
need
more
public
input,
but
they
consistently
ignored
the
complaints
raised
by
those
against
it.
The
primary
argument
against
it
is:
we
need
more
oversight.
I
keep
hearing
that
word
back
in
2020.
L
He's
also
right
that
this
is
about
process,
but
his
re-engineered
process
from
2235
once
again
goes
too
far.
The
other
way
it'll
favor
those
with
the
privilege
to
attend
meetings
to
have
an
extra
bite
at
the
Apple.
If
we're
going
to
codify
the
complex
nuances
of
a
Greenway,
we
need
to
codify
everything
else.
Lane
widths,
bike,
Lanes
Etc.
L
This
is
not
the
solution.
If
we're
going
to
talk
about
process,
let
the
council
consider
this.
We
know
how
much
time
we're
supposed
to
take
for
each
regular
period
of
our
meetings.
We
moved
to
extend
one
of
our
periods
tonight,
but
we
can
control
our
time
better
by
putting
limits
on
more
than
just
public
comment,
we
can
put
limits
on
debate
like
we're
having
right
now
we
let
all
ourselves
unlimited
debate.
We
can
put
limits
on
the
question
and
answer
period.
We
can
put
limits
on
each
individual
members
opportunity
to
ask
a
question.
L
Members
can
reclaim
their
time
if
they
need
to.
We
can
limit
the
whole
time
we'll
spend
well
the
time
we'll
spend
on
the
ordinance
as
a
whole,
so
that
people
know
when
they
can
go
home
without
missing
their
chance
to
speak,
knowing
that
it
will
be
taken
up
at
a
later
later
meeting.
We
could
do
all
these
things
to
let
people
schedule
around
an
issue
of
such
importance.
We
have
always
been
able
to
do
that,
but
this
Council
has
steadfastly
refused
to
do
so.
L
If
councilmember
Rallo
were
also
willing
to
schedule
ordinances
to
be
heard
at
a
particular
time,
then
people
who
supported
his
ordinance
could
predict
when
they
had
to
be
here
as
much
as
people
who
opposed
it.
If
we
promise
not
to
hear
it
again
before
it
was
continued
at
another
meeting,
more
people
could
have
arranged
to
come
to
speak
to
it
and
not
have
to
guess
when
we
take
it
up
at
our
own
convenience.
This
ordinance
began
being
discussed
at
8
25.
L
L
For
all
these
reasons,
I
cannot
support
this
ordinance.
I
do
I
am
sensitive
to
the
reasons
why
councilman
Moralo
reacted
the
way
he
did
with
ordinance
2235.
That
became
this
ordinance,
but
it
is
not
a
sufficient
solution.
It
is
inconsistent
with
with
oversight
across
the
board
and
I
urge
him
to
reconsider
a
different
way
of
approaching
this
problem.
Thank
you.
M
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
Okay,
thank
you
to
everyone
who
has
commented
so
far
been
very
interesting.
I
would
say
in
general,
like
I,
said
before
I'm
up
for
considering
changes
to
this
program,
but
if
so
many
folks
have
said
tonight,
I
don't
think
this
change
is
the
right
change
and
I
think
it
misses
I
think
it
misses
the
Mark
I
think
it
could
too
much
power
on
Council
too
late
in
the
process.
M
This
is
the
final
step
of
a
month,
long,
maybe
year-long
process
that
has
actually
cost
the
city,
tens
of
dozens
of
Staff
hours
consultant
dollars,
and
it
feels
like
if
council
members
want
to
be
engaged.
As
they
have
said
tonight,
engagement
doesn't
come
in
the
form
of
veto
or
oversight.
Engagement
comes
in
the
form
of
participating
in
the
process
from
the
very
beginning,
I
think
I,
repeat
what
Mr
Duncan
said
that
he
would
love.
M
T
M
Traffic
calming
and
Greenways
projects
in
our
city
not
only
disheartening,
it
creates
safety
issues
for
our
residents.
Moving
about
the
city
staff
and
residents
find
this
updated
program
to
be
successful.
The
way
it
is
right
now,
staff
has
seen
increased
engagement
each
year
from
Resident
and
from
residents
and
neighborhoods
that
we
so
rarely
see
at
our
City
Council
meetings.
For
example,
I
already
mentioned
Crestmont
has
applied
for
two
of
these
projects
and
they
have
had
one
awarded
to
them.
F
M
This
is
an
anecdote
that
I'm
going
to
share
that
I
debated,
sharing,
so
I
work
at
the
South
Southeast
y
as
a
staff
at
the
Welcome
Center,
and
sometimes
this
gives
me
unique
insight
into
what
people
think
accidentally,
because
I
talk
to
people
and
I
hear
people
having
conversations
I
heard
of
Weatherstone
residents
say
that
they
did
not
want
the
greenway
on
Hawthorne
Weatherstone
because
they
did
not
want
lower
income
residents
using
their
street
and
being
near
their
yard.
Like
that
makes
me
tear
up.
M
The
thing
is
I
think
that
streets
belong
to
all
of
our
residents.
They
belong
to
anyone
who
uses
them
or
can
use
them
whether
they
live
on
that
street
or
not,
and
people
moving
through
our
neighborhoods
on
our
streets
need
to
be
kept
as
safe
as
we
can
keep
them.
Whether
we
live
there
or
not.
So
having
someone
say
they
don't
want.
People
from
a
neighborhood
south
of
them
on
their
street
is
just
incredibly
disheartening
and
we're
talking
about
letting
that
run.
M
Our
decision
making
some
council
members
tonight
brought
up
bringing
power
back
to
council
veto
power
oversight,
power,
fiduciary
power.
This
is
the
council
power
hoarding
our
traffic
calming
and
Greenways
program
has
empowered
residents
to
make
changes
in
their
neighborhood,
and
this
amendment
takes
power
away
from
our
residents.
M
I
think
still,
a
better
option
would
be
to
look
at
something
that
is
similar
to
the
sidewalk
committee,
where
we
have
some
oversight
in
the
beginning
of
the
process
and
the
budgeting
phase
of
the
process.
But
we
don't
we
don't
we
don't
make
the
decision
in
the
end
after
a
design
has
has
been
created.
We
don't
go
back
and
look
at
sidewalk
designs
and
say
this
isn't
right.
We
just
let
engineering
and
playing
and
transportation
do
those
sidewalks
after
we've
agreed
to
budgeting
for
them,
so
I
think
in
general.
This.
M
This
is
disheartening
to
me
on
so
many
levels
that
we
are
bringing
something
back
that
wasn't
working
and
that
probably
will
not
work
moving
forward.
I
think
it's
unfortunate
that
this
is
going
to
stall
most
likely
stall
this
process,
but
I
hope
that
moving
forward
in
2024,
we
can
come
back
through
this
and
create
ways
for
residents
to
be
involved
in
Equitable
ways
that
we
have
seen
proven
to
work
thanks.
A
And
that
would
be
me
then,
thanks.
A
A
So
I
did
what
I
do
and
that's
I
have
two
columns
on
my
notes.
That
say
what's
compelling
to
think
about
and
what's
not
compelling
to
think
about-
and
there
are
several
arguments
I've
heard
tonight
that
are
not
compelling
one
is
that
involving
Council
will
somehow
politicize
the
process
and
make
it
unjust.
Council
is
just
waiting
to
be
obstructionist,
I
I
would
respectfully
disagree.
I
understand
there
are
people
who
feel
that
way.
I
would
respectfully
disagree.
I,
don't
think
that's
the
case.
A
I
I,
don't
it
would
not
be
my
choice
to
characterize
a
desire
for
counsel,
increased
counsel
oversight
as
power
hoarding.
So
I
would
note
that
as
well.
It's
also
not
fully
compelling
to
me
to
hear,
but
there
is
a
plan.
There
is
a
transportation
plan.
There
is
a
comprehensive
plan.
A
One
of
the
things
I
said
when
we
were
discussing
the
stop
sign
on
Sheridan
is
that
we
certainly
have
plans
and
I
I,
hear
Ms
Rosenberger
and
Mr
Duncan's
comments
that
that's
what
they
work
from.
They
work
from
the
plans
that
have
been
adopted,
but
one
of
the
things
I
said
regarding
that
stop
sign
is
that,
even
with
our
plans
in
place,
when
residents
come
to
us
with
a
well-researched,
well
thought
out
response
or
set
of
feedback
set
of
information
or
feedback
I
think
we
have
an
obligation
to
listen
to
it.
A
A
I
think
there
have
been
some
misstep
I
think
what
gave
birth
to
this
particular
ordinance
focused
on
the
Hawthorne
project
in
particular,
and
I,
have
tried
very
consciously
to
separate
out
the
Hawthorne
project
from
an
effort
to
it
to
alter
this
entire
process
going
forward
and
I'm
very
conscious
that
those
are
two
different
things.
A
I
do
acknowledge,
I
I
do
sense.
There
have
been
some
missteps
in
working
with
the
Hawthorne
project.
It
sounds
like
there
was
an
email
that
was
sent
out
in
error
that
created
some
expectations
or
created
some
rumors.
That
were
not
helpful.
It
sounds
as
if
between
the
first
and
second
meetings,
there
was
somehow
some
kind
of
a
disconnect
in
and
what
produced
initial
feedback.
A
Somehow
it
didn't
translate
into
a
design
that
had
support
the
level
of
support
you
were
to
expect
after
hearing
feedback
in
a
first
meeting,
so
I
acknowledged
that
there
were
some
missteps
there.
One
of
the
things
I
would
strongly
strongly
encourage
planning
and
transportation
to
do
in
the
future
is
to
invade,
engage
and
inform
council
members.
A
Early
I
have
I
have
written
two
letters
of
support
this
year
for
resident-led
traffic
calming
projects
both
of
them
I
heard
about
from
residents,
even
though
they
sent
letters
of
inquiry,
it
would
have
been
helpful
to
me
to
hear
by
the
way
Sue
within
your
District,
these
two
particular
proposals,
or
these
two
inquiries
have
come
forward.
You
might
be
getting
a
request
for
that.
So
I
think
that
kind
of
communication
early
is
tremendously
helpful.
A
I
appreciate
the
the
suggestion
or
the
observation
that
it
might
be
a
good
idea
to
report
every
year
or
every
six
months
or
whatever
is
appropriate
on
the
anticipated
projects
that
are
coming
down.
The
pike,
because
I
think
that
gives
us
a
chance
that
gives
you
a
chance
to
use
us
to
engage
with
our
residents.
So
I
would
very
strongly
encourage.
You
encourage
our
planning
and
transportation
department
to
engage
council
members
early.
Okay.
A
What
this
comes
down
to
for
me
is
whether
or
not
this
process
is
fundamentally
flawed,
and
what
would
what
would
make
it
fundamentally
flawed,
in
my
mind,
is
its
inability
to
involve
resident
input.
Okay,
Equity
is
important
to
me.
The
comment
we
heard
during
public
comment
about
the
connect,
the
this
systemic
View
and
the
connectedness
of
our
system.
I
think
were
very
compelling
to
me
as
well.
A
But
the
fundamental
question
for
me
was:
do
I,
believe
our
planning
and
transportation
staff
are
committed
to
receiving
resident
input
and
incorporating
it
in
as
productive
a
way
as
possible,
and
that's
why
I
pushed
Mr,
rosenbarger
and
Mr
Duncan
pretty
hard
on
that
and
asked
them
several
times
in
a
couple
different
ways.
A
What
their
thoughts
were
on,
that
I'm
satisfied
that
they
do
I'm
satisfied
that
they
do
have
that
commitment
and
that
they
want
to
engage
resident
input.
I'm
satisfied
that
this
was
something
at
least
the
Hawthorne
Greenway
was
something
of
a
learning
experience
and
that
there
are
some
refinements
in
the
process
that
are
coming
down.
The
pike
not
the
least
of
which
is
informing
council
members
early,
but
also
perhaps
some
new
strategies
for
meetings
going
forward.
That
will
allow
us
to
avoid
or
or
better
respond
to
some
of
the
challenges
that
we've
seen
this
time.
A
But
where
I
have
finally
come
down
and
again
I've
struggled
with
this
decision
all
night,
it's
for
now
three
hours
do
I
believe
this
is
a
fundamentally
flawed
process
and
I
guess
I,
don't
so!
For
that
reason,
I
appreciate
what
Mr,
Duncan
and
Ms
rosenbarger
have
said
about
their
commitment
to
resident
input.
I
appreciate
what
they've
said
about
learning
experiences
during
this
most
recent
Greenway
project
and
I
won't
be
supporting
this
particular
ordinance.
I
Thank
you
a
couple
of
things:
first,
just
to
clarify
because
sort
of
factual
record
and
what
I,
what
I've
met
with
respect
to
the
bike.
Bed.
Safety,
commission
I
couldn't
recall
quite
what
happened.
I
Last
fall
I
recall
that
hadn't
gone
through
the
commission,
so
I
reached
out
to
Commissioners
to
ask
what
that
process
had
been,
and
one
commissioner
got
back
to
me
and
said
she
was
the
commissioner
that
asked
for
it
to
be
in
the
agenda
that
councilman
did
not
request
to
present,
but
he
did
show
up
that
night
because
he
said
he
noticed
it
was
on
the
agenda.
Didn't
do
a
presentation,
but
I
spoke
during
public
comment
and
then
last
week
well,
councilmember
earlier
said:
the
council
member
Clarity
went
to
them,
went
to
the
bike.
I
Ped
save
commission
the
last
week
to
sort
of
advocate
for
this
resolution,
which
is
not
the
case.
I
made
a
motion
at
our
council
meeting
last
week
to
send
it
to
the
bike
bed
safety
commission
for
the
recommendation.
I
I
meant
for
councilmember
Rallo
to
present
it
to
them
and
engage
with
them
on
it,
which
which
did
not
happen
so
I,
understand
he
attended
a
meeting.
I
My
point
was
that
the
legislative
process
should
really
work
to
engage
those
resident-led
commissions
meaningfully
in
the
development
involvement
evolution
of
the
ordinance
so
to
clarify
that-
and
the
second
is
just.
I
I
I
hear
the
perspectives
of
folks
that
are
concerned
about
you,
know
this
discussion
of
politicization
or
or
like
I,
understand
some
of
my
colleagues
sort
of
put
off
by
that
term.
Maybe
a
better
way
to
think
about.
It
is
just
policy
priorities
that
range
across
the
council
before
I
decided
to
run
for
Council
was
something
I
never
expected
to
do.
I
I
was
involved
as
a
transportation,
Advocate
and
housing
advocate
in
our
community
and
part
of
what
ultimately
led
to
my
getting
involved
was
that
I
I
was
disappointed
time
and
again
by
how
easy
it
was
for
a
handful
of
folks
to
to
kill
safety
projects
or
or
good
policies
that
were
called
for
in
our
plans.
We
said
we
wanted
to
that
met
our
goals
and
it
was
so
easy
to
just
destroy
that
and
I've
been
flipped
over
cars.
I
On
my
bike,
I've
been
doored
multiple
times
we
have
residents
dying
in
our
streets,
pedestrians
and
bicyclist
users
I
feel
this
very
viscerally
and
personally
as
one
of
those
vulnerable
roadway
users
that
it's
really
important
that
safety
is
Central
here
and
I.
I
want
to
acknowledge
that
sort
of
importance
and
that
fear
of
the
people
we're
hearing
from
that.
It's
not
a
high
enough
priority
for
some
council
members
and
I
know
we've
sort
of
heard
pushback
on
that
tonight
that
you
know
we
all
support
Greenways
and
we're
not
looking
to
kill
projects.
I
But
you
know
just
20
minutes
ago,
councilmember
Morales
said
and
I'm,
quoting
Elm.
Heights
really
doesn't
need
this.
In
my
mind,
end
quote:
if
that's
not
saying
that
it's
not
needed,
I,
don't
know
what
it
is.
I
mean
literally
said
the
words
and
just
a
second
example.
You
know
councilmember
Sandberg
and
her
campaign
for
mayor
spoke
repeatedly
about
how
the
seven
line
was
a
mistake.
This
was
an
award-winning
bicycle
facility
that
got
National.
Recognition
talked
to
folks
who,
who
bike
regularly
those
commuters
on
that
they
feel
seen.
I
They
feel
safe
for
the
first
time
ever
in
this
city,
and
so
there
are
different
policy
priorities
and
and
to
the
extent
that
consider
that
sort
of
political
process
I
think
that's
what
we're
speaking
to
I
know.
Not
everyone
sees
it
though
I
know
not
everybody
gets
it,
but
I
get
it
and
I
think
it's
important.
I
D
Yes,
well,
I
I
must
respond,
because
I
think
that
this
mischaracterization
of
council
members
versus
troubling
I
too,
have
been
hit
by
a
car
on
my
bicycle,
I
value,
the
stop
sign
had
done
and
seventh
street,
because
staff
recommended
it
because
of
numerous
crashes
that
occurred
there
and
because
I
not
only
value
bicyclists
but
also
pedestrians,
who
have
no
stop
sign
for
a
quarter
mile
or
more
half
a
mile
on
7th
Street
to
cross
so
to
impugn.
D
Our
our
character,
because
we
seem
to
be
unconcerned,
I
think
is-
is
well
it's
troubling,
but
it's
also
completely
Incorrect
and
false.
What
I
described
was
council
member
filarity,
and
you
can
look
it
up
yourself
on
page
18
of
the
transportation
plan,
Elm
Heights
is
considered
the
safest
area
to
bike
in
the
city.
That's
what
it
says
in
the
plan
in
the
in
the
evaluation
by
the
planning
staff.
D
There
are
other
places
that
don't
have
that
that
are
very
risky,
and
so,
when
I,
when
I
said
what
I
said
about
misappropriation
or
misdirection
of
funding,
I
meant
it.
There
are
places
that
should
be
higher
priorities.
Frankly,
for
a
huge
amount
of
money
that
should
be
spent
for
people
of
lower
means
actually
so
I
hope
that
helps
correct
your
your
evaluation
of
of
your
fellow
council
members,
I
think
it's
unfortunate
to
impunus
with
falsities,
really
I
think
thank
you.
L
L
But
this
is
the
point
that
that
we
we've
never
respected
debate
either.
The
debate
is
too
bites
of
the
apple,
and
some
of
my
colleagues
always
wave
a
hand
and
dismiss
it.
I
don't
want
to
be
here
already
well
then
put
time
limits
on
everybody,
but
I
have
something
to
say
very
brief,
and
then
we
can
have
a
third
round
if
I,
if
it's
okay,.
L
Pedestrians
don't
have
stop
signs
on
Third
Street,
either
on
the
south
side
of
campus,
there's
two
stoplights
between
eagleson
and
Indiana
to
single
out
the
seven
line
for
not
having
stop
signs
is
just
indicative
of
the
micromanagement
that
underlies
the
impulse.
The
impulse
of
this
ordinance-
let's
not
micromanage
everything
but
I,
do
stand
ready
to
discuss
a
a
different
way
of
better
regulating
council's
oversight.
If
councilman
Morello
is
thank,
you.
I
Thank
you
I'm
sorry,
I
know
this
is
tedious
and
it's
late,
but
it's
important
words
matter:
I,
impugned,
no
one's
character,
I
said
nothing
about
character.
I
talked
about
policy
policy,
values
and
priorities
and
I
quoted
literal
verbatim
quotes
about
folks
priorities.
We
can
have
policy
disagreement,
it
doesn't
mean
I've,
impugned,
anyone's
character.
It's
important
for
us,
in
fact,
to
be
able
to
disagree
on
policy
without
assuming
that
someone
has
immuned
our
character,
so
I
reject
that
framework.
Thank
you.
D
D
S
D
A
Thank
you
we'll
take
this
up,
we'll
take
appropriation,
ordinance
2304
up
next
on
May
17th
one
week
from
this
evening,
so
that
takes
us
to
our
second
of
two
periods
of
public
comment:
may
I
surmise
from
everyone's
departure.
Is
there
any
public
comment
here
in
Chambers,
okay
and
Mr
Lucas?
Can
you
extend
our
invitation
on
Zoom?
Please.