 I'm going to help facilitate the meeting tonight or try to. So we're going to go through and we're going to get started. Third Avenue Neighborhood Meeting. I want to welcome everyone and thank you for taking the time. I have to tell you that the only monitors that are working are this one that's right in front of us and this one back here. The other two monitors are not working, okay? So if you want to adjust yourself so you can see clearly, that's what we need to do. It will be this one and that one. So tonight what we're going to do is then the welcoming. We're going to go over some ground rules. My name is Carmen Ramirez. Then our city manager Harold is going to give us some background on the issue and decisions. Then Sergeant Eric Lewis is going to talk about voluntary compliance. Jim Ankstead is going to talk about future projects. We're going to talk about next steps. We're going to have a bit of a Q&A. We're going to start with the index cards. We know that this is an important topic to a lot of folks. So we're going to get started on some of this, okay? So I want to honor the start and end of time. So we said this was a one-hour meeting. Usually I'll ask for permission if we need to go a little bit longer, okay? We ask that everyone be respectful in their communication and respect for all. Sometimes it's a little hard to listen to understand what the other side is saying, especially when we already have an answer formed, right? So listen to understand. Assume the best of intentions. We're looking at the issue and not the individual. So no personal attacks. Allow full participation. We're going to ask please if one person could speak at a time, no talking over other folks. Be brief and to the point. Fully participate. Silence your cell phones so if everybody wants to take out their cell phone, put it on vibrate. And limit your calls or texting. And then we'll close it out with a thank you and review of next steps, okay? Sound good? Are we good? Okay, so I'm going to turn it over to Harold, our city manager. And he's also going to do some introductions of folks that are here, some other city staff. Good afternoon, everyone. So I'm trying to look and see who I'm going to introduce. So first, I want to introduce the current city council members they were invited to this meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Aaron Rodriguez, Mayor Joan Peck, Council Member Martian Martin, and Council Member Susie Hidalgo-Fairing. And then from staff, we have Jim Engstead, who is the city engineer. Eric Lewis is the sergeant over the traffic division. Jeff Satter, what's your title now, Jeff? Deputy Chief, it hadn't changed yet. James Brown, Commander, Zach Artis, if you haven't met Zach, Zach is our new public safety chief. I'm seeing Robin Erickson, Marika Unger, Becky Skoll, Wayne Tomak, Sarah Arnie, Dave Kennedy, Michelle Goldman. I think, oh, Council Member Waters is in the back, and then Dane from Code Enforcement. Sorry, Tim, I missed you there. So why are city staff talking about this? This is because this is an operational issue. And so when we look at these issues, the way this was outlined is that we have ordinances in play that create the structure that we have in terms of what we use. And so the ordinances come in and create the process that we utilize as we're looking at this. That then refers to our MUTCD standards, the traffic standards that we use throughout the community. So that's why this is a staff presentation at this point. What I wanted to start off with, and I'm a walker, so I'm going to move around. And hopefully the camera, can you go to the next slide? So I've had a few conversations about this and a few coffees with Council. Many of you may have heard this. Many of you may not have heard this. But how did this come about? It actually started at a coffee with Council that was held at the Lodge and Hearthstone off of 17th and Hoover. And there were some residents that attended that coffee with Council and talked about the traffic and parking issues that were in play at that location. I'm looking at Mayor Pro Tem. I think he was there at that event. And I don't know, was it Council Member Waters? I think it was Brian. It was the mayor. It was Mayor Bagley that was at that event. And so this issue came up. Some things that actually came up in that conversation when we were talking to the residents in that, there were a number of things that they asked for. They asked for a residential parking permit only. They talked about handicap parking in front of other residences. And there were a few more issues that they talked about, of which we said no to the majority of those issues. Because we don't, that's not what we do. That's not what we have in our code of ordinances. And so there were a lot of no's in that conversation relatively quick. The one thing that we said that we would look at based on the conversation was the safety issues that they brought to our attention in terms of line of sight. And so that's really the start of this in August of 2021. Really, from August until December, I will say, we had a number of people constantly reaching out to us to say, what has the city done? What are you doing on this? How are you moving through this? And we were moving through the process that we moved through across the community when we have these types of issues brought to our attention. The first thing I wanna say in this, and I've heard a lot of these comments, and I actually had to answer this comment two weeks ago at Coffee with Council, or last week. Two weeks ago, at Coffee with Council about the council's involvement in this process. I wanna be very clear on this. The city council members were not involved in this process. There was not a council member that brought this to our attention. There was not a council member that said, we need to do anything in this because it was the information that was brought forward in that. I can say, any number of occasions, I have a very hard line in terms of these issues that I deal with based on my professional ethics. And I say no a lot. And we say no a lot to council members when there's that operational policy divide in this. And so I will just tell you, this has been an engineering approach from the very beginning. Some key points that have come out on this conversation on both sides of it. I know a lot of the complaints that came forward were about people parking in front of households in deeper into the neighborhood. Here's the key piece of this. Parking on public streets is open to anyone. Anyone can park in public streets. That is not something that goes with your home or anything else. It is open to anyone in the public. One of the examples that I talked about with staff is I live near a park. And when they have a lot of activities at the park, they run out of parking spaces and they end up going into our neighborhood and parking in our neighborhood. I had to deal with the same issue with my HOA. And I had to tell my HOA, they can park here. It's a public street, they can park here. And I think that's an important piece for everyone to really understand when we're talking about that issue. We personally don't own the parking in front of our homes. The second piece of that is because of that, the city does control our public streets and we routinely get these types of requests coming to us. This is not a new type of request that comes into our system. On average per year, we get 10 plus or minus two of these requests throughout our community to look at in terms of parking issues. And we go through the same process that we're going through in this conversation. Some examples, and we'll talk about them in a little bit. We also get about two to five of these requests that come to the city's attention for landscaping type issues. So it is not uncommon for us to go to someone who has taken a fence down, rebuilt the fence, and then all of a sudden the fence creates a sight line issue and we go, you need to take the fence down and reconstruct it because you've created an issue. It is not uncommon for us to go in and tell people they have to remove landscaping when we get these types of things brought to our attention. We do not proactively go out and look for these, we just don't have the staff to do that on a regular basis. These are brought to us through members of the community, our sanitation folks, our code enforcement folks, those types of issues. It really is a complaint-based approach when we deal with parking issues. So when we went through this, let me back up. The other thing I wanna talk about is I think folks in terms of land use and parking connect those two things and they're not connecting. Land use is connected to the property. We don't, in our process, attach off-street parking to the land use component of that. There's maybe a handful of where that may have been done in the past, but that's not something we do. Again, going back into public street parking is for the public at any location. So we went out, they took some time to evaluate it. They saw the sightline issues specifically on Sherman and Third right across from the West Side Tavern where we saw the parking issues. They also went out and looked at some of the other intersections that were brought to our attention and there's something within the design standards, the 3050 rule that Jim can talk about a little bit. And that's really what started adjusting the parking on Sherman Street as it went north and south. Part of it that's in play in this too. There's always been a 30-foot restriction in parking from the stop sign and parking from the intersection. That rule actually exists everywhere in the city. Many people probably don't know that. You also have a five-foot parking issue from Driveways. So you have a five-foot area that you can't park in and then if there's a fire hydrant, you have 15 feet from the fire hydrant. And I think that's part of the issue here. When they looked at the 30-50-foot turning radius on Sherman, that then ultimately led to the sign placement that you all are probably here to talk about in the no parking components of this. What I also wanted to say is we've been listening and we've been evaluating. Jim will talk about something else that we just did. Many of you Friday may have seen a fire truck in the neighborhood and the fire truck doing different turning radiuses on Sherman specifically. What they realized in that and Jim will talk about it is the fire truck can actually make that turn with just the 30-foot sign that's in place on the corner. And so Jim made the recommendation today to remove those signs that are further back within the neighborhood and just go to the 30-foot signs that are off of the intersection because technically the fire trucks can make that turn. And he'll talk about that. And that was part of the conversations that we were having with all of you in terms of what we were looking at. And again, it's a very pragmatic approach that we're gonna take. We're gonna look at the engineering. If we have to, we're gonna take a fire truck out there and we're gonna make the turns with the fire truck. Third, we still have the sight line issues. But there's a big butt on this. And here's the big butt that comes into play. Typically, when these things come into play, we also will look at structural changes that we can make on a street. And you will see these at certain places within the community where you'll see bulb outs that come out of intersections and do other things. They did not, we couldn't look at it in this case. And here's why we couldn't look at it. We know that in the very near future, and Jim will talk about this when he talks about projects, is that we're gonna have a water replacement program project come through. We're gonna have a water, we're gonna have a water line replacement come through Third Street. And that's part of what we wanted to talk about. We're gonna have a storm water project occur right in that location. And so we knew if we did anything now, if you put it in literally within months, we're gonna have to rip it out again. And then we have a repaving project that's gonna occur on that street. In these conversations, there has even been staff members point to other parking problems if you go further toward Francis Street and what we're seeing in that area. So what the engineers are going to be doing, and this is why I said there's a butt. When we get in and we look at different areas, we see things, we have to deal with it. They're gonna be looking at a lot of design components on Third Street to really deal with these sideline issues that we're seeing. And that's gonna be the long-term fix. And it is really likely that when we go in and we deal with those long-term issues, there is going to be parking that's going to be recreated as a result of the work that we're gonna do from a structural component. And it's probably something, Jim, we're gonna have to do maybe from sunset, or close to sunset, wouldn't you think? We're gonna have to look at all of it. But we didn't want to invest money and then have to rip it out and do all of these issues. So that was a big component for us. We start the project and we'll get to that in question and answer. But Jim will probably answer some of that. We're asking to kind of compress it too. Just because of the broader neighborhood impact because you also don't want a construction project going on for years as well. But they are pretty in-depth projects. Making sure I hit all my points. So I think I covered all of this. Couple of things that I did want to address. So what happened early on in October, engineering staff made recommendations for safety improvements. What happened in that one is when we make those recommendations, we sent the order to our operations group. Our operations group put out random headlights and put the signs up. We wanted to have this type of meeting before we had that conversation. Now there's some components of this that's very practical and pragmatic and engineering related where it would have been more of an inform. Here's what we have to do because of these standards. The signs were put up early. We made that mistake as a city. I will own that mistake as the organization. We have put things in place to ensure that that doesn't happen again. But that's what kicked this off in this direction. I know folks wanted to present tonight and do different things. My commitment is to the entire neighborhood is that if we have to have additional meetings to have this conversation, we will do that. But we also knew in this that there's a lot of emotions on both sides of the discussion. And so we wanted to be mindful of that too and make sure that everyone would have an adequate opportunity to share information with me. So if we need to have another meeting and people to share information, we'll get it figured out. But I wanted you to hear that from me. This is a situation some folks ask me, do you care about businesses? We do. But at the end of the day, when we get into these evaluations, we're very pragmatic on what we're seeing from an engineering perspective. The thing that we have to do is to ensure that whether it's location X, Y, or Z, we're following the same process on location X, Y, and Z because I don't want to be put in a position where I have to look at this location and say, here's what we need you to do. And they go, well, why didn't you make this location do it? And there's not an answer. So we're pretty pragmatic when we move through these, not pretty. We're pragmatic when we do this based on engineering principles so that we can ensure that we can look at any neighborhood in the community when an issue is brought to our attention and we can say we do the same thing every time we have to look at these issues. So that's what I'm gonna talk about at this point and we'll go to Eric and then Jim and then we'll get into Q and A. Before we go to Sergeant Lewis, if you've got a question on one of your cards, if you'll just raise the card and someone will come by and pick it up. So if you wrote out a question on one of your cards, we've got some folks, staff, that will come pick it up. All right, good evening everybody. Can everybody hear me okay? All right, I don't get to walk around because I don't have a fancy microphone attached to me. But first of all, I'd like to welcome members of the community, city staff, and city council. I appreciate everybody's time out here tonight. My name is Eric Lewis. I'm a Sergeant with the Longmont Police Department and I'm the supervisor for our traffic unit. Part of the reason why I was asked to come out here today is it sounded like there was some potential misinformation or misunderstanding of what public safety's role was in the community. So that's kinda what I wanna talk to you guys about tonight. The Longmont Police Services is actually the enforcement arm of the Longmont City government. Our main mission is to protect and serve in partnership with our community members. Part of our job is also to enforce criminal and traffic laws and conduct investigations related to both criminal and traffic incidents. What we are not is part of the legislation making or adopting laws or ordinances. I think some people believe that the police department has the authority to make laws and change laws and that's just, that's not the case. The police department is also not the authority with regard to traffic signals, signal timing, crosswalk placement, lane markings, or official signage throughout the city. We do advise on those, but it is not ultimately our decision. Why do I bring this to everybody's attention? Because ultimately voluntary compliance to the law is our goal, right? We want people, we encourage citizens in the community if you have all walks of life, people who live here, work here, or visit our community to voluntarily follow the law. By doing so, this keeps everyone in this community safe. We accomplish this through education, engineering, and enforcement action. Believe it or not, enforcement is part of an education. Unfortunately, if someone chooses not to follow the laws, they should not be surprised if enforcement action is taken when a violation is either reported or witnessed. I don't have a whole lot else to say other than that. I thank you guys for your time and I'm sure I'll be answering questions here later on. So thank you. Good evening. My name is Jim Hankstad. I'm the director of engineering services or the city engineer. Tonight we want to provide a little more information on the upcoming projects that are soon to be coming to this area. I want to start off real quick by, this is the diagram that was established by our traffic engineer in laying out the parking as Harold indicated at the two intersections of Sherman Street with Third Avenue. We did lay out a turning template on the plan to establish that larger trucks and fire vehicles would interfere with any of the parked cars there. So that was why we established no parking areas on the south side of Third on Sherman on that east side and then on the north side of Third on Sherman on the west side. Last week we did go out and do some field tests to establish whether our design was accurate and thank the public safety for running a couple of fire trucks out there. They had plenty of level of clearance so we will be adjusting those signs based on our field work out there. More than likely it appears that there will be three more spaces established on Sherman Street two on the south side and one on the north. There you go. So some of the upcoming projects. These are asset management projects that the city undertakes throughout the city every year. And so first one that is currently going on is our waterline replacement projects. That is currently working on Gay Street from Third Avenue up to I believe Longs Peak. They will be working on the diagram that kind of lays out where those projects are occurring. There will be one on Third Street from west of Main Street all the way to just past I believe Francis. In the area that goes from Francis that goes north and then over to the reservoir that section is an abandonment but the main portion of work on Third will be an invasive construction where we will have to actually excavate and then replace the line and then do all the connections. So it will be for the most part through most of summer of this year. And then we will also be working on Kaufman Street from First Avenue to Ninth. So you can expect lane closures in that area, traffic delays and there will as the contractor works in that way establish some detours. Notices prior to that work for the residents who live along the corridor will be provided via door hangers. And then there will be contact information within those door hangers where you can reach out to engineering with any questions. The second level of projects is a sanitary sewer rehab. This project is less invasive in that we are only lining portions of our sanitary sewer system. So we won't be digging up the whole street. We'll be working from manhole to manhole. So that duration in these areas is basically from March to October. There will be some lane closures, but for the most part traffic will continue to move. As Harold mentioned, when I other project we're working on is a storm drainage improvement project. This will be on third from Sherman to Francis Street. Current plan is for the north side of the roadway. It'll be involved in inland manhole and some pipe installation was scheduled for spring of 2023. Harold has asked us to try to push that up. So we are working with our designer to get that out so we can get a contractor in there. And that work will probably close portions of a lane while the contractor is working. Then the last asset management is component is our street improvement project. This is our yearly asset management for asphalt rehab. That will involve a resurfacing of third avenue from Main Street all the way to sunset. Part of our asset management for asphalt is prior to going in, we go in and inspect all the curbs and curb ramps and sidewalk. And if there's any work that needs to be done if they are not meeting our standards, we will go in prior to the paving and do rehab on those. Why that's important is that would be when we would be looking at curb extensions in this area to try to do some traffic calming or traffic mitigation. We would also be looking at prior to that, we'd have to be studying to see if there are any speed tables we may be able to install or other traffic mitigation to slow traffic down. We've also been asked to look at the lighting in this area as well. So we would coordinating with LPC on any improvements that would happen. That is pretty much a summary of those projects in that area. One thing I do want to note is part of that, any traffic mitigation or prior to our work going in, we will be needing a designer to come in board and do that. So once we have some of those designs set up, we would be coming out to the public again with another engagement session to share that information so people are aware of what's happening. And then we will, prior to construction, we'll try to get comments from people if there's anything else we're missing or we need to undertake. With that, I'll turn it back to Carmen. So I've got some cards here. We're gonna start with that. We'll see how we get through this. And depending on the question, it may need different staff to respond to that question. Okay? And I apologize if I'm moving around. I tweaked my back the other day so I can only sit for so long. So that's why I'm moving around. So we've got a question regarding safety and regarding installing a crosswalk and stop signs at Sherman. Crossing is dangerous. People are speeding. So I think a crosswalk would be a gym question. So I'm gonna lead it off. That was actually a suggestion from a few conversations I've had. The key piece on the crosswalk is to build a crosswalk. You have to make sure that it's ADA compliant. And so that's a, you can't just stripe a crosswalk in the intersection. You have to make sure that it's compliant. And so that's associated. And Jim can talk about the details, but in terms of the curb ramps and the things that we have to do. If we were to do that and it's not ADA compliant, then we have other issues we need to deal with. Yeah, so as part of our design, we'll be looking at areas along third where we can provide safe crosswalks. So there's a question here about, will you apply the same rules slash approach all the way along third, including around the church, further towards Maine, which has a lot of cars on the street when meeting. I don't know if you all can hear us now. So if there's issues, actually, what I will tell you is in this conversation, I actually gave a very similar issue that impacts this building here. So when you drive out of our parking lot and you try to leave, you can't see because of the angled parking. And that's on their list to look at in this building. So the answer is, if these things are brought to our attention, we will go through the same process. There are different components to this. And Jim can talk about it. If you all, and I've paid a lot of attention to this lately. So if you look between Emory and Kimbark, basically from, probably from third to sixth or close to it, you will see a lot of no parking signs in that area. It's the same issue that was brought to our attention by the east side neighborhood with people parking. So there you see a lot of the 30 foot signs because of the issues that they were having. It's the same kind of situation that we're dealing with. The big difference, and Jim can talk about the engineering on this. The biggest difference in that is the width of the road. So the width of the road also adjusts the sight lines and what you can and can't do. So we look at that, but wider roads tend to have more tolerances based on your sight line approach. And Jim, what did I mess up? Well, there's actually two standards that we follow for local roads versus collectors and arterials. Have a higher standard based on the fact that they're usually at higher speeds and or higher traffic. So sorry about that. So as I said, city and our standards design standards has two standards for clear sight, clear lines of sight and sight distance at intersections. One is for local roads and one is for roads that are have either higher traveled or have a higher volume of traffic. Basically that's the collectors and arterials that we have in our roadway system versus our local city streets. Okay, so the next question is, why is the intersection of Grant and Third not part of the conversation? But is Grant and Third? Grant and Third was not brought to our attention by the residents at the August meetings. If based on that question, if people feel it's an issue, we'll certainly take a look at it. Well, and kind of, I said this before, you see what you see. Frankly in a staff meeting, there was video presented to us at another location there and where I literally said to him, we need to look at that one too. And the, but I think the piece that we're hoping to do is in the work that we're gonna do on Third to alleviate many of these issues. So the next question, I think we've addressed it, but I'm gonna let Jim repeat the response. What other options will the city explore to improve driver and pedestrian safety on Third Avenue around Westside Tavern while minimizing negative impacts on the neighborhood small business? So Jim, I think you answered about the future projects. Yeah, as part of, as part of, or prior to going in and repaving the road, we'll be looking at a number of options. As we indicated, curb extensions are one manner which we can utilize to push the area of the line of sight closer to the roadway. So we may be able to buy more parking or obtain more parking in that area. We may actually shift the road and the lanes in the road further to the north or to the south. We're still looking at that. It may not allow parking on one side, but may buy us a lot more parking on the south side as an example. So basically we'll try to look at as much as we can in order to make the corridor much better for all users. The other component on Third Street's an issue. I mean, we know Third Street's an issue. We see it in different locations. The other thing that they're working on, and this is a much, this is longer term in some ways, but they're working with the PUC that is tangential to the Third Street conversation is working to submit an application so we can actually get Boston to do an on-grade crossing so we can connect Boston all the way through. And we have to go through that work. And a big part of that project is actually to alleviate the traffic flow on Third Street because we know that's one of the few cross streets that we have. It's not gonna be an easy run just to be frank with everyone. We have to deal with the Public Utilities Commission obviously Burlington, Northern Santa Fe, but that's something that the council's acted on and we're moving forward with that. Oh, Third Avenue, yeah, yeah, sorry. Okay, so we have two questions regarding safety and the sight line from Francis and Third. So Francis and Third sight line. Two questions around safety. So Francis and Third, Harold had referred to that as an intersection, not specifically, but that a staff member brought it up earlier this week. So again, similar to Grant, we'll be out there, we'll take a look and measure the sight lines and establish what we might be all, what we need to do. Because basically the line of sight on the south side of the road is from the western leg of Sherman Street. So the sight line on the northern side doesn't extend as far down. So when we measure, if we measured Francis and look at which we didn't measure, but that graphic we have up there should show it. I can talk to you, talk with you offline, but it's kind of difficult. Actually, there's a graphic in the back. I'm sorry, we didn't put in the slideshow because you're looking at the eastbound traffic. So you don't need to, and I don't understand what your concern is because we measured it from on the south side looking towards oncoming traffic that is eastbound. So it's only the one lane you're looking at. And you only lost a few spaces because there's a driveway, there's an alley. So in reality, we took, I think, three spaces out in that area for the clear line of sight. There were several spaces that were already where you couldn't legally park. So I just want to remind folks we did talk about the need for future meetings to talk about individuals, situations or to get more clarity. So that's an option. So let me go through a few more questions. Well, I've got a gentleman back here that was before you. So I want to be fair to folks. And we said that we were going to do a few by index cards. So do you want to have that gentleman and then have her ask questions? Any more index cards? We're going to go through a few cards and then we'll get to folks. If you could hang on. I appreciate it. Thank you. So there was a question regarding putting cones out in front of your house to block the parking. Is that legal? This was on South Sherman, but that question actually goes to any street parking. So who wants to? That is not legal. Doesn't matter what street. No, public streets have access to public vehicles. You don't have a right to block off an area in front of your home. So the next question is regarding ADA compliance, factored into the decision to eliminate parking. Neighbors with disability will have difficulty with the new setup. So ADA parking, do you want to? The ADA parking is actually the responsibility of the business owner. When you look at these locations that's. So when we have folks go through the development and review process, those are requirements that we put in place in terms of the number of spaces. That's correct, Dane. Planning determines that, but that's in the development process and that's the business owners. And so I can use this building for example. So when we. That's the second question. So there's two questions. So when I talked about earlier about someone wanting ADA access in front of their home, the issue there is, is if you have an ADA designated spot, you have to make sure that the grades and everything else are appropriate based on the ADA standards. So the second question about that is it possible to get an assigned parking spot so I can safely park for myself and my disabled son? So is that you want code or do you want to? I'd love code to answer that one, but. There is no code that allows us to reserve parking spaces in the city nor is there a national standard we can follow or apply to for handicapped spaces for on-street parking. I'm not aware of that. Dane, do you want to come up front? So I think there were two different questions. One is about whether you can create a handicapped space on a residential street in front of a house, which you can. And the other was whether you could create a designated space for a specific resident, which you cannot. Any street parking is for any resident that can legally park there, legally drive, so. So here's another question and I think Jim answered it, but we'll go ahead and repeat it. What can I do to get a minor adjustment to the no parking sign location? The sign in front of my house is beyond the number of feet for clear view of the intersection and that's on Sherman Street. So I think we answered that already. We'll be adjusting those signs to be 30 feet from the stop signs on Sherman. So this question is about the issue of, biggest issue in the neighborhood is patrons parking illegally too close and over the intersection can lines be painted on the curb to aid enforcement of safe parking? So as a standard practice, our operations group has never painted curbs. Harold has given us direction to alter that practice and so paint is on order and when the weather breaks and gets a little warmer and dry we'll be out as a test case or a pilot program. We'll be working in that neighborhood on third to paint some of the curbs to clearly define where everybody could park. So this one's a repeat. This is signage on the east side, 200 block of Sherman seems excessive. Also no signage in the west side near the fire hydrant on Sherman. Jim? Well, I think on the east side we addressed that. The west side will, I think if we paint curbs we'll be noting that you have to maintain a 15 foot distance on either side of a fire hydrant is also in code. And I will say just generally I think that's the thing that's probably hit us and something we're gonna work on from a communication standpoint is I think when we talk about 30 feet from a stop sign and things like that, what we've realized in this conversation is I think people don't reconcile that. So we're gonna have a focus on communications to make sure that we put something out there so individuals understand it because we get these issues all the time and we need to do more communication. So people understand those distances and what we have in play because that's a given no matter where you are you can't park within 30 feet in those areas and we just need to do more. This next question or there's a couple for Sergeant Lewis. So how is the voluntary compliance working so far? Is that the only enforcement? Is there any plan to actually enforce it? I believe after the no parking signs went up we had a few staff members go through there and cite a few violators. Mainly for my staff they've tried to make contact with people in violation of the law and educate them. We've talked with the residents and business owner in that area to kind of help facilitate that. To that question, yes, there has been enforcement taken specific to the no parking signs. I understand we've gotten a few more complaints more recently about speeding. I myself have written two speeding tickets in there in the last week. So we get out there as much as we can as much as I'd like to have an officer there 24 seven that's just not practical to do. So at the end of the meeting I'll give you all some information on how to report ongoing problems or who to contact if you see something in progress. So the speeding issue that Eric brought up is interesting and Jim did mention this. Because we are going in a street reconstruction phase on this one, I have asked them to look at temporary speed tables on the street and so that we can evaluate speeding and what's going on. What we also know is that once we begin construction that that's probably not going to be an issue. So we're looking at something more of a short term to see how they work and see what we can do. It's actually something I did in the last community that I was in where we had temporary speed tables and we would use them when we get complaints to really assess A, does it slow speed down? Also understand how it moves traffic into different neighborhoods because anytime you do anything it's going to shift and it's more of a strategy that I think we can look at long term. It was pretty successful in the last community. Just another point on the voluntary compliance. Ultimately again that's our goal. We don't want to go out there and just hammer people with tickets. That's not our intent. However, if we have repeat offenders and people aren't just aren't getting the message sometimes enforcement is what we have to do to educate the public. And then by word of mouth that gets out and attempt to change people's behavior. So we would like for people to do it on the front end so we don't have to be called out there to conduct enforcement. But if we're not getting compliance and that's why police are important. So there's a question regarding the ownership of the driveways. And so I think Harold made that point in regards to street parking. I don't know if you want to repeat that. Well, it depends what the question is. Do we own our own driveways? If so, at what point? That's actually a hard question because depending on where you are in the city, it can change. So for example, my driveway at my house goes into the easement. And so the lawn area, it's interesting. I think you own your driveway and you have five feet on each side by the parking requirements, correct Jim? Yes, five feet on either side but driveways are the responsibility of the property owner. If the city does come through with a project and you need to make corrections, we normally will fund that through our transportation street fund. An example would be, there's a sidewalk. It's not driveway necessarily, but a sidewalk just to the east side of the West End Tavern. They had installed a flagstone sidewalk years ago. That was not in ADA. I'm sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. My apologies. But it's the east side of the Tavern. On third, as part of our miscellaneous concrete rehab, we just replaced it. So it was not at the expense of the property owner, but driveways are very similar. They are, if it cracks or breaks, it is the responsibility of the property owner. We have an easement through there in some cases, right? Depends. Depends on the driver. Depends, yeah. Okay, there's a question because regarding the no parking signs were installed before public input on city and city council consideration, why not remove the no parking until affiliated discussions can be worked through? So the question is no parking signs were installed before public input. Do you wanna? Yeah, so I think when we talk about those issues, we talked about the engineering processes that we go through and what we review and within the existing ordinance structure on traffic control devices, that is in the operational realm. So we do not take those to city council as I indicated before. We do this on a fairly regular basis and that is assigned to the city engineer and his department or their department to do that kind of work. Part of it is when you have safety issues that come into play, it is in many cases an inform to say, here's a safety issue that we're seeing. Here's what we need to do to address the safety issue. In some cases, it depends on the nature of the situation we're doing where we can have some conversations. I think part of it is why we wanted to have the meeting is we probably would have seen some things earlier in this had we had the public meeting, even if there is an informed component to that. Okay, so why is parking blocked off on the south side of third from the West Side Tavern to Francis but not the north side? Why is parking blocked off on the south side of third from West Side Tavern to Francis, which is the question that he had asked earlier but not north side? So that is in, if you look at the site diagram that's in the back and in the outer area, that is the site triangle for South Sherman for drivers who are trying to access third avenue to either turn either east or west. It's 250, measured 250 feet in either direction, which is why we restricted parking in that area. It's measured 15 feet back from the travel lane. There's another question as to why was this no parking put in as soon as possible while I've been requesting from the traffic department to put in a few crosswalks across third avenue for years. Is this a case of who you know? So I think part of the issue that we've talked about with the crosswalks is really just the work that Jim talked about that we're gonna be looking at as we redesigned the street in terms of the curb ramps and what you need to do. You all may have seen us where we do curb ramp work across the city and you can see us doing that work. That's typically, if I'm correct Jim, associated with our street rehab projects. And part of that is too, there was a Supreme Court case that said you had to make reasonable progress in terms of putting in curb ramps. And so that's part of our street rehab program in terms of what we're doing. And so to the point of just placing a crosswalk, you have to make sure that it's also accessible. Is that correct? When you build a new one? Yes. One of the other factors is we don't just put in crosswalks wherever we get requests. They have to meet a certain level of service, very similar to a traffic signal or a stop sign. Traffic signals at stop sign have to meet warrants. We have a certain level of service for people who actually would utilize that crosswalk. So an example would be if we get a request, we go out and we do traffic and pedestrian counts to see if they're within a certain threshold off the top of my head. I'd have to look at the manual, but if it doesn't meet that threshold, that's an approved manual standard through council. So we basically do not. Someone, my staff should have responded back and explained it if you've requested it. So if you anywhere else, the question would wanna come chat with me after the meeting and be happy to find out the locations and we can get that information to you. This one might be for Sergeant Lewis. How many traffic accidents have happened in this location in the last five years? How many pedestrians have been hit? How does this compare to Main Street? Almost sounds like a loaded question. I actually looked at some crash data specific to Third Avenue and Sherman Street. I don't have the specific details to that, but since 2016, we've had five reported crashes at that intersection. I can follow up with the city manager's office on specifics. Unfortunately, I do not have that at this time, on whether or not those were auto pedestrian crashes. Apologize for that. And this question might be for Sergeant Lewis or for Dane with code enforcement. So if a vehicle is parked in front of a building and it's parked on the sidewalk. So is that something? Yeah, so that's actually in violation of the parking code under subsection A. You cannot park on a sidewalk. So that actually dovetails into the previous question on, do you own your driveway? If your driveway extends into an easement and there's a sidewalk that crosses, you can't park over the sidewalk on your driveway. Yeah, like the tree lawn is what you're talking about where sometimes you'll have a driveway that extends. There's a piece of public property between the street and the sidewalk and then the driveway starts on the other side of the sidewalk. As long as you're not creating a site distance issue, we don't have a problem with people parking on the apron typically. As long as it is paved and is actually part of a driveway. I'm sorry, it wouldn't matter to us. As long as it's not on the street and you're not creating a site distance issue, we wouldn't be bothered. You just have to make sure you're also not blocking the sidewalk. We wouldn't look, at least in Eric might be able to chime in too, but I know when we're looking at those, we would not consider the tree lawn to be the same as the street. If the signs are saying no parking on the street, we would still be okay with people parking in that part of the driveway that runs through the tree lawn. With the caveat that the vehicle is not extending into the roadway where there's no parking or blocking any portion of the sidewalk. Yeah, so we have a few questions regarding zoning. It says, what is the zoning for West Side Tavern? The city map states residential single family. Pardon? Yeah, and so, yes, and here's the distinction here. And this is when I talked about land use and I talked about those other issues. And Joni and I've talked about this. It's a legally non-conforming use because it has been in use consistently over time. And unless that use goes away in excess, I believe it's 12 months, I'm looking to, I think it's a year. There's no planning people here legally, is it a year? So there's a time period where if it's not in that use, it's there, and so it's an allowed use in that because it's legally non-conforming. What is the occupancy inside and outside? I don't know what the occupancy numbers are off the top of my head. Will West Side Tavern be allowed to use the expanded seating within the parking spaces? That's really, I believe that staff has informed me that there's been a request to look at that. It's gotta go through the processes just like any other request would come in for that. To be clear, and West and I've had this conversation. When we went into COVID, there were some parameters that were changed in terms of liquor licensing at the state level, where you could look at expanded outdoor areas. That's the process they went through, which is not unlike the process that we went through along Main Street. Obviously, those parameters are not in play anymore, so you have to go in and go through the formal process. In that, we have a review process. When people do this, anyone does it. It goes to planning. It goes all to the relevant review departments in terms of what can and can't be done. The design standards do not allow for a side entry. The banner signs do not line up with the city guidelines. I'm not sure what that question is specifically. If you ask that question, I'll be happy to talk to you afterwards to get more specifics, but I think you also go through the same legally non-conforming use that's in play that I talked about earlier in terms of that. Is that, I'm looking at Michelle. Does that sound right? And what it was built for before and what it's utilized? Right, so if it didn't have a change of use, it continues as that use and what's there. Okay, here's one from a cyclist who needs to use Third Avenue or uses it routinely. I find the existing curb build-outs create a hazard by forcing me out into the high-speed traffic. What consideration is being given to safety of cyclists when considering redesign of features on Third Avenue? Well, as we look at the redesign, Third Avenue is not listed in our multimodal plan as a location for bike lanes, so that would not be consideration. More than likely we would be looking at share-os on the road, so most cyclists would have to be riding with traffic. There's just not enough room along the road, so. We'll add it to our list to see if we can look at it as we lay out the new alignment, but I don't know that other than having share-os on it. It is the roadway for the most parts 25 miles per hour, so it's not necessarily a high-speed road, although we do have counts that show significant number of drivers driving over 25, which is why we would be looking at some type of mitigation for the road. So there's a couple of questions regarding safety and putting in a three-way stop at Third and Francis and a crosswalk for pedestrians. Moving parking away from Third only puts parking congestion in residents' streets, and there's another question, again, asking about a three-way stop at Francis and Third, traffic being backed up during hours when school and work let out. Jim? So as part of any adjustments, we'll look at the warrants to see if it does meet those four three-way stops. We looked at Sherman Street, it does not, but we'll look at Francis. One other item to note is that if we do any form of crosswalks, we would be looking at some type of visual system flashers of some kind that will make sure that as people cross, it would be noticeable, rather than some of our standard signing. So we have started using some flashers, we just installed some on 9th about a year and a half ago. They've been pretty successful. So we will continue that practice, but again, it just depends on where we establish them and how we're gonna design it. Yeah, so there, here's a question said, if council persons were not involved in the decision, why are they engaging with people on the West Side Tavern page? What is the role in the process? What I can tell you is we have provided the city council members with information regarding what we're doing and why we're doing it. But once again, I will say that the council has not directed on this, nor is that their purview in the way that the ordinances are structured now. And so we have informed them, but they have not been involved in the decision-making process at all. So I just wanna make sure, so we're at seven o'clock. We said we were gonna honor folks' times. Harold, do you wanna go to a couple of questions? Yeah, I'll be happy to take questions now. So I just wanna honor folks and their time, and if you'll also give me some time, I saw that Wes and then... There was a guy back here that had a question earlier. Yeah, and then you had a question. So we probably won't get to everybody, so please make sure, as you heard from Harold, that if we need to meet separately, if we need to do another meeting, that's something that we can address. I also wanna remind folks that out in the lobby are the film core boards that show you the future projects if you wanna take a look at that. So I wanna honor people's times. If you have to leave, thank you. And those that wanna stick around, we're gonna answer a few questions. So without getting more detailed information from a law enforcement perspective, we would have to initiate an investigation before any official action was taken on the part of the police department. And who was that with it? So if an allegation of a criminal offense. Okay, so we're not gonna do... Please don't speak over and let's listen to the question and we've got a response here. So if an allegation of a crime was made and that can be brought to the police department's attention, an investigation would then be conducted, if probable cause was determined that that violation actually occurred, then enforcement action could be taken. If it was determined that we did not reach the threshold of probable cause, then no official action from the police department would be taken. Yeah, I was gonna actually say, I think that's a conversation based on the complaint. We probably've got some public safety folks here that can talk about that and we can give you information in terms of what can and how, what we can share and so. So what we're gonna do is we're gonna move on and have you talk to one of the officers after this and then we're gonna move on to the next question, okay? That was a question that we missed and I just knew it because Carmen asked me about this and it says, what does the city do into mediate the antagonism between West Side Tavern and the neighbors that are complaining about the parking? One of the things in the information that we send out to the city council is we do have a mediation service within our organization and we deal with issues like this. Part of why we said the parameters in terms of asking questions and doing the no cards is because we know that this is a significant topic for people who live in the neighborhood. We know people are passionate on both sides of the issues and we wanted to do the best that we could to convey information. We would love to find a way to bring people together and go through our mediation process that we use for everyone and use different neighborhoods. I've been part of that and we would love to get there. I think what we need is a commitment from everyone to say we're willing to go into that process and really move through this. Unfortunately, we see this a lot in what we do when we get issues and it comes in and we look at code issues, it creates challenges. And so yes, we do need a mediation process. We do need to have this conversation and that's probably gonna be something that we're gonna continue doing. If you look at an email that I sent to the city council and that we sent to the staff that are involved in this, what I said in that is we hope to get the situation to the point to where we can facilitate a mediation process. And so yeah, that is our goal. If we can find a way to do it and bring people together, we would love to do it but we need everybody to participate in that and like you would in any mediation process. And so we will go to questions now. So we've got the gentleman over here, you had a question, then we're gonna go to Wes and then you had a question, no question and then you had a question, sir. To see coming that direction. Yeah, and part of it is just so you know on that, many of you may or may not know this, one of my assistant city managers actually lived in a house in the area. And so we've seen the sight line issues just to say again, it's very pragmatic in what we move through this but we know there's a larger solution on third. When you look at the way the width of third and how it's constructed, you look at the curves that are in third street and those things, that's actually what the engineers are gonna be looking at when we go into the larger redesign of that, well not redesign, but do what you can within the width that you have to minimize issues. I do, thank you. And if you could advance the slide to the last one, I wanted to remind folks that you can also ask questions and add your ideas on Engage Longmont. So at the very end, you'll see a link for Engage Longmont. I think the previous one. Try to resolve this. I've sent emails and emails. Second, I want to address that we received or we have a copy of an email from the city engineers staff saying that a public meeting should have happened prior to this. So even the staff recommended this should have happened and it didn't. And that's what we all shouldn't be here today if we had done that. My question is this, your line of sight map out there, if you're on South Sherman looking to the east looks through fences, bushes, and structures to stop the parking that's directly in front of the tavern. I'm sorry, we don't have X-ray vision. You cannot look through the houses to call that the sight line to stop the track for the rationale in front of the tavern. It makes no sense. I mean, there's buildings there, big trees. I mean, your sight line draws it right through the building. Please explain. Well, I can walk you through that. It doesn't run it through the building. Oh, your drawing has it right through the building. No, I don't believe it does. We measure the sight distance. The sight triangle starts 15 foot from the edge of the travel lane, which puts it right in the intersection of North Side of Sherman. So here's what we did. We physically went out and measured it 15 feet back from the edge of travel lane. We're looking at a graphic from a 500 feet up. Okay, so, and either way, okay, you cannot have parking along that frontage. It's just, it's within the sight triangle, okay? And what we'll be willing to do on this, so obviously when I looked at this and taking it from this to this, what I'm willing to do is go out and measure, just kind of like what we did on Friday. And so to show you what they saw, and so I'll work with staff on that one and to answer that question. Could you put up the graphic with all the no parking signs, please? Okay, thank you. I have 40 years experience in the construction business and I've dealt with a few of these and it's complicated and it sounds like feelings have already, you know, been raw on both sides and I think the city would do well to drop back and you have a redesign coming. I was speaking to your superintendent on the Gay Street project where I live and your men have been very nice, Harold and accommodating and they told me they were coming down third with the water project soon next year or whatever. But I would suggest that you drop back and have a workshop or something and have more time. One hour when the presentations of the city staff took 35 minutes was another totally inadequate format for this problem to be solved. The second point I'd like to make and I don't wanna get into all the construction stuff because the engineers will figure it out. There's a lot of ways to solve this problem but if we applied the parking, no parking, rationales that you have up here which would be nice, it would be the ultimate perfect safety situation. We would have done something over at the school where I have the same complaint about parking and about safety, little kid's safety and I see that nothing's been done at Central Elementary and I know there's a project going on there, maybe there is work coming up but this one's gotten into a really touchy situation and I've been happy to wait and work together and it's a concern of safety of the residents so think about resetting and you can't apply these standards everywhere throughout the city. You're gonna need to order 10,000 no parking signs and you look like the places that a lot of us have left because we don't wanna live there. Thank you. Yeah and I appreciate that comment. I think that's the part of what we're looking at too in this and that's part of the communication in terms of the 30 feet from the intersections and things like that. What I will say in terms of the school, I know that that's in the hopper somewhere because I've seen emails on it in terms of what they're looking at. Again, similar process but we can figure out where we are, yeah. Yeah, I wanna be clear on that. Even if we would have had the meeting there would have been certain areas where we go, here's the issue that we're seeing and that was the mistake that was made in that we didn't have the opportunity to do that. And so yeah. We're more human. Right. And we'd like to get along. Yep. I came in late, this may have already been addressed, possibly not so I also have a statement. I'll start with the question. How many accidents have taken place in front of or surrounding the tavern within the last four years? I think they said five since 2016. And how does that compare with other intersections in the city? I don't know, different for her. So pre COVID, we were averaging about 2,600 crashes a year and those can be spread out throughout the entire community for various reasons. Most of our crashes, probably about 46% of them are rear end collisions. So those could happen on any roadway at any given time of the day. And a lot of that has to go towards distracted driving. And do we know the nature of the accidents surrounding that area, third and Sherman? I did not get the specifics about that but I'll report that back to staff in the next week. Secondly, I have obeyed the no parking signs whenever I've been there. And I've gone down Sherman to try to find a place to park. And there was someone with a orange cone in front of their house. My comment would be, whoever that may be, you do not own the street parking. Well, should there not be a sign stating that since we're so big on signs? We're not gonna do the back and forth. I'm not doing a back and forth. I'm making an observation. Okay. And we'd be happy to give you the answer once we're done, in case you have more questions. But generally, public streets are for the public to park in. Okay, third comment and then I'm done. I owned a restaurant for eight years in another city. I can tell you that the biggest way to destroy a restaurant business is to make it appear that there is no business in that restaurant when people are driving by. So that's my comment to you on the kind of impact you as a city may be having on that business. I have a few questions. So first off, thanks for holding this meeting. So for sure, thank you all for being here and everyone for being here. It's important. This is how we build community. I would like, I do believe if the process was not followed, I do think that you must do that. I spent a lot of time on boards and other cities I've lived in. And I mean, if you really want to achieve a good solution here, it sounds like that must happen. So I was just curious, so is that a correct statement that there was not a public workshop about this? And is this, and then, so that's one question. So what we wanted to do in this is to have a public meeting to inform everyone in what we're doing. I don't know that we don't, on these traffic signs, that's not a practice. That we normally do when we do it in all areas of the community. We just knew how much engagement there was in this issue and we wanted to do it because of that. But I don't think we hold community meetings when we, in all occasions, when we put signs up. All right, well, there is an excellent lesson for the folks who are in administration now that that probably would be a fabulous place to go and probably really productive. I do have a question. Did this go through the city transportation board or did this come directly as a recommendation to, from the staff? This is a staff-driven process. This does not go to the transportation board when we deal with these issues. The transportation board doesn't have authority or can't express a recommendation to city council about this? No, this is an operational issue that stays within that. So if I look at the transportation master plan, it won't say that the transportation advisory board can offer a recommendation to city council being appointed as their experts on transportation because generally it does. So do you know for a fact that it does not? As Harold indicated, this is an operational issue. We can take items like this to the transportation advisory board for recommendation but it is not necessarily required. Okay, and do you think that that might be a good thing to get buying from, I mean, I'm a neighbor here. I mean, I live here. I'm not just somebody who comes to the restaurant which would be also fine and fabulous but I am a neighbor here and so I'm represented by the transportation advisory board and not necessarily the staff, perhaps by the staff. So if that hasn't happened, I mean I'm gonna ask that that happened so I don't know why you wouldn't want that to happen because that's how you get the best response here. Okay, so fine. So then my next question is taking a staff's recommendation on something that has had no exceptional injury rate for a staff to introduce that in a democracy such as ours with this much public uproar, it seems really not a good decision personally and I just think that that happened one time and on a board I was and the staff recommended the removal of the diving board of a pool that sat there for 65 years, beautiful pool and they removed the pool because of the staff and then they went back and they realized they hadn't done the proper procedure. So I mean, I would just ask that if that is actually correct and please, if there's other background there and then also the thing, the only thing I saw that was for rationale for this project was around neighbors complained around sight line and so I would ask, how does that balance with the need to have put up the new speed limit sign there just past just west of the restaurant? That flashing speed sign there is new in the past whatever year perhaps and so that says to me, and I know for a fact that that says people are flying down that street. So if you're gonna, and to me it would seem that the way it is now actually slows down the traffic. So can you comment on that because that to me seems, they seem opposite. You don't need a slow down sign if people are going slow because they're slowed down because they can't see. So I guess just to me I'm a little confused by how can you do opposite things to solve for an issue on that intersection. So anyhow, thanks again for being here. Want to take it and then I'll jump in. So there's a lot there to unpack. So the, we have years of traffic data on Third Avenue and so the reason for the sign installation was basically as a traffic mitigation measure we saw in our numbers that while it is posted at 25 a significant number of higher than what we measure as the 85% is driving greater than 25 miles per hour. So we undertook some mitigation. There's another flashing sign further to the West. Some of the curb extensions were another method of mitigation. We haven't done any, we saw a significant drop in traffic counts through COVID. So we don't really have the last year and a half accurate numbers. But the site distance that we use to measure the criteria is based on the posted speed limit. So we posted it at 25 if we actually utilized it with the actual speeds that people are driving it would be, the site triangles would be greater which would require more parking taken. And we choose, that's not how the manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and AASHTO standards which is what our city standards are based on. So, sure. Yeah, so we will talk about that. I would say look to the AASHTO standards and the muni, I call it MUTCD, which is the manual of Uniform Traffic Control. Okay. And so that's how we base the design. Yeah, I don't know, what's left? So what we had was some of the questions were about the same subject. So I combined those questions. Was there a specific question that you had? Why don't you ask your question right now? So, so guys, guys, so let me. Yeah. So folks, there's a process for that. But what I would say is it's gone through the process that it needs to for that and it's complied. And just like Richard did, they went through the same process and it's allowed. And that's the land use that deals with it. And it talks about the legal non-conforming land use that was there, why they're able to do that. So we have one more question. Who was it? The lady right here. And I saw, I think Phil. Hello. My name is Alice, we went to 245 Shawman Street. And English, no good. I came back in 19 years. And we battled this house 15 years ago. And absolutely children, when children is a special needs. Artisan ADHD, sleep problem, lots of behavioral therapy. He went to the law, he went to the Tona School, went to the Coranche, the Ferris Down School, Ming Street School, Denver Lawndale School. He have lots of behavioral problems. This is why I put the cone for my friend. And I just want to come here. I apologize to you, my friend. Because after school, half of the special needs swimming for lessons in the rec, rec session, every day after four o'clock. Have softball, have the speech, behavioral therapy, have OT teacher. Every day have many things he need to go out. If he don't go out, just spank people, you know. So this is why, and I'm cleaning the house, and the housewife, sorry. To do best for my children. And so sometimes winter time, clean the outside the snow. I leave the people just parking. And so I don't know what I can do. Every day I come back after four o'clock, you know, the swimming lessons finished four-thirty, five-thirty to six-thirty, you know, half of the board of artisan group. We have all things he need to go outside. He can't just stay home. And every time I come back home, I don't have parking. I need to run, run, run, run, run, 20 minutes to find them when parking. I just don't know what can I do, you know. And my son is very more fast than me. So if he cross-streamed, maybe he died, you know. We just cornered the air. What can I do? I imagine the city of Lambo, they say they can't help. So I need to support my children. I need to help him, you know. He's a fast and mean boy, so what can I do? Appreciate your comment. You know, when staff, and I said this at the beginning, when staff looks at these issues, and I think I said it when we met, we have to look at these issues in the same way throughout the community. I have to be able to look at business owner X, neighbor Y, and say we're following the same process that we're gonna go through in any location. Because, you know, that's my responsibility. And I've been very clear with them. I don't want to ever have to go, why did you do this here and not this here based on the information that you're seeing? And that's why I talk about the pragmatic approach in that, you know, we don't enjoy this. I mean, we really don't. And we understand the issues and we, you know, unfortunately it's different issues different places. And that's why I wanted to say we've tried to hear, we've gone back, we've evaluated, we are gonna make some changes. We're gonna deal with this issue and we have to look for a long-term solution because what we've seen is that there are issues, you know, from Sunset to Main Street, we know there are. And if you go down just beyond this location, there's no parking signs all over the place because of similar issues. And we've got to take a long-term look at this in terms of what that's gonna look like to the benefit of everyone, to the benefit of the residents that live there that need parking spaces, to the benefit of the business, that's what we have to do. And when we say long-term, I think it's a couple of months, the water line's starting. And then I've asked Jim to accelerate it into, because I don't wanna keep the neighborhood in a state of construction for years. And so Jim's working on that as we move through this process. And so, but I just wanted to be clear where we sit and we have these processes for a reason. I think we'll end it now. We'll be available for comments and conversations to talk through this issue. And if anybody wants to talk to me, I'll be around for a little bit longer. Ma'am, we do wanna have you get with us pretty quick so we can figure out what's going on.