 Thank you everybody for for tonight's a big meeting. I know we've got some time ahead of us. And so I really appreciate you dialing in here on time. So Kirsten, I'm going to kick into the agenda. We've got some formalities here to initiate and kind of take care of. And then I want to maybe just set the scene before I charge into the agenda is that we will have a public comment period. It doesn't look like anybody's on right now. Brian, you'll be the one to maybe flag to us if there's somebody that dials in. We'll give an opportunity in the in the in the beginning and also circle back in the end. That's the plan. The idea is that we'll have probably a half an hour of kind of the initial background where we are where we were the survey results and some of the parking model results. Take some Q&A. We want to be informal. Go back and forth. But I also want to make sure that we spend the majority of the time really focusing about the management strategies. And that is where, yep. Thanks, Jane. We'll do that. When we do the introductions, we'll do that. So then we're going to spend the really the majority of the time on the management strategies and I identify go corridor the segment by segment along the corridor, identify the key user groups and identify the management strategies. And so this is meant to be a really working collaborative meeting today and the the technical team needs to obtain information and hopefully to get consensus at the end of this meeting that we're headed in the in the right direction in terms of which policies we need to flesh out in more detail. So without further ado, let's see and we'll do introductions here. Brian, maybe you can help facilitate just in terms of who's on the call just say people's names and and people can either say hello or just a quick hello just high on the screen. For that's fine. And hello everyone. Thanks for joining us tonight. I'm Brian Davis. I'm a transportation planner at Ginny County Regional Planning Commission. You've heard John Slason from RSG speak. If it's for sake of efficiency, I'll just let people know who on the steering committee I have as present. We've got Councillor Jack Hanson, Councillor Jane Stromberg, Kirsten Bairman Shapiro, Kelly Duggan, and Max Horowitz. And then at in person down at 645 Pine, I have Nicole Loesch with DPW. And we'll introduce any members of the public when it comes out of the public comment area. Sound good? All right, so I have I can't see the presentation but you all can. Is that right? Okay, great. I'm seeing nodding heads. So that's good. Okay. Do we want to see this view or do we want to see it right for March? We want to see the presentation view. So are you able to shift that? Did I change it? Okay. All right, we're good. Technology here. There we go. Cool. Thanks, Nicole. Any proposed changes to the agenda here? We have the public comment period. We're going to go through the survey results, the parking model, and a little bit of future conditions and then spend the majority of the time on six and seven, which are the management options and then a public comment period at the end. Any nays to that? Thank you. So we'll proceed. Background here hasn't changed the team structures that are she's the consultant working under this project along with the city of Burlington and the Regional Climate Commission represented by Brian here tonight is the technical resourcing. Just a reminder, the seven members who we are that we're still missing Charles. And now where we are today is that the city council gave us direction for this committee. We need to approve the scope of work, which we have done. We've developed the engagement plan and we've worked collaboratively on the on the survey element. And then now we're at the point of reviewing recommendations for the draft parking manager plan. And so it's a collaborative effort to develop those recommendations and then there'll be a subsequent meeting to approve the written narrative. And then there'll be some meetings afterwards in terms of NPA presentations and the city council presentations. And so there is a slide at the end of the slide deck that has the schedule to it. The committee structure is a public body. So we've not been coordinating with any of the members outside of the public meeting. We are discussing the plan here and we're following all the open meeting law requirements in terms of advertising the materials and posting the materials online. And there is a procedures there. If you anybody were to click on it, we amended it after the second meeting I think with some some edits that were proposed. Reminding us back to why we're all here and the concepts here just to highlight is that we're identifying practical strategies for balancing parking supply and demand and with the goal of meeting essential parking needs while freeing up space for the dedicated bike lane. And so again to be explicit, the plan is for bike lanes in this corridor with the physical limitation that it's going to require to removing some of the east side parking along the corridor to free up that space. And so our goal tonight is to how to manage then the available supply as well as manage the demand for that parking over the next few years. And so we're going to achieve that goal by convening this committee and engaging with you all and the public. So we've taken a phased approach. Phase A was largely a technical exercise to get a lot of data collected in the modeling setup. And then phase B has used that modeling data as well as conducted a sophisticated comprehensive survey, web survey of users in the area to understand their behaviors, but also then develop these management strategies and do the reporting. So without further ado, any public comment period. I saw Jane, you are here and Brian, do you want to see if any hands or anybody wants to speak or raise hands so far? So Brian, you're able to facilitate, is that right? Either one. Yeah, Brian, if you'd like us to do it, just let us know. You're muted, Brian. I see you. Sorry. All right, I'm just going to start at the top. Jean, you should be able to talk now or unmute yourself. Can you hear me? Yes. Yeah, I had questions about when the supposed availability was surveyed in terms of parking spaces because I live on North Wineski between Grand Street and North Street. Did you survey during COVID or something? Because there is regularly zero parking there. Today, last night I checked at 10 p.m. there was one spot in this stretch. I left this morning at 10 a.m. one spot. I just came home from work at 6 p.m. one spot. There's already so little parking. I work, live, and rent my duplex. And I have two tenants who are currently trying to leave and get subletters because they can't find parking. So I'm really concerned about this plan and it feels, yeah, really, really unfortunate to me. Okay. I can answer real quickly is that the data was collected throughout 2018 as part of the original Wineski Avenue corridor study. Particularly the North to Grant section, even back at that point. We're showing that the lowest occupancy was somewhere around Friday, late a.m. at 70%. So I completely agree with you that the majority of the time is between 70 and 100% of occupancy is what we've observed and that aligns well with what we're using today to inform this work. Okay. So is this, is this intended solution that more parking lots are created such that, I mean, am I supposed to turn my backyard into a parking lot or something? It's really confusing because there's so many cars that are going to need to be relocated and we have, and I've read the proposal and I didn't see any, no one was willing to share their parking lots, no one was willing to, just very curious. It's a very good question. That's exactly why we're here tonight, to figure out what the strategies will be. So yeah, there will be another round for public comment after we talk through some of those strategies a little bit. So yeah, maybe to chime back in after once we hear a little more conversation about those options. All right. Thank you. Brian, you're muted again. Sorry about that. I thought I unmuted. Next up is Reese. Hi, Reese Whitworth. I work for Pathways Vermont. I'm the Mental Health Services Director there. We operate the Pathways Vermont Community Center at 279 North Wyniewski. And I know in the past, we advocated for an ADA parking spot in front of our building. In general, I think awesome conceptually to put in additional bike infrastructure. We're just concerned specifically about that ADA spot, as well as how we could provide supports not only for the population we serve, which is like a broad range of folks, some of which who have disabilities, some of which who are receiving financial assistance, like how do we create more bicycle access in that corridor? Is there any possibility for partnership with the rideshare program, which I know has discounted rates or free subscriptions for folks on EBT? And I know there are a variety of other nonprofits in that corridor, right? So perhaps could we think about adding a rideshare station in the corridor or getting bike parking on the street, where some of these businesses and nonprofits are? Thank you for the comment. Thanks. And Reese, could I clarify when you say rideshare, do you mean the Car Share Vermont specifically or Green Ride Bike Share? The Green Ride. Thanks. Yeah. Okay. Thank you for that. Great. Jane, I see your hand raised. Hi, everybody. Looking forward to the meeting. I read through the presentation and just as you're going through the slides, one thing that I was hoping to get a better sense of is the magnitudes, which is you have various strategies to address the excess demand for parking that will be created when those spaces are removed. And it was hard to tell whether you think that those strategies are going to fill the projected gap between demand and supply that will be created once the current plan is implemented. So any sense as you go through the slides of how many the effectiveness in terms of actually reducing demand or increasing supply of the various strategies? Thank you very much. Jane. This, I see your hand up. Yeah, thanks. I just wanted to ask the committee to consider this question as we go through the presentation, which is the term essential parking. That seems like that's one that's in the eye of the beholder. And I'm just wondering who gets to define what essential parking is or means. Is that just a technical term from the planning community, which is overwhelmingly highly privileged, white, and middle, and upper? And I wanted to ask how how we're in developing these strategies, how we're single parents with young kids and people with the black and brown skin involved and how are low income renters involved? How was outreach conducted to all of these marginalized groups and whose voices were considered in the survey beyond the 766 respondents, 240 of which were residents when one block alone has 140 apartments? So, you know, how was this survey really administered at scale and inclusively of marginalized voices? Thank you. Thanks. I think we will touch on how we got the word out on the survey and then some of the results of how we were accommodating and reflecting the representation from the residents effectively in the survey. And so there's some, I'll discuss that when we get to the survey pieces. And Nicole, it can help me answer how we got the word out. And then, yeah, we'll also get to that question of how we're defining essential parking. So, yeah, very good question that we will definitely hit on later. Thank you, Liz. Chris Rivers. Thank you. I also live on North Winooski. I love to bike in town. I'm proud of Burlington and what it's done to provide safe biking lanes. And I bike all over the place and I drive my car. And it sounds to me like this is a done deal, that this bike lane is going to happen. I have yet to really hear or understand any real practical strategies for replacing the parking that's going to be taken away. But getting back to the biking, I just don't understand and maybe it's too late for this commentary, but why bikers can't just like cars go one street over east to Union and travel safely on that road instead of taking all these parking spots up. It's just so impractical in a city that does a wonderful job with bike lanes. I don't understand how we've gotten here. And I just think it's crazy to put it bluntly. Thank you. Thank you, Chris. Thank you. Cara. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Thanks. My name's Cara Greenblatt. I also live on North Winooski, the block between North Street and Grant. I had the same question as one of the earlier commenters on what defines essential parking. I couldn't find any specific criteria listed in the presentation. So if someone could answer that, it would be helpful. Also just wanted to point out some what looked like errors to me in the numbers. The Burlington Property Database shows that there are 141 units on our block, but in the presentation it says 118. This is kind of important numbers if you're going to be modeling from them and could skew the data towards looking like there's more parking than there actually is. So it seems to me we'd want to get those numbers correct before doing analysis on modeling that comes from them. Another comment. I filled out the survey and I remember there was an emphasis or a lot of questions relating to permit parking. I think somewhere in the presentation it said something about only half. There'd be about half of the households that need them would be getting permits. I don't understand how that could work where the rest of us supposed to go for parking and also just repeating something that was said earlier. I also, I think it was two weeks ago, I counted three times in the evening that I had to drive around my block at least once defined parking in the evening and I just, I can't imagine it getting worse than that by 100 spaces being taken away on the street. So again, like Chris River said, I just, I'm a biker, I'm an avid biker. I don't see why we can't use the bike lane over on Union instead of taking away 100 spots from residents and the majority of us are residents who use them here. So I don't know if it, again, it's too late for this commentary, but I wish I had known earlier and been involved in the decision about going forward with the bike lane. It just doesn't seem to be a practical solution. Thanks. I'll mention the the housing unit number real quick is that we've used 131 in this analysis, always a little bit of room for error that creeps in. We're using a pretty large data set and it might have been a manual error in terms of using the data set. We use the BED meter data as well as a housing set that's been used at the regional level. So at the, at the end of the day, that magnitude, I think you're going to see how we're going to discuss how the model informs what we're doing. Any model is not perfect. I would strongly just suggest that we, that the level of error there is reasonable given the error in the overall, the amount of margin that we see any given day on the amount of parking that happens. And so at the end of the day, we're using the model to inform where we're going to see stress and what magnitude of stress, but we're not, we're not going to forecast whether there's nine cars or eight cars out there. The point is, is that it's going to be at that percentage level relative at a, at a consistency. So hopefully that, hopefully I explained that at least clear enough on that number and I do apologize that we missed that, but the 118 was one number that came from the July presentation and now we have 131 in this in the new data set. And then I've heard the other comments that you had there. And so one thing about the residential parking permit, it might have been just a misinterpretation or I'll say clearly for the record is that there was no, there's no recommendation that only 50% of the residents get a red parking permit. And so the idea is that a parking permit program is clearly a policy and a management strategy that we're going to discuss today. But in terms of how it is implemented, that has not been defined yet. Thank you. Anyone else? Yep. In the chat, there's a comment from Alan O'Brien from the community health centers of Burlington. This comment is, we're equally concerned for patient care and where our patients will park in an already highly congested parking area. Thank you. Comment noted. And that is all I'm seeing right now. Thanks. So we're going to go into the public survey piece a bit here. And as I mentioned, there, there is the presentation that's available online and it sounds like people are accessing it. So that's a great thing. And then so that way, we're going to just highlight a couple of the key takeaways, at least as term as to the way that it's informing the questions that we're asking about the management strategies. But some of the most important fundamentals here about the survey is that surveys are important pieces of information. And unfortunately, we had to do it by web because of COVID. And we did an effort here that is not typical with a web survey of this nature on a type of a corridor study. And we were able to do direct mailings throughout the whole study area with this postcard to invite residents to participate. We also had postcards delivered hand delivered to numerous businesses and other organizations throughout the corridor. I know the community health center posted the survey, as well as potentially sent it out on an email blast. We also had some specific engagements with with communities, particularly those that are new Americans. And we did a come an effort to engage them and provide a translation services for by ALP, where they were able to walk through the survey with individuals and fill it out on their behalf. And so we were able to track how many respondents 29 individuals took that took that up. So that was a really great opportunity to get their voice heard. Now, a piece that is really valuable to know here is that because of the way we sample the data, because of the way we engage and sent the invitations throughout the study area, we felt like we could statistically and robust, robustly do a weighted survey response. And so for the residents of the study area, we waited the demographic data, the respondent data to census data. And therefore, we have the representation from those who live in the study area, the 243 respondents represent the users of the study area explicitly. And the other users are a convenience or they were self selected to participate in the survey. And so we are not able to wait them to represent the census data. This is a this doesn't have typically happened in surveys. And I think it was an effort that we really focused on here to be representative of the population in the study area. Nicole, anything else or Brian, do you want to say in terms of the how we engaged the population in the web survey? Could you talk a little bit more about the outreach to new Americans and what that consisted of? And sort of what you heard in that from that specific engagement outside of the survey? Outside of the survey, I did not participate in any direct engagement. And Brian, maybe you can weigh in a little bit here because you were helping us coordinate the ALV outreach. Yeah, so we we worked with ALV to take advantage of their interpreter services. But we didn't want it to be one way communication where we relied on people to either, you know, see the lawn signs posted or receive the mailed postcard or see the ones that we were handing out or visit the website or whatever. We had also asked the interpreters if they could engage with their communities. And we had done this with a different project as well, which had some success. So we wanted it to sort of be a two way channel of communication, not just relying on people to go to them, but also ask them to do some outreach too. We extended the survey to give people extra time in order to respond. And to John point to make sure that we were capturing all the people specifically that were representative of the people that lived in the neighborhood. I will say that there's always more that we can do. And we're always open to suggestions. And we're currently trying to build those relationships with different leaders of the communities, so that we can have this consistent, ongoing conversation about different projects happening, particularly in the old north end. But we did the best we could now we offered incentives, we heard a lot of people that were interested, but were favored having an incentive offered. So we did provide gift cards to random selected number of people, which we thought would be helpful in getting people to respond as well. Thank you. Just to your point, we're not going to dwell on it because the data is just pretty comprehensive. But on slide 21 of the presentation, there is a set of tables there that show some of the demographics of the respond of the resident data. And the census data and those the demographics of those who responded to the survey. And so you'll see that there are certain characteristics of either race or income that do differ. But on the whole, it's not bad data. And we were able to easily wait the data to then become representative. There's a lot of data and I can confess I'm still trying to absorb it all. Yeah, that's data just keeps coming, doesn't it. So the point is, is that there'll be a period to reflect upon all this and obviously come back for questions. So residents in the study area, I'm just going to highlight a couple pieces here that are important in terms of how we frame the management strategies, in my opinion, 35% of the residents use the street for parking, either due to lack of a driveway, or it's typically inconvenient in their driveway space. That aligns pretty well with what we were modeling is that we were in the 25% area, 20 to 25% area, we were overestimating the amount of commercial users using the street versus the residents, but in the total magnitude, we feel really good that we're modeling that. 25% of the residents would bike more in the study area if it was safer. That's a helpful data point, particularly given the context of the bike lanes. We do understand that residents are, they're sensitive that the residential parking permit system might work for them. And that it wouldn't affect their travel so much when they're visiting the area or that they seem to have a positive response. So over 65% of the people indicate that a parking permit would generally increase their visits to the study area. So that's how we're conveying that that's a relatively positive response to that particular question. Because residents can answer the survey as both residents and then they can check the boxes, whether they also visit, whether they shop, whether they work in the corridor, residents can take on various different points of view. I will say maybe the first part is the first bullet there is important is that they own vehicles at a slightly lower rate than the region, state and national averages. This area of the city does own vehicles. Aside from college students, this geographic area of the city does have the lowest vehicle ownership rates. That last bullet is just a little confusing kind of. And I wonder if people understand how residential parking permits work. That's all you don't you don't have we don't have to talk about we can talk about how they work later in the presentation as they're one of the strategies. So thank you. Employee persons in the study area. Also just a couple key points is that the employed persons about 54% report parking on the street. And as I said, our parking model estimated at 60% of people parking on the street. So I was relatively close. But and then we have 13% parking on side streets of the study area, and then 4% are outside of the study area. So I know Councillor Hanson was interested about how we drew the study area. And I think both the residents and the employment data suggests that we've that we captured it relatively well is very few parking people parking outside of the study area. We also report that the residents that basically employees don't want to pay for parking, that's consistent throughout the study area. And then we realize that employees are willing and interested in parking off in share of off street lots, whether it was their own place of employment or not. And we'll contrast that with another point of view here in a minute. Visitors, clearly they visit the corridor using a more diverse set of modes relative to employees and relative to those resident who live in a study area. We realize that 43% actively or frequently avoid using a vehicle and almost the equal magnitude frequently do use a vehicle. We also realize that visitors are here infrequently. 65% of the visitors are here for one day or less a week. And then 80% of all visitors are just two days or less a week on average. So that helps us try to scale the the magnitude and the frequency that people are visiting the corridor for various reasons. We also know that visitors are willing to park a little bit further away and do some more walking along the corridor. Now owners and managers are places of employment. Now this is a difficult one is that their current needs for loading happens to coincide with the busiest times for parking as well as the busiest times of traffic. It's not surprising, but we realize that in other parts of the city there is a bit of management around truck loading and maybe there's some flexibility here in the future to to push those periods either earlier in the day or in a quieter time of the day. We also know that owners and managers are not interested in sharing their off-street lots. Only a very small handful did offer a sharing opportunity and there was probably only about 20 spaces in total that was potentially being shared, maybe 25. We don't always know exactly which lot people are responding to depending on which questions they they answer in the survey because some questions are optional. And so they appear split in terms of reducing introducing metered spaces or more time limited spaces and so that's something that I think is is an opportunity for us because it's not clear one way for or against. They realize that it could it could benefit them. Now the owners of the other properties are the residential units and we realize that majority of people do not charge for parking. There were some owners that do charge for parking and they discussed that and there was a lot of open responses saying how people who are charging for parking are encouraging people to park on the street. They acknowledge quite strongly that owners agree that it would be more difficult to rent or lease their property if they charge for parking. There's also an acknowledgement that there is not enough supply for the demand and I put here it's it's really subjective because we didn't say are you providing X number of spaces per unit. We let them answer it as they see fit and they answered it themselves saying they don't have enough. So the majority are 44 percent don't provide enough spaces as currently exists. All right so here's some of the demographics I'm not going to spend any time here. It's data for you to dive into and understand who we were who is answering the survey and then we have this other slide. This is again all respondents on income and education and then this is the demographic data that I mentioned to Kirsten there just a minute ago in how our survey data compares to the census data and we were using all of these tables to do a process to weight the responded data to represent the attributes of the three census blocks of interest in the study area and for that's using the American community survey. Now equity is a component here and we're trying to understand essential needs as well as who is affected and by what investments and this is the best we could do given the limitations of the survey. We in the first table here we extracted households that have income in the first row less than $25,000 a year and that we're not college students so maybe that's its own bias but we wanted to check out residents who are older than 25 and they report 25 typically driving a vehicle 50 by 25 taking the bus. It's a very small sample I don't draw a ton of value from it but it is our only data point. We get a little bit larger sample when we extend that to households making less than $50,000 a year and again more than 25 years of age is the responded and but the value that I do see is there's a general trend that vehicle use is the minority in terms of other shares and you have it all up. The American community survey data provides us a little bit more much larger data set to draw from and it compares more racial travel behavior and it shows pretty clearly that the driving data is fewer for those that typically persons of color or are not white in the sample in the study area and again this is focused on the census tracts within the specific study area so we're really driving right into this area for this for this detail. So I only draw your attention because this is an important data point I think for later on as we're looking as to who's affected by by law policies. Here's another just a quick model that we pulled together using the again American community survey using their it's called the public use micro sample data set so it's a little bit more detail and we're able to understand the median household income for northwestern Vermont specifically. How much does the typical for for two vehicle homes their median income is $98,000 per household that's what this data is showing is that so for the households that are owning six or more the median household income is $177,000 a year. It just simply shows again another relationship between vehicle ownership and income which is which was meant to be one of those connections on that first table on that last slide and maybe it's implied but if you don't own a vehicle then you don't need to buy parking for it. All right so setting the scene here and we're going to start cruising because we do want to get into the meat of it but if there's any questions pierced in or anybody else speak out. Basically within the study area we have 1,630 parking spaces. We estimate there's 223 along north windows itself and 141 alongside streets. We have 101,266 spaces estimated for off-street spaces. We did that manually looking at google earth and visiting walking along the corridor to try to estimate how many parking spaces are behind everyone's parking buildings. So it may not be perfect but it's our best estimate. Now some of it's restricted off-street so they're dedicated for residents or specific commercial uses. Other ones that are shared with a few uses on average we're about 1.3 spaces per household unit in the corridor. Now we turn that into a model again we spent a lot more time last time so I'm not going to talk about it as much. There is a methodology that's been adapted and well used called shared parking and it's made for a multiple land uses or generators that create demand that go into one parking lot. What RSG was able to do is turn that into multiple generators into multiple lots and we are able to then spread the demand across multiple lots to understand where that demand might go and that both allocates it to off-street locations as well as to on-street locations and we built that model using a range of data points collected from occupancy data that was pre-COVID. We also collected it using we calibrated it using parking rates from other studies. There's a number of residential parking studies that have been collected in the city of Burlington that give us confidence about the parking ratios of how many cars per unit of square feet or per unit of household and we also recently did this for the city of Uskie which has a very similar profile for vehicles per household and per square footage of commercial spaces. So this is a table that does aggregate a bit maybe too much because I think the point that others made on the north to Grant here saying we think the occupancy is a little bit more than this and this is when you average throughout the total the typical weekend average or the whole weekday as a whole. You can see that some spots on the weekend are quite busy and then some spots on the weekdays are quite busy and that 85th percentile is typically when management strategies are are really warranted or should be considered. This table is for your own records again but it dives into a little bit more point in time data about where the occupancy falls. We can see I was highlighting the PMP period because by and large that is the period of greatest demand if you take the whole corridor at large and you can see that the Grant to Pearl area in the north to Grant are quite busy and there are some periods that exceed capacity. The archival to Union to Cater area is quite busy over 100 percent so without defined spaces sometimes people can really get multiple cars in there. So this gives us some of the data that we were calibrating the model to and understanding how the parking was performing. So now we're going to go through kind of the existing conditions which we have largely summarized in July and so again I'm going to move pretty quickly here because I also have these existing conditions on other plots that will show in the future. But each of these sections goes through kind of a conversation to say what is the current condition? What's happening on the street? How's it being managed? We understand that certain areas are more constrained than others. In this situation there's fewer parking spaces off the street per relative number of households that are in here so we realize that that's already a constraint. We also understand that the health center itself has I think we've confirmed by emails but north of 100 employees approaching maybe 140 employees and it's hard to know how many existing on any given weekday but there's 76 spaces on site and roughly half of them are dedicated to employees and then the other half is allowable for first come first serve. So there's clearly a lot of demand coming from this very important use and and they don't have enough spaces on site and currently probably visitors are using some of the limited one hour parking spaces along the side of the street or the two hours on the east side but they also use the unmanaged river side spaces quite heavily. Moving south this area is extremely busy. We realize that probably the demand comes from multiple uses. We know that the 294 there's just so much diversity there. Gosh it's hard to provide a model to estimate those uses and that's always been a topic of conversation among the team but we also know there's some very large buildings from out legal aid and if they generate parking at the rate that an office building does they far exceed their current off-street spaces. So there's definitely some land uses here that are that are sensitive and busy. The unbundled parking at the redstone that from the survey it acknowledges that there's users trying to actively avoid parking there. So we acknowledge that and there's there's only a handful of residential locations so largely it's a peak weekday kind of condition here that we're seeing really max out the occupancy. You can see the model occupancy basically says it's full out as soon as people show up to go to work. All right so heading south this is the section. The also also sorry I just want to make sure everybody realizes also that the feeding Chittenden's right there as well right down at the bottom of the corridor that's part of it and we model that land use. These these areas are not the land uses is modeled they could go anywhere within a 600 foot radius of where the land use goes. But Kiersten I would love your observation here but from our observations we show that they're generally fine in terms of meeting their off-street parking needs. Is there is there something that I need to know about that use? Well they have 17 employees and they have you know I think well over like 12,000 visits annually they're very busy people are coming there a lot that's all. 17 people employed on and then they have deliveries too and I don't have more details on that but I just know from talking to them that they have are concerned so I just want to make sure that to me that's another generator of use and it's just it's an unusual one right. Well that's what that's our job is as humans at the end of the day to make sense of what the data tells us and how to make a management system that can hopefully work for us. So this section is primarily residential and they typically have some of the most the highest number of parking spaces off-street relative to the demand and so by and large the existing occupancy is fairly it is some of the lowest in the corridor. The east side is more heavily occupied than the west side. Maybe there's more turnover or whatever it might be but that's the kind of the way that the existing data is showing and it models it matches the model quite well. North Street to Grand Street so we've talked about this. This is the most dense residential part of the corridor. You can tell I we've estimated with 131 housing units but there are an average of 1.5 spaces per unit provided but but clearly the demand it is pushing off onto the street. We can see that demand gets closer to that higher 80% during that during that time. With the the occupancy being observed so high at other times of the day I'm curious as to whether people are able to use their driveways whether there's just a greater if it's 90% of people are probably maxing out their driveways. We were surmising last time that people are parking in this section that can't park in the southern area or they're or they're visiting other land uses further away. So I don't want to get into a huge discussion right now but I would love to get your feedback afterwards if there's any specific observations around this corridor to help us better understand what what is happening because the current model does forecast that or it suggests that we're only 50% kind of at the nighttime period and if that's clearly not the case a the model might be underestimating the the amount or it might be over parking driveways or people are parking here that don't live here. That's kind of the two main things to take away. So the Grant Street to Pearl Street section is the second most dense residential area and they have the fewest off-street spaces. So this is the corridor that currently is very managed. There's existing meters throughout and it's available then for residents on Sundays or after 6 p.m. and it's basically full up the parking occupancy data and the model. This it just shows that it remains very full in the future as well. There's 50% already fewer parking spaces for that same level of demand. So this this area will will have to find other parking not in this area. They're going to have to walk further away if they if they have vehicles at the same rate that they currently do. This is a table to again just show where the model was in terms of the existing data on the side streets and Riverside Avenue that small section there is really full quite often. Hopefully it's not surprised. Archibald is quite busy during the peak weekdays immediately east and west of the study area. North Street, Cromby and Decatur are up there a little bit more. Cromby less so. They definitely have a large number of off-street spaces per unit. For a point of clarification for everyone's benefit when we the corridor study did its occupancy data in 2018 we did not count parking occupancy on Cromby or Decatur and in July we tabled this table for the committee's review and the general consensus was that it's reasonably accurate and so we've been working under that assumption. So again if there's any particular comments or feedback on those results I would love to have it sent after the meeting or send us comments directly. Alright so future conditions here. The overarching theme is that there's we are proposing to remove east side parking between Riverside Avenue and Union so coming from the north down and then in that section that that dense residential section so between Union and North Street that's going to remain parking of both sides and then south of North Street we're going to remove the other 42 spaces or so that's the estimate of 42 spaces and 33 spaces to the north so it's 75 spaces total that's stated slated to be removed and all right then the one change that has happened over the course of the project is that the zoning has changed. So in essence the city has officially adopted a there is no minimum parking required on any of the land use development within the corridor and so that provides us a point of guidance that the city has already adopted as a policy that there's no minimum requirements that we have to maintain for the supply of parking and it's just something to keep in mind as we go into the management strategies. It's obvious to say that the removing on street parking will increase the occupancy of those existing spaces and likely some more of the off street spaces and it also probably stands to reason based on what we just covered some specifics or some segments are affected more than others. All right I'm just going to cruise through these that these charts are here for your own records and I think they've slightly I changed the format of them so we'll get this new presentation uploaded to the website. You'll just see a slight change in the way that that's formatted. Again to probably orient to more than discuss anything today is that I find it valuable to understand how peak periods compared to the overall whole day and that's how why the why the charts are here so you can get a sense of what happens during the day but then also if we were to average the whole day out this is the number that that's just before that so the 64 percent 72 percent. So during the peak periods it's it's full up but if we average it during the whole day there are some spaces it only just helps us to understand it because you'll see a couple sections down below where the whole day is quite full and so that gives you a sense of who is using the parking in the corridor and so this corridor given that it has some occupancy it has some space available in the future is that it's the commercial users that are really filling up these these spaces and that makes sense today because it's currently time limited anyway we know that the residential users aren't parking there much during the middle of the day. Another data point just for you to kind of compare is that this just helps understand the scale of change in terms of how many total spaces divided by the sum of dwelling units and employees in the area and so we're still having more than one space per dwelling unit and employee even after doing all this but but we know that some spaces are off limits for others so it's an aggregate number. Okay this one is the again it's continues to be very full and it's going to force parking onto Cromby and Decatur probably more and definitely we we estimate that it forces more people onto Archibald as well. The whole day is a little bit more full because there is there's a higher residential portion here and so they'll park on street as well longer during the day. These future conditions all assume the existing management strategy is in place which is none in these in these sections so it's just anybody can park there for however long they want to park. The Archibald you can see how we forecast that that it's that grows and basically becomes full up during the sunny areas during the middle of the day. Cromby we forecast to see a slight growth and then Decatur a small growth as well and so I'm happy to try to go and investigate there if we're underestimating the number of housing units or the parking supply or something if that's underestimating those models for those streets. All right the next section I see a little modest change of the parking demand and what we the the model helps us understand to say that there are people parking here now in the future that are that can't park to the sections of the north because it's so full so people are walking or they're they're moving further south and that's what's really increasing this occupancy because the parking with supply doesn't change in the future. On this section we we see that the number of parking spaces does go down we still have more than one per kind of user if you will and but the model does show that our current peak of kind of that 80% really goes up and it becomes full and this is assuming with no management strategy that means that people again can just park here as soon as they want and can last throughout the day. This is primarily residential in nature and so the idea that if it's filling up during the middle of the day like this they're coming from other places that can't that can't hit them and so that means they're probably coming from the south or they're coming from other commercial areas in nearby but most likely most likely it's coming off from the south and the most southern section here is that the current management was modeled here where there's parking meters those would remain on the east on the west side and that basically we said there's a slight occupancy on that section right after the residents drive to work but in the future there's just so much demand it's it's full of all day in this situation and again this is the most restrictive part of the corridor with residents that that don't have parking today and they want in the future and so that's most likely why that northern section is seeing a significant increase in demand. Jonathan the the side deck I'm looking at this this Grant Street to Pearl Street the model and the one I'm looking at is existing daily average occupancy 63 percent and that future daily occupancy 90 percent. Yeah I think I caught an error in the version that was uploaded so that's why this version will this is the acronym that will replace the one that was uploaded. So all right so we're we're about right on time a little bit behind but where we wanted to be but the management strategies to give the committee and the public kind of a flavor for what is out there in terms of managing parking there's a list of some options and some a little bit of brief narrative about them before we go into problem solving but I'd like to describe this as a menu of management strategies and that there's a typically an easier and a harder set of set of options here hardware doesn't mean it takes more time sometimes it's money sometimes it's policy sometimes it does take just time to get behavior to change. So on the easier end of things first off is that we could improve the definition of parking spaces sometimes communities benefit from not doing that because if you have a plethora of smaller cars you can fit more cars in in that limited space versus if you define every space then you're limited to those spaces itself but if we're going to use enforcement mechanisms of time limited parking meters and other things then we need to have more definition of parking spaces. So I think we'll be thinking about the definition of parking is almost a do minimal options that this is going to be pretty common throughout so we're going to probably have to improve the striping of spaces. Designation short term spaces again this is a low cost initiative it takes a sign it takes enforcement however but we can try to consider where in the corridor we can optimize short term loading spaces and things have changed so much in the last five years and we have yet to see what's going to happen coming out of covid but uber's and lifts they were really busy along certain parts of the corridor and they only need a five minute they just need a drop-off space we also know that in really constrained parking areas maybe residential loading spaces might be of interest and that hasn't been done before as far as I know in burlington so we might be able to define these short term spaces depending on the user and the user type and so we might have some flexibility there the time limits to increase turnover clearly if you're supposed to be there for only two hours and you don't have the option to keep feeding the meter or or get under park mobile app or something it's going to force you to move unless you get if you get a ticket so turnover is key and particularly for high for high turnover businesses like restaurants they they typically benefit from these faster time limits that increase turnover because you will get in the door and out the door then we could also talk about paid parking paid parking also encourages turnover it also generates a revenue source that can pay for some of these things I don't know frankly if burlington how all the parking monies are giving out but you could set up a basically a parking district here which would benefit some of the revenues that would be generated and spend them in the in the area that's generating those revenues. Kirsten already mentioned the residential parking permit outstructured today so we should we'll have a separate slide on that but that's it's it's used throughout Burlington currently Grant Street on the east of the corridor is the only one in this specific corridor in study area that has a residential parking permit today in place and it limits who can park there at all times of the day I believe and there's then these more difficult ones for sure do we add more off-street capacity is it available in the corridor or maybe in a remote lot situation and how far is that remote lot is it available by a bicycle by a bus or by some other means how infrequent could the use be so that it would make sense to have remote lots for instance UVM Champlain they have remote lots and they they make those work so can it work you know residential or an employee area maybe lastly mode shifts we realize that that's really the the aim of the city in some of the earlier work we showed that the city has aggressive mode share targets to achieve for walking and biking and transit and if we get more people to travel by those modes there'll be fewer cars owned fewer cars needing to be parked by visitors in the area if they are able to take these modes so these are all the management strategies I have a couple slides I have one slide on each but are there any real basic questions now and let's take just a couple minutes from the committee if you want to just discuss these or if there's any questions on it thank you explain them well John all right we do have a question from the public I don't know if you want to if can you type it or I don't want to get too off off hand but yeah I think if we can say that for the public comment thank you all right so we've discussed this the definition here's some examples some of the signs that could be created here if we had passenger loading zones so kind of the Uber lift thing we have 30 minute for a variety of users 15 minute zones clearly the difficulty is enforcing the behavior in these areas so how often are we having somebody there to enforce but it does give us a lot of options to meet some very specific needs and and like I think what Reese about the ADA spots as well so that that falls into maybe not a short-term space but it definitely falls into a managed space discussion time limits this is not aside from around here but anyway you get the idea of a two-hour limit for for areas that could be imposed elsewhere currently we have that on the east side northern section paid parking so currently we have paid parking in the most southern section we have a handful of blue meters and then a handful of brown mutes and do we do we extend those for the north do they encourage the type of turnover that we want does it give us options we could discuss that in the most northern part I don't think we're to talk about the rate structure at all but really the idea is that it's a combination both of timing and rates and you can try to really optimize your your parking behavior so residential parking permits there's a whole process that's on the city on the DPW and it's on the DPW website and they're going to direct people to the police department who manages or I guess enforces the the residential parking permit I want to know you now recently so you still get directed to the website for the police but I thought it was all kirsten did you want to pipe up and just say is the rqp system that you have a major concern with I just I guess I I just so I'm really torn because it's the public right of way and so then there's this whole idea of your managing and and and then somebody comes to visit you and you've got to run out and make sure that they can get a parking permit but maybe they had to park for like a half a block away and then I know it's it I personally at a personal level do not understand or think it's a great thing because I think we all pay taxes to use the streets that's just me and I know that perhaps it works in some neighborhoods for some people I just I just want to make sure people understand sort of how it works and that sometimes it can also get oversubscribed yeah but maybe that's not happening anymore I don't know I think they issue a still number of permits for a unit so you never know I don't think there is as strict a review of how many spaces how many off-street spaces and then how many permits so there there are some nuances there here so I agree and max I think I saw you had a question or comment too yeah just a quick question about the residential parking permits what exactly defines the guest passes for dwelling unit each pass gets two guest passes that a one-time use thing or is it how does that work yeah it's actually it's a hang tag and so it can be yeah you can hand it out to whoever is visiting at the time and you collect it when they're done and so it's very transferable in that sense okay so I guess my question is like say I'm a student and I get a pass for myself and then use my two guest passes like give them to my roommates or something how long could they theoretically use them for it I don't know the guest passes are attached to your regular permit so it would be renewed every year okay thank you councillor hans yeah I mean this is probably a bigger question than this committee because that's just the general policy but I think max's point is well taken that it's somewhat of a loophole because you could just keep putting the guest pass in your roommate's car right I mean you could but it still counts towards the the overall cap of how many permits are issued so that was one of the biggest changes to this program a few years ago is there still a cap on how many permits can be issued per household oh okay I understand so even okay so they would save money but they wouldn't necessarily they wouldn't like inflate the parking situation in theory yeah I'd say it definitely provides more control than I was previously and it I'm sure in some streets it does not um it still doesn't give everybody access to a parking space on the street but um yeah it is it has helped in some of the situations got it got it yeah um so quickly I think I've discussed this so just new street off off-street capacity remote lots motifs any questions just about these clearly how they would be operated and designed uh would it have to be consideration there is no publicly owned lot that we're saying hey here we go here's some new spaces for the city to consider so this would be a private land deal if there were to be new off-street capacity so let's get into more dialogue here it's been a lot of me and sorry for that the process here is that we are aiming to develop practical strategies for balancing and identify those essential needs so part of this will be unfolding organically today because we haven't had a conversation to say what is essential and it is a little bit in the eye of a holder as to we realize that there's going to be fewer parking spaces so now what do we do and that's really where we're at our performance measure is that in the future if we were to keep the current management strategy which is unmanaged for most of the section aside from keeping the time limit in the far north and the pricing far south basically the model says that we're going to have basically 39 spaces or 39 cars so we eliminated 75 spaces and so we found home for some of them but 39 cars basically said I can't park within 600 feet of where I wanted to park and so that's five percent of the estimated total demand was saying that that might not be able to be met that's just using a strict model to do that so that gives us kind of a scale and Jack just real quick I ran another scenario is to say what if we reduced our parking demand by five percent across the board and what if we were successful in mode share and other policies largely that 39 does go away so that's kind of that that magnitude that five percent buffer there is what we're playing with in terms of the total amount of demand in the in the magnitude of the study area council handsome yeah I mean that was going to be my question and I still don't fully understand what you just said with but just the fact that with the bike things going in you would expect some mode shift especially like the survey confirmed that but that's also just proven out in other examples where bike infrastructure is added you do have more people you know using the infrastructure and then this survey is also you have a significant number of respondents saying that that's the case so what shouldn't that be some what built in I think that's what I didn't want to do I wanted to at least say what if we didn't change the management today and we assume the parking demands remain the same that's what we're saying is that basically there's 39 cars that are not able to be parked using the constraints in the model now what you just suggested is that that's probably unlikely right we're going to come up with management strategies and people are going to change behavior whether it's five percent whether it's two percent one percent that's to be determined and we don't know how people's behavior will actually shift so I'm only providing us a data point that says hey if we could eliminate five percent of the parking demand our parking problems or the parking constraints that that are going to be faced might go away right yeah I guess I'm just saying like we're this is the parking management plan where we're coming up with strategies to deal with supply and demand but there's inherently one strategy you know you're talking about this baseline of no strategies but there is inherently one strategy that's definitely happening which is the bike infrastructure which does have an impact so I feel like in the same way that the other strategies we come up with here we're going to project that they have some impact and that's by that same logic we should assume that you know that infrastructure has some impact yeah I agree we can explore what percentage we think because certain businesses are affected more than others certain times of the day are affected others but I hear what you're saying so we'll try to build in that it's not there is going to be a bike lane there so we need to estimate what the effect the bike lane might have on park there is like okay so I guess my comment is that we now know that having a bike lane is going to necessarily have a positive impact on parking because households may have both cars and bikes and if it's easier to bike for local transportation but you still need a car for you know longer distances you may choose to bike during the day during business hours and leave your car parked in one of on the street if there's no meter or limits or this residential parking so I don't I don't know it's necessarily the case that we would improve parking by adding bike lines I mean that's just something that seems sort of a natural consequence or a potential consequence to me good points so are there any other members of the committee that have their hands raised um could I add something yeah thank you oh I just want to just going off of the bike lane and whether that will change modality and the strategy around that like I just want to point out so Old Spokes Home did our Old North End mobility audit last winter and a lot of what we heard was that the bike lanes in the Old North End already and across Burlington are just notoriously unmaintained through the winter there's all sorts of problems like potholes and like cracks and in many cases during certain weather like it's safer to be in the street or on the sidewalk than in a bike lane so I just want to point out if I mean I know there's not a strategy but if a goal is getting more people on bikes or getting more people walking like the infrastructure really needs to be maintained for that and I agree like a lot of people in the Old North End are multimodal and if it's like a shitty day maybe they'll just take a car yeah I was just gonna respond quickly to Mark and I guess Kelly too I think um and you know any of the strategies that we're gonna talk about with the parking management plan none of them we do we know that they're gonna influence behavior right in that way but I feel like this one is as certain as any of them in terms of like we're going off of what happens in other examples when you do this strategy and also the survey data what did people say like those are kind of the two things we're going off of and I feel like this is as much as any of them you know this is indicating that okay thanks then let's move on and John I'm just going to interrupt I just want to acknowledge to the public that I see your hands in the Q&A in the chat so thank you for all that we'll gather all this and address things as we get to the next public comment section and maybe this next discussion will help address some of what you're asking here great thanks Brian all right so the task at hand we're going to go segment by segment we're looking to get consensus on priorities for time periods so by user group is the way that we've thought would be a helpful way to organize this and the user groups are the ones that generally align with the survey meaning are they residents are the visitors are the employees are the business owners and so we understand how each of them have different needs for parking and they're each affected by different strategies differently and so our goal is to identify applicable strategies that the technical team are going to then refine is that the we just need some guidance to say are there any any strategies that are off limits and then which ones are of worthy of more detail so to give us a sense Riverside Archibald again remains in very high demand highly utilized low turnover if unmanaged that's Riverside and so do we want to propose anything for Riverside the current management along North Winooski is going to continue to work it's a one-hour period that's open to residents at night and based on the forecast the current residential demand doesn't overwhelm that and it seems to work well with the current commercial use those are the my observations from from the occupancy data and so now we have an opportunity to say what do we want to do and we have kind of the overnight period then we have the morning and midday and then toward the afternoon evening is kind of the framework that we have for us and these colors are just simply meant to give us the kind of classification differences these were meant to be kind of an initial seed to sow the discussion with and so to orient us real quickly because they almost all look very similar to this is that the idea that maybe overnight residents should have the ability to park on the street and then the second priority is visitors their priority is employees then during the middle of the day period and assuming that the one-hour time period exists today and will remain in the future there clearly is a priority toward the visitors and the commercial users today do we want to maintain that and then there's kind of the residents after that 6 p.m. time period employees at the lowest priority they don't have any ability to park really in that corridor because they typically are there by more than one or two hours a day and then in the evening we kind of see the same thing as the overnight so here's some ideas the management strategies are in the top right just to remind us what do we need in the overnight time period to meet the goals of the parking of the businesses of the entities around here what do we need during the middle morning in the middle of the day what do we need in the evening I think hopefully if we kind of exercise this one example we'll be able to kind of move a little bit fast through some of the other sections at least that's my hope but does anyone want to kind of kick this off do we is it is it easier maybe to think about the middle of the day if we're losing the right hand for parking which is currently two hours and it's going to be one hour on the other side of the street what are the management strategies that we're going to need to support those those entities here's to your hand sure so I'm just going to say one hour parking doesn't really work for employees at all right so that's how I'm going to start with that I don't see how that works for employees and that makes me very concerned particularly for the health center and others the health center has a large employer and provides really critical services to this community and they have some parking on site and it they split that parking on site 50 percent for the for employees and 50 percent for their clients who are coming but that said and then they rotate monthly which employees get to park on site so everybody bears their share of figuring out the other how how else to park or to arrive or get to work and I just worry that you know people where you see people leaving the healthcare field you see that it's a difficult field particularly in the pandemic not that it's easy at any time and I worry about what we're doing to the services that are really critical for the people in the neighborhood and are we going to be impacting those and I fully believe that the the health center has that same concern you know they they they last year they had over 55,000 visits in the pandemic can I can I ask Kirsten do you think some of that one-hour parking should be opened up for longer time frame for employees we heard earlier that the need for visitor parking was really crucial for that so trying to just think about well it's a mix it's visitors or their clients so maybe it works for more for people if you're only need an hour for your appointment but that's still pretty tight for an appointment you know you get there you go I don't know maybe you're in and out it really depends on what services you're receiving when you when you go there and are they running on time and you know how we all experience going going and getting our medical care these days so I just I'm not sure what the right answer is here maybe if I can maybe start with one of the questions before we get to like those specific strategies that we think about the user group priorities do you think that employees should be at a higher tier than any of the other users for any portions of the day perhaps during the middle of the day maybe residents I don't know yeah and that's a good question and oh thanks for that from the health center yeah it's good to know um thank you well so yeah I'm curious from the rest of the committee we this is exactly the kind of feedback that we need that if we want to shift employees to a higher priority during the daytime we can consider that I find it hard to prioritize any of those because it's a public right of way and you know you kind of want people to be able to use it yeah I'm sorry John I'll let you chime in after this you know one of our main tasks here is defining the essential parking needs so that we can come up with the right strategies and so unless we can define the users that have those priorities and the essential needs then we're going to be really really stressed to find the right strategies yeah I was just going to chime in there sorry that there's currently a priority today and that's what really this is represented on slide that employees can't park there really realistically and so that's where they're showing up as the third tier and so to Nicole's question do we see that we should shift and and really we're trying to not hone in on that the details to say all right to me two spaces for employees x number for for visitors if if the committee feels that we need to elevate the employees then the task is all right how how does that how is that done so that's what we need to hear yeah councilor Hanson I think just jump in here right now I think that's fine for the committee yeah yeah so the so in this stretch the parking that's being eliminated is two hour parking right correct yeah so I I feel like that's what we should think about in terms of management is okay what you know what are we losing and what is that impact so I feel like that impact is not really on employees as much because they wouldn't be using two hour parking unless they're like jumping out of work every two hours but so I think we should try to hone in on more so um the visitors I don't know residents I thought there were only a handful right and do they not have off-street parking there was like only a handful of residents on that block right only a handful they don't have a ton of off-street spaces but they currently operate it from the observations that we have they keep they seem to operate fine once they have available parking after 6 p.m okay so yeah I don't I guess I'm not as worried about that I'm not really worried about residential during morning midday but I think what we're what the impact is is more on the visitors than because it's that two hour that you're losing so I feel like that should be the priority everybody agree visitors and the commercial users are the priority during the middle of the day at least number one priority I agree with jack yep I agree yes okay uh let's just I think going through in the sequence works let's just say overnight residents that makes sense yep saying nods yeah okay yes I'm looking at the screen by the way so that's why I can see if people have their videos on I can see that then and in the evening so after let's say 6 or 7 p.m is it is it a residential reference that currently exists today does that exist in the future so I don't agree with that and one of the reasons I'm I don't I don't support a residential parking permit or residents after 6 only in the bus barns project that we have we have both commercial and we have we also have residential in that location and there is some off-street parking associated with that but three of the businesses located there are hospitality oriented businesses and they are busy and open after 6 p.m and so that gives me a concern we want them to be successful their success allows Champlain Housing Trust to continue to operate the property in a way that we're able to maintain it keep it up and it allows for certain types of uses to happen in the neighborhood you know and so thinking about goods or services that are important to people to use in the neighborhood that they can actually be successful and remain along the corridor is pretty important in my mind so can I hear you that basically the unmanaged approach that exists today that allows anybody to park there after 6 p.m that that's a good something that you think works it leaves it open equal access well I'd like to hear from some of the other committee members about their thoughts about what I said and how they feel about parking along this area Councilor Barlow and how many spots are on this one that would be helpful for me also to understand how many parking spaces would be lost in each of these for this one there's one section I'm sorry if the information is available I just didn't know it's available but I'm gonna have to go get it so continue the conversation I don't want to keep 22 you're removing 22 spaces I believe from this section thank you I think that's correct but you didn't verify I will jump in and say Kirsten so Old Spokes Home is in the bus barn um we do have that lot of spaces and we've noticed just like this past week or so like it's been insanely busy like busier than usual in that lot so I can understand wanting to have that street parking later and also I mean those spaces I mean Old Spokes closes at six but you have Fohang which is like a local business local restaurant and also people use the laundromat later than six yeah I think that's a really good point to leave it open especially in that section of the corridor where there is a lot of usage going into the evening um kind of leaving it open to keep it sort of equal access I think that's the best uh best option PT spaces as well we've had on that such street section yeah I would agree I don't I don't think it should be made I don't think it should be made residential only okay so unmanaged until certain time and probably you know it's just let residents take over once the commercial uses end for the day and you can strike RPTS the strategy yeah sorry let's whoops okay uh so this is helpful I think this is good during the middle of the day with visitors commercial now the question that just comes as second priority here's the thing that employees should be elevated they currently are only one hour restricted or two hour restricted so they're basically not not parking there today if you want employees to be number two we're gonna have to do something longer than than a one or two hour parking yeah we heard from counselor handsome with a different perspective so yeah anybody else from the committee if you have other thoughts on the priorities here for midday yeah for the second year priority yeah well oh sorry we're mark are you going there I just wanted to yeah I mean I guess I would think employees should be second after visitors and commercials and I guess it doesn't have to be all or nothing right like today it's all one hour two hour but it could be you could have some 15 minutes some 30 and then like a couple employee spots potentially right in the future you can have a couple unmanaged or all day or a brown meter and somebody could park there all day for instance um so if number two then there's a variety of things that do we see a need for commercial loading spaces I think they I think they pull off off street right now I don't think there's any I'm trying to recall if there's a commercial zone uh we can maybe does anybody have an idea that the commercial loading is critical here it's a short term commercial loading space for instance you know 30 minute with commercial loading or 15 minute that can also happen quite often yeah are you guys incorporating this what the survey said into your initial draft like because I don't I feel like the survey could give us insight into the demand for commercial loading or whatever or any of this stuff we know if they've given us an address which is optional but we know where they're loading would be desired yeah got it okay nobody gave that information I yeah and I would say maybe instead of yeah getting into the weeds of that specifically we'll just follow up with any commercial entities see if they need any loading so when we do do a commercial loading zone though then that it will it be dual purpose like so it might be loading for a certain period of the day and then in a different period of the day maybe it becomes parking because if you have commercial loading that has to be big enough for a truck to get into so you're really seeing not just the loss of the 22 spaces but if if you when you do place commercial loading along the corridor then you are further restricting sort of the availability of parking to individual normal size vehicles yep so I just have to ask quickly they're going to move on but in terms of pursuing other off-street locations are these are these things off the table uh sorry I'm highlighting off the street capacity I do put I put an address here clearly we have not talked to anybody about this and it's not in not available spaces as far as we know but there's a large surface area there outside of that building and a lot of Riverside on 666 Riverside is this something that is worthy of at least for more spaces should we look into this and say the city should investigate remote lots or the city should look at pursuing eventually finding some parcels is this a recommendation that we want to make yeah I could just jump in here I think this could address one of the comments recent comments pretty well in terms of employee parking and those who do need to use on-street spaces currently throughout the day I think for people such as employees who are staying in the area for longer periods of time considering remote lots such as the North Manuski one it would definitely be a good option for parking spaces for them and then a short commute walk or bike um into work from there so I just want to say that oh I'm sorry I just want to add so CHT owns that property and I did talk to our property managers about that and we we actively have residents as well as the businesses that use a portion of the parking there and it is subscribed in its entirety um in terms of we we have to have certain amounts of parking spaces for our residential units um and our other one of our other buildings a little further down in the corridor which I'll talk about at the time actually has absolutely no parking associated it was one of the things the city had asked the housing group to come and look at one of these older buildings the corner store and along the corridor and we and they did and it was redeveloped and but the lot itself is the building is the lot so they rely strictly on street parking and there's no way for us to fix that for them so um I would like to know if that's a real thing for people or not does the city have money are they buying land is there actually land to be had where you could create these remote lots how remote away would they be like and would people use them I mean those are things like if they're not real we shouldn't then I don't think you I don't think they can be part of the solution if they're just not real and if they don't have the money to be real then they're just not real max is I mean I think it's that's fine comment I don't think it's worthy of conversation right now because we don't have those implementation strategies or a budget in mind so I think for us now is that a far far off kind of future that might be might be of interest to explore but it's clearly not an option for the next immediate time yeah I guess I would just add that right it's it I would take none of my option for the near term however the city will never allocate the funding if it isn't identified as a priority and if it's um not something that seems important so I guess like from this committee if this seems like a strategy that is extremely important for this project and to offset the impacts here then that is something that the city needs to hear so that we can try to find the funding well then I would say that new off-street capacity is the number one priority I would have to agree if that's a possibility to look into we should definitely pursue that it would make this a lot easier but I still even by saying that I don't see how it's a reality given the land uses around there so I just I know you don't want to talk about that now but it may come up again so handsome yeah I was gonna say I think it should be more so just because yeah I don't think it's super realistic either that there's something that someone's gonna build a new parking lot in that space but um trying to identify like existing off-street parking that could be remote parking um that isn't already full because we know from not only this study but a lot of the broader study of parking in Burlington that there's tons of off-street parking that isn't full but it's that was part of why we changed zoning to unrestrict that because previous to the zoning change that park that all of that unoccupied parking couldn't even be shared but now it can at least in the transit corridors so that opens up tons of spaces that aren't currently utilized all right I am now I'm worried about time yeah so we have a lot of people from the public we have to be mindful of what we've promised I guess in terms of our comments there so I want to figure out the best way to this is the next section down Archibald Union it's oversubscribed there is there is a lot of business activity in this section it clearly not a ton of residents that are using the area today and so it's probably going to be employees who are the most affected as well as visitors to the there's also a fair amount of off-street parking so I'm also it's just the amount of intensity of the demand but I think to be honest Jack to your point this section probably represents some opportunities for some of the sharing particularly some of the back lots and some of the bigger lots where they're currently reserved to a set of users so here's if we just maybe dial into the middle of the day period again do we think that its visitors and commercial uses should be the the number one priority okay the question is right now it's unmanaged completely it's first come first serve it's somewhat low turnover in some cases because people come to park and work do we do we install some time limits or other restrictions so just another I guess clarifying question I don't know if you understand it or not but do employees park there's parking on the street now so where would they park if they were displaced would they park in the law associated with businesses that I mean I think we need to understand we don't know to that level of detail because we were not able to do an intercept survey so to speak to understand try to say hey you you're parking here why can't you go park and you're off the street lot we do know that there are some businesses that do not have adequate parking for their employees nor visitors we know that across the whole study area about 55% of employees park on the street so there is a likely chance out of the total nature of whose parking on the street employees is somewhere probably around 35% of their overall mix of people on the street so if you're eliminating those spaces about 30% of them are probably employees that are in that probably park on side streets or in some cases they might work out negotiations with their current tenants so they might mode shift all those kind of things and you said right now it's totally unmanaged that's right in this section again I am most concerned I am concerned about the impacts on the food shelf again with 12,000 visits annual visitors and 17 employees and then multiple delivery vehicles coming and going so their entire parking lot cannot be used by visitors or employees because they have delivery vehicles coming regularly so please think about that as we make our decisions. So the the impacts of reducing the spaces here which are already pretty full so people are already parking on Union, Cromby, Decatur, they're probably parking on side streets they're going down the section to the south which is forecast to still have some capacity so we don't know exactly where people are going but it's not it's not the end of the world is that basically because of how busy it is today it's going to remain very busy and there's only a handful of people that are going to have to shift their behavior in that section so by putting in a parking limit if that's a suggestion that I want to make is that you'll encourage faster turnover for at least the visitors of all those businesses and entities and is two hours the right limit is it something longer how do people feel about the time limit parking on that section shouldn't it be shouldn't it be shorter based on the uses than two hours we can also put a mix of shorter and I guess okay yeah because you have both options in there yeah again I'll just go back we don't we don't understand who the users are I mean we don't know if their employees if employees are getting there and parking early in the day and staying there there's not going to be a lot of turnover those people would be displaced by any needed parking there are we just don't know I mean it's hard to make a decision you know understand the impacts yeah it's it's a mix and that's why we have only the data that we have which is basically a lot of the employees I think in this section given the amount of all street parking our parking off the street I think it's mainly visitors and short term and a handful of employees that's basically what what we're estimating we don't know we we know whether the we know from the model we can tell whether it's commercial users that are parking on the street we don't know if their employees are visitors so we don't know that level of detail but we know that there's a handful of commercial users parking on the street so yeah we are limited but there's always going to be people adapting and changing to these things you know and one other question I guess is visitors to the food shelf would they you know they they may not want to pay for meter parking I mean and this doesn't have to be meter time limits can just be time okay got it yeah do we think that uh do we need any residential parking permit in this area at all there's not a lot of residential demand um and there's a lot of commercial demand which probably dissipates at night that's basically what we see so we don't probably need to go through that process process I would say no in the evening uh if we have unmanaged spaces or time limits until 6 p.m I don't think do we need to say is it residents or visitors basically at 6 p.m again it's equal access well what I am something we've been like honing at 6 p.m I don't think we know yet what you don't know yeah yeah sorry is it evening yeah evening are people generally prefer of the same persuasion as the north that basically the residential and the visitor needs an evening or high equal in this section kirsten on short term parking for the for the feeding chitin typical visit aside from employees is probably relatively short 30 minutes or at least under two hours probably they have volunteers also and they do um lunches and other items so other other other activities beyond simply food distribution yeah kitchen in that sense like you come get a bag of groceries and leave right they do other activities as well so it's 750 we are forecast to be done in 10 minutes we were going to leave 10 minutes for public comment yeah three more sections to go through here I feel like we are we're understanding what the task is is the committee able to spend another 15 20 minutes after 8 p.m if we give the public comment period 10 minutes right now yeah I think people waited and I'd like to hear what they have to say and and how you're addressing their concerns okay great so Brian again can you facilitate um I'm just going to keep the screen as is if that works or yeah I can do that thank you everybody for your comments and chats and your raised hands I'm going to start with the raised hands first and then we'll go to the question and answers um Thomas hello I yes I'm a resident on the north street to Grant streets block which we haven't heard about and I very much suspect that your 5% of estimated total demands of parking spaces is going to be um being lost is going to be concentrated in our block our block has about 65 parking spaces and we lose half of those that's 35 so I think the the residential users who are going to be harmed by this scheme are concentrated on our block and it's um those specific residents who are going to lose their parking spaces and they are not going to be helped by any of these high in the sky remote parking schemes I don't think there's a lot of spare capacity elsewhere in Burlington and I just want to point out that it seems to me that in this process the needs of the residents of Burlington uh and business owners um who reside in Burlington um are being deprioritized um concerned and you seem to be more concerned with the needs of people who don't live in Burlington and want to cycle north um towards Waianuski um they can already do this of course because there is a bike park on Grant's streets so I don't understand what needs um this change is is helping how the residents of Burlington are benefiting from this change and it seems like they are uh really going to be um suffering from from this change thank you thank you um Kara you're up next hi thanks everyone um my name's Kara Greenblatt I'm also on the same block between north and grant um just a couple points on the the numbers again um you talked about the um that our block has about 60 percent um usage of spaces 63 percent I think was the number in the report and then the moderator the presenter um talked about 50 percent use of spaces at night and asked for some feedback on that um I have no idea where that number where either of those numbers could come from I'm really concerned that the that the data that you're using for modeling is not accurate um if you come over here tonight and count the the number of empty spaces on our block you would not come anywhere near 50 percent it would be more like you'd find a space or two after driving around the block several times and and I as I said earlier I do have to drive around the block several times um more than one night a week to to be able to find a spot to come home to and and sleep at my house at night um so those numbers I just can't imagine they're accurate um I also just wanted to say that uh I guess I I because it is the highest density block I'm hoping that you can come up with a solution that considers that and that gives um you know more access to if you're going with remote lots or whatever you're going with gives extra um attention to to the residents on this block um and I'll I'll just say I'm I'm also you know listening to you go through block by block each of these sections of the corridor and and finding it you know your group finding it very difficult to prioritize users um which I understand I wouldn't want to have to prioritize between employees and people who are sick trying to visit a health center or people who are volunteering at the food shelf on on the corner here um at what point do we go back to the beginning and say is this necessary and at what point do we relook at the point that was made earlier why not improve the infrastructure we have for bikes we have infrastructure that works and that needs extra promotion it needs repairing it needs help during the winter um instead of pushing through something that at every turn seems to um have have challenges and barriers um I I just can't imagine how we're going to go forward with this and could someone um tell me at what point do we reconsider the the original um the original plan of putting this in um lastly I just wanted to ask if there's any way at all if this does go through um that there could be a way of first ensuring that a management plan is effective and actually works before you remove these spaces from our corridor um because I don't trust the numbers I want to see that we actually will have spaces and and that we will have you know a way to come home at night and put our cars someplace safe um before the spaces are actually removed I hope that makes sense thank you thank you thank you um Liz uh I see your hand is raised I know you also had a lot of comments so I will unmute you hi there I am coming on as Brian using Liz's computer so I am okay I'm Brian Pine and I'm speaking as as a citizen um who cares deeply about these issues and has lived in the old north end for um over 30 years um I want to just say you have somebody on your on your committee who has expertise in doing this because I know this because I hired her to handle the north street revitalization project and the way that we approach the north street revitalization project was an incredibly grassroots inclusive community driven process that really engaged the community in a meaningful way and I'm afraid that this got a lot harder with zoom so I don't I don't I'm not intending to point into fingers I'm just saying that I don't feel that this process has been anything close to what um what CEDO did in its um in its heyday 20 years ago around north street and Kirsten I think should be you should use her as a resource I think the way she approached her task which was huge was to revitalize the physical infrastructure on seven blocks from North Avenue to um North Moorsky Avenue and the work was done in such a way that um folks weren't left out folks weren't left behind we accomplished great things there we didn't create dedicated bike lane but at the time the philosophy was really a share the road philosophy which uh as a pretty avid biker myself I'm not a winter biker but I do bike pretty pretty regularly pretty religiously to get around town I tend to think the share of the road has worked pretty well but I understand that there's a different philosophy and we could probably debate that quite a bit but I have to say at the public meeting that happened the first big public meeting at the neighborhood planning assembly pre-covid um I threw out an idea which got a lot of support although perhaps some viewed it as not realistic but I think it's as realistic as the idea that we're going to get satellite locks to handle remote parking I don't I think that's actually really far-fetched I think a more realistic idea is to look at the corridor and see if we can't accommodate both and not either or and I still think that's worth taking a closer look at is can we fit a good dedicated bike lane and parking and I know we have to give up something maybe it's the tree belt I think it probably is but I think we have to look at that rather than just assume that we have to work with the roadway that we have from curb to curb that we have today so I just want to ask you to think about this in a little bigger way in a way that really does build the I mean the neighborhood the neighborhood was really a priority for um for the residents of the neighborhood for the elected officials for the city for for really decades because it was the it was the location of lots of speculation and blight and brownfields and all of this incredible work was done to bring the neighborhood to a whole different level so what you see today is not just like happenstance that was very very intentional and I work very hard to save a bunch of buildings in that neighborhood ensure that we get the properties cleaned up in my job at CEDO many years ago and I just want to say that I think I think we have some incredible assets here in terms of the organizations that are located there it's like it's an incredible hub and I know with the restaurants we have incredible activity and and the neighborhood I think really appreciates that and I worry that we're we're thinking of ways to approach this that that may in fact we may look back on and say we really did make some mistakes here and I really want us to be careful about that so please consider the both and approach not the either or thank you great thank you for that okay um next I'm gonna I'm gonna go to the q and a and does everyone um on the committee have access to those as well or is it just me I have access to the q and a you're a co-host I don't know I can see them are you gonna go through and answer these now uh I think that might be a process question for the group um a lot so let's see question uh let me yeah so Nicole do you want to go or some of these will be quick I was trying to see if there's any order to these um okay time trying to scan through and see which ones are well I mean I guess maybe I will just pose a question that rather than go through and read all of these that um if anybody who did take the time to add them into the chat uh if we haven't answered them already um maybe if you could just raise your hand and we can make sure we flag those and get to these because yeah there are quite a few in here and if we've already answered them I don't we're already running late so I don't want to keep us later so Nicole I think yeah just we could probably just scan through a couple of these are pretty quick like that first one just I think to be clear the council has voted to put in the bike lane uh so that's a yes as far as I can tell at this point in time that's the plan that's going forward and the point is is that the the idea is that within the current confines of the curve uh that's the plan and so that's why this management plan is trying to manage the existing supply that will remain after that goes in so that's the answer for Chris and a few others um the uh the parking model there's there's a if everybody wants to go back on the July meeting goes into a lot more detail in terms of the parking model and it is just a model it's using national parking data for various land uses and there was 40 different land uses that we put into the model and it's based on national data again that we try to calibrate to the local conditions but no no data trip generation or parking estimates reflect every unique land use that we have and so no it doesn't explicitly account for the 1200 visitors to the food shelf but it does estimate the typical parking demand for a us we I think we cut it as a as a grocery store slash office so I don't know how much parking demand that that estimated but we can always go into those details and that's all in a pretty thorough draft report that's that's been drafted and in a state of draft is anybody suggesting parking meters toward the health center I at this point it sound like just just time limits will remain as being the the kind of the philosophy that was being before all right so the 50 occupancy at night between brand north I agree the mark the parking model underestimates the observations that we had showed that it was 70% or more and and that July model the July conversation goes in a lot more detail there but the the assumption is is that there's people that's coming from outside of the study area that are that are not reflected in the parking model the parking model has a very defined boundary and there are some areas that are not reflected 100% but what it does show is that clearly in absence the removal of some of that parking that demand increases and so it's forecast to be basically be a peak throughout the all the time periods all the from anywhere south of north street moving it to so I'm hiding the ones we've already answered okay that's why it's moving yeah right and I do see Liz posted further down that her questions and comments were for the committee to consider not necessarily for us to go over tonight and John were you saying I was moving them or Nicole was moving these always was taking us on the answer okay I'm sorry I'm trying to I'll stop touching it so you can scan it John there are a lot of questions or comments here just about specific kind of behaviors that are detailed behaviors that that are not assessed in the detail that that that some of the uh questionnaires would like so some of that will be in the report some will be in the narrative and then there's there's some answers that we just cannot get to that rather resolution with there's going to be a reduction in parking and we have to try to work with that the uh there's an interesting one about street cleaning and and how that forces a turnover at night um that's for the committee to consider whether I guess we don't really have that active although management plan here in the city for for street cleaning but that would force a certain behavior all right I think that's it yeah let's be captured to the committee yeah so are we gonna finish going through the sections because I feel like we owe it to the people on the other southern side of north street let's let's do it can we do it are all the questions in all the chat are we done Brian public comment I'm scanning the chat we just separate from the q and a to see um and thanks to Ellen who provided some some data on the health center and some other input that's appreciated regarding appointment times and spaces I guess I would like to propose I know we're short on time but I know that people stuck on the on the zoom and I want to be fair to getting through there I also am not sure if we need to have like another public comment at the very end I just want to so let let us can we should we shall we proceed forward and then reserve the opportunity if people feel like they have additional comments that are pressing yeah and I'll also mention that our next step after this is to go to the work to three npa so there will be a whole other opportunity for different comments there but yes I do agree that we keep moving on so we can yeah try to see what we're taking to the npa okay thank you forward around and then thank you to the committee let's press on all right so the next section heading south here is the union union to Decatur intersection union streets north street section they supply parking is not forecast to change in the in this scenario and basically we're forecasting that the demand will increase because of the changes surrounding it and basically the demand might exceed the 70 percent kind of on the peak period so it's going to go from kind of that 50 60 average up to 70 to 80 percent and that's when clearly management is typically is typical and by meaning management that means that maybe time limits maybe more more active restrictions like pricing so without a without awareness that probably there's going to be some behavior and probably those people shifting are probably visitors or employees how does this change the middle of the day philosophy now what would be our number one priority cancer and then I would just jump on in feel free to so I thought you I thought you all had said that it was usually 85 was when you needed to come in 85 percent 85 is the rule of them castle handsome that is that is correct so if this if this is going from 60 to 70 do we need to is not fine or yeah so what I would probably recommend then is that it's probably a more monitoring situation that if the demand starts exceeding that 85 percent for more than about three or four hours at a day then a more active management route regiment should be considered so that's one way to go about it yeah because I don't think we should push because everything we do on each block affects other blocks and if this one's at 70 we shouldn't push people out to other blocks I don't think because I mean yeah this block's not losing parking so okay if this block doesn't lose parking does that mean the bike lane that you're going to put that that supposedly is going in is going to be disconnected no it has enough width in that section so this section can accommodate parking on both sides plus the bike lane yeah this little graphic here it has a wider curb to curb in other parts of the section the corridor which I guess I'll also just mention because this is right on the cusp of feeding ginden which has been a you know big conversation point uh-huh so that this block will also be able to accommodate some of that parking they're right on the corner right right so today overnight it's just general unmanaged so frankly you know whether we have a priority or not it's it's the way I'm going to what I've heard is that if we're leaving it unmanaged it's an equal priority frankly and then the question will be right now there is a very short-term space at the corner of promby and so that will be remaining there so in terms of the commercial needs they probably have that but during the evening in the overnights we probably are fine to leave it equal and then during the middle of the day if we leave it unmanaged as well we'll monitor the demand so is that I assume that all like 15 minute or commercial loading spaces that are already along the corridor or handicap spots that would probably be remaining where they are but this section all of it would be untouched is basically what we're suggesting right now so this section here I think we've heard a lot about it from the comments and it is mentioned is that we basically see the existing occupancy is somewhere during the 75-80% during the middle of the afternoon and then basically going to a full most of the day and that's with the change in that supply on the eastern side there's a number of units that have very limited parking and then there's a few that have a fair amount on the back it's been observed that probably some of that demand is showing up from point south because of the meters that are there so now we have a situation where it's almost predominantly residential how does this change the middle of the day priorities do we accommodate visitors and commercials that commercial users who might come from elsewhere because there's very few of those uses in this corridor or do we leave it unmanaged and just have really full up do we have time restrictions that might be available for visitors and commercial users until a certain time do residents maybe this is an opportunity for a for a time of day that our RPP is applicable I'd like to hear your thoughts max just go for it yeah so my understanding of this block this is the block where I should live it is mostly residents and I don't know every property exactly but that as you mentioned there is a good amount of off-street parking already available for instance in our unit it's 128 near the top the north edge there we use about two or three spaces of the six available that we have in our backyard I know there is a lot of usage during the day on the street at night time there's not a lot of parking there that's taken up so I think this could be an opportunity to kind of bump up the importance on employees maybe it might be a good spot for overflow if we maybe bump down residents I don't know if I'm wrong in saying that but as a resident of this corridor I think residents can almost be given the least priority with potential for overflow for employees from other from other sections that's just my thought does that serve time of the day max I would say it's good for midday the section run though so for those people that might be from out of town that need parking during the day so let me just flesh that out a little bit more in the committee gets feedback do you think then what what happens just to the south or that there are a handful of the brown 9 meter meters would that be an approach to to give those employees those spaces or leave it unmanaged like it is today I want to say that unmanaged would be a good option kind of first come first serve love to hear other thoughts on that but that's what I would say so if it's unmanaged though wouldn't couldn't residents just kind of camp out there around the clock kind of blocking out those other uses or so okay well what I mean you all are the experts what do you I I agree with max so I think whatever we can do to achieve what max is saying getting some sort of whether it's meters or time-restricted parking is going to help manage that turnover that you were talking about counselor answer so that residents are parking there all day employees are one of the higher priorities here counselor well I would just say that there could be we know there will be impacts to the next block we haven't talked about there are businesses there I could envision um you know visitors commercial needing to park a little bit further away so we want to discount the downstream effects literally here in this case we might want to hope the priority of visitors commercial not for a moment but for the mid-morning certainly and maybe even even evenings yeah okay so I think from a practitioner point of view if counselor Hanson's inviting opinion I think to Nicole's point and then if we're talking about visitors who might not have sufficient parking down in the southern section as well as managing employees again it might be a mix of maybe more blue shorter duration either time limits for free parking with kind of a half an hour one hour windows and then clearly probably for the visitors the best way to do it without to avoid the residential members camping out there is probably put a a nine hour brown meter and because that's just to just further to the south it feels like it's a it's a price that people are willing to pay because that to the south is very in high demand all day as well what time do those meters end because I want to be conscientious of what we heard from some of the the residents along I'm not really sure which which section here between north and pearl but right uh finding finding what's currently 96 currently the meters are 96 so that would mean open time after 16 that's right um so the question sort of for new unical should should this initially go forward with meters the end at six so that it's open for residents in the evening if if residents were still struggling and really challenged in those circumstances would there be the ability to come and petition the city for residential parking in the future absolutely yeah I can happen at any point I mean that's also fun so we can consider here maybe become residential parking at 6 p.m and meters during the day we don't know who we want to start people don't necessarily want to jump into you know paying for the residential passes all the time but yes that is definitely an option I'm not so maybe so here is a proposal that do we want to say there's a mix of shorter term either either or pay parking there's a handful of longer term pay parking and then kind of put a caveat there to say if the parking is still too full after maybe an r.p.p to be considered so that's that's basically what I think it's what we're saying yeah yeah so to that comment about yes overnight we are prioritizing residents yes actually it's be starting at 6 p.m it's never prioritizing residents yeah that sounds like a good revision to me we have here I agree yeah all right so we're basically saying you know employees visitors are the first priority during the day residential last or secondary during the evening after the meters or the time limits are done then the residents get whether whether it's unmanaged or a dedicated r.p.p. can be a decision and then that'll be overnight as well so okay that's good heard that just gonna put sorry my one notes here I know everyone else is taking notes all right the last section here is and much to so we've said this is the second most dense residential area over 105 households in it with fewer than 0.7 spaces off street so this is somewhat just the flip side of the northern piece is that this one has a fair amount a lot of residential demand with fewer spaces it currently is actively managed during the day with meters and then available for anybody unmanaged after in the evenings so that's what's currently happening now and so in the future do we see that changing in the middle of the day do we keep the meters as is do we try to encourage even a faster turnover is there any is there any indication that we want to change what's currently working during the middle of the day see any and so basically we're just going to keep the existing during the middle of the day is that I mean is that what you all recommend or it's it's it's a little more it's a lot it's a higher occupancy than what you know the city's philosophy is I think it's called something smart parking or something and and it's it's exceeding that 85 percentile it's pretty close so basically it's a pricing piece at this point counselor Hanson and the city wants to be generally consistent within the meters and the zones so it's I would say it's reasonably working fine right now you probably don't want to touch it just in this study okay thanks you you could extend the blue ones a little bit more to get faster turnover because it's about split 5050 blue and brown meters but okay I don't I don't I think I don't have a strong preference in terms of blue versus brown I don't think it can be residential parking 24 hours a day okay and I think the mix of parking is good even on both blocks that short and long term it gives people that flexibility and it might mix up the parking rather than just one blocking all short one block being long for instance all right I think one more thing I think just it is important definitely to include some of the short term high turnover parking just because it is closer to downtown so do you think that maybe a recommendation that that there might be some more 15 minute because of the food operations there and pick up drop off type of operations that's something to consider and flesh out whether there be two very short term spaces or something I think there may be for my personal experience I was a DoorDash driver the past two years that is a super congested area it's a pretty common stop I've seen four pickup drivers there at the same time before on the south end of that block all the way towards Pearl Street so maybe I wanted to short stops there would be a good consideration I will say that basically the loading zone that's in front the buildings on the on the on the radio beat side that loading zone is there and that's what you're probably used for the drop off right now and pick up that will have to be eliminated and shift it to the other side of the street and basically there's enough room right there because of the way the travel lanes are configured to put that in the in the lower west side of the street yeah from my experience that's actually where most of the delivery drivers pull over is to that right side of the street as you're driving down south is that workable for the rest the restaurants I think oh right now today you see some of the big trucks they pull on the right side of the street already I've had photos of that couldn't we have a delivery drop off to a shared sort of use space there that would be both bike lane and delivery I'm just saying that I know we there's other places that we consider things like that so like upon um Cochester Avenue is there something like that by where the cars would cross I guess it leaves the bike lane up it's still I'm just I think we can be creative here too I put that for Nicole to consider that that's the bike lane design part of the project less than the yeah but didn't you just say we could have in fact the loading space on even with the bike lane council Barlow was suggesting keeping it on the oh on the other side well yeah but I but to Max's point and and yours um John it's already kind of happening on that side as well I think that the point is taken so when that those details get looked at I think there's some engineering suggestions to avoid that that particular type of conflict but all no I don't think it's necessary though I I I don't think what counselors Barlow is saying is necessary I think the loading zone is essential but it seems like it can be on that that other side I guess I would defer to the rest of the businesses there and uh presume that we could be experts on that here right so in the evening I just meant because today because like that's already the case that's that's why I was saying that it's a de facto drop off today in the evening right now the meters end at 6 p.m. and it's open access do we this is such a high demand area frankly the meters would probably extend further but there are a lot of residents here as well so is this something that do we want to change the priority here currently it's unmanaged so it's kind of equal priority in the evening and overnight do we want to be more explicit is this an opportunity is this area so intense do we need some more restrictions do we need an r.p.p. do we what is there any thought here and we can also let the residents petition this is that we can leave it unmanaged as it is now and know and just and say that residents can petition this and say this is clearly a high likely block for an r.p.p. seeing some of the comments and knowing some of the conversations earlier into councillor Barlow's point on the last block thinking about kind of the commercial spillover for removing meters on this block then maybe we should think about at the same strategy for residents overnight for the spillover in the evenings of removing that one lane but this could give them more options to park on this block as well so I know it doesn't necessarily solve the problem the residential demand on this particular block but this could be somebody to consider that basically it's over the national parking zone for those two blocks right okay so if I heard you right currently today it's unmanaged in the night but because of the absence of parking on both this block and the block to the north let's free our more space dedicated to residents and so you're suggesting that the r.p.p. might be something this committee would we don't have an endorsement but I guess I do want consensus is that something that this committee says hey we think r.p.p. might be applicable here yes I think it's worth sorry sorry did someone else say something no I was reading a comment on the screen getting distracted sorry I haven't heard very much from councillor Schomburg um yeah no I mean I think that's fine so the r.p.p. is could you just describe the process of that real quick yeah I'll let Nicole well I mean at this point all we're asking is if this seems like a reasonable strategy to suggest then we take it forward for more conversations with the community at the next npa meeting and if there is still a consensus that this is something that we should entertain the process is that it is established by the public works commission it still has that whole other um approval process and it would then require residents to get parking passes um okay there's like there's a whole structure around how many they can get what the cost is it's either a one-year or two-year permit um but that's it in a nutshell is that it is a permanent thing on their part or the visitor's part that gives them the ability to park on that section of the street okay yeah that makes that makes sense to me um and so I saw on like one of the earlier slides it was the the plan was to I think just finish out with the npa wards two and three are you going to go to all the npas on this or just just for that ward because of that district we were going by the council resolution that clearly pointed out we needed to go to this npa so we're only planning this one okay yeah because Evan obviously like even my ward isn't yeah um okay that makes total sense sorry thanks for the clarification thank you I guess with that I'd also say yeah I'm supportive of doing that so Kirsten I think it should be something that's brought forward to the npa I guess in the next phase of this for their feedback I guess it's just another place also for people who participated on this call I would strongly encourage them to participate at each step as this proceeds all right so general consensus is that probably this is the appropriate corridor for an rpp to be brought to the npa for further conversation it is going to be a balance too because you've got a lot of businesses right there at the corner and it's very active into the evenings yeah that is true um all right those are the those are the segments the kind of questions that we just need to reflect upon we have the goal of putting the bike lane and meeting essential parking needs we tried to define what those needs are by understanding who are the users who are using the corridor how are they affected and what opportunities do those users have to park elsewhere there will be some areas of stress I want to be clear for the public that's still listening we're not saying that this management plan is going to meet or provide the option to replace all that parking that's lost there will be some impacts to that and we don't have an answer for every land use or resident or visitor so the question is are we meeting those essential needs are we balancing that supply and demand committee are we have we missed anything can we reflect quickly are there any little spots that require us to dig a little deeper and understand anything more specifically there was a public comment earlier that I thought was um it could be useful are there opportunities to pilot any seconds to try to see what the um the shifts might be in terms of the use or I believe that that's kind of in the city's discussion because the the resolution is pretty clear that this was supposed to be already on the ground basically the bike lanes are supposed to be designed this year and they are being designed this year and that'll be part of the paving project I think that'll be happening next year saying if we can't answer some of these questions that would give us more tools to sort of empirically see how things would play out real real life before we actually um you know made those more permanent commitments and it might help shape uh the design in a way that would be better or less impactful to existing current use I mean I don't know I'm just starting out there right I think well we need an answer for it and so that thing just it's somewhat rhetorical because I know some of this work was done before I was on the council everybody tonight's talked as though this is this is happening you know we're talking about a part a parking management plan but we're really talking about this how to limit the amount of impact uh we're not you know that's what we're doing we're trying to find a plan that will limit the amount of impact but part of that might be to try to be more iterative about it even if it takes more time and come up with something that works I share some of um Jane O'Dell's concerns about like what are we going to do some of these things could have downstream effects that we won't know that could be like an employer decides well I don't know about parking I'm going to move my business to South Burlington where I have more parking or something like that we don't want to have that have been unnecessarily either so anything we can do even if it elongates the process have a better final product and product I think is worth at least considering it may not be practical but we should at least consider that this is the place to do that I think I don't know anybody else thinks that yeah you're for one counselor you're you're on the council you're on the two you have an authority here that I I'm only the technical assistant so I'm providing you the only comment that I have is that behavior does take time and doing pilots for parking is almost impossible because people will not have time to change their behaviors and nor will they have time to seek out other all alternatives that may eventually exist so that is a limitation to us for sure we are certainly the expert on these things so you would know better than I what what's practical and what's not I know we piloted bike lanes things like that like on a north avenue right so counselor Hanson comment yeah I was going to say to your earlier question about just the overall these three questions on the slide I think we didn't really talk about transportation demand management from employers which I think has been proven in Burlington and elsewhere to be a super powerful tool and we've seen you know UVM Champlain other other employers like putting in TDM and actually driving down the number of people driving by huge margins and and getting people to and from their their locations without cars so I think that should be a piece of the puzzle is just you know helping employers utilize TDM but to Mark's I mean Tim what Mark was just saying I think we I want to be careful that we're not kind of just going back to the process that we already had because from 2018 to 2020 there was like an 18 month process of the north when you are you know the Windows have corridor study what are we going to do with this corridor and there was a bunch of public meetings there was an advisory committee like this one and they went through that 18 month process and they unanimously made that a they unanimously recommended to the council this configuration for the corridor and then it went to the city council I think it went through to and the counts what the council did it was approve that but also added this and what we're living through right now which is this you know this parking management plan process and I think we've we've done more than what was laid out like the council just laid out basically presenting to the NPA we went above and beyond in terms of doing a large survey and kind of getting that data and bringing that in but to at this point to like go back to the I don't think it really is appropriate to kind of go all the way back to like that original 18 month process that already played out and I wasn't suggesting we do that either I was just suggesting that the notion of trying to model or put some do some things temporarily to see how it might influence behavior could be useful Jonathan Jonathan has indicated that that might not work because we might not see the behavior sooner but yeah and like originally we did talk about mark we did talk about if it was on the ground for a year before the paving plan which was the original timeline that it would be on the ground this year and you would have a year of this thing actually on the ground before the state comes in with the repaving next year so then if if you see it on the ground for a year and you want to make modifications you can do that ahead of the state coming in but because of how slow and delayed this whole process has been and and the way that we've continued to miss deadlines we're now up against that that paving and so it's we don't really have that same luxury that we would have had on the original timeline I just would like to add that I am not sure that it was actually unanimous by the other committee but it was overwhelmingly supported I will say that to go forward but through that process there was a longer term option and one that was often discounted as too too high of a goal for us to meet as is a community which was really to look at again um adding the bike lane retaining the parking perhaps moving curb and changing the overhead utilities to allow for moving of the curb to provide the width to really create a corridor that had all of the things that were needed for this to be a thriving corridor um including parking including sidewalks including bike lanes and I have to say with a trans a transportation bill on the cusp of passing in in Washington DC I have to say it may make sense to consider trying to think about can we have it all good point Kirsten all right I want to uh then just acknowledge that unless we have any strong considerations to the contrary that basically we've done our due diligence in trying to meet these these obligations of the goal and these questions clearly some of the narrative is going to be fleshed out as we define these the the management strategies that you've articulated tonight we're going to take and add a little more detail and then clearly we're going to go and get more feedback from the npa particularly on the art on the residential parking plan and such so thank you um and so Kirsten I'm gonna just say any other words from the committee and then we'll talk about next steps I think yeah we should jump in the next step so that we can because there will be comments on I just want to say I just want to say I am not convinced totally that we have balanced um supply and demand and or met all essential parking needs for some some groups say what are the next steps well I we want to know exactly which specific groups can see whether customized and more sensitive you know focused management plans can assist those so here's the next steps that we have today's meeting we've we've covered a lot of ground we have some next steps we have some management strategies we've we've conveyed to publicly end of the committee the results of the survey and how that's informed and the users that we have and the opinions that that were expressed we're going to then prepare for an npa meeting with more narrative around those management strategies and and we'll discuss about how much of the background do we do we go over in that meeting it's as Jack excuse me counselor Hanson has said this has been an 18-month progress that has culminated in this right in this in this recommendation and now some management strategies to uh to help mitigate the the impacts of that and then we'll be preparing the draft report which then will come to you all for our comments which will then go in front of the public's work commission in the city council so those are the next steps that we have in front of us so Kirsten if I I don't want to delay things necessarily but if there are any specific comments you want to air for the for the group if there's a specific population if there's a specific user that you think can be the treatment of those users can be improved with the constraints that we have please let me know here please let us know or if it's a more specific email correspondence something that we can discuss that I'm happy to I'll continue to share sort of additional information about what I know about the use and to try to help you get additional information on from either the health center and feeding Chittenden and maybe some others I think maybe one of the things John that we can we can look at too is you know you shared that early slide about you know the 39 parking spaces that are estimated to be unresolved without any of the management strategies we haven't gone through the process of trying to figure out what that looks like applying some of the parking strategies because we weren't really sure what the committee wanted us to move forward with so that definitely needs to be a next step and may help us better answer that question of like how close to the end goal there of meeting these parking needs but yes it's good to continue to bring up Kirsten well I am done with the presentation I assume at this point in time we we don't want to hand it off to the public we're we're done or do we want to do one more round I don't know if there's been any new questions or comments yeah I'll leave it to the committee but I would say John if you can end on the slide or contact information so that people at least know how they can reach the project team if you would like to follow with us directly afterwards but yeah committee we will leave it to you if you'd like one more round of public comments or if we should close this today again use the MPA as our next round of public engagement this is after all your meeting we are helping facilities may I just so are you saying doing another round of public comment right now or for scheduling us a time for specifically that no it's basically do you want to close out the meeting now or do we want to let one more round of public comments before we close it out I mean I don't want to I don't want to squash anyone's voice so I mean I don't want to say no to people who want to speak but I guess I would defer to other committee members I'm in I'm indifferent if there's people in the queue I think I would like to hear them I think we yeah so I guess maybe it's really other committee members that need to jump off because we just want to make sure we sell the forum of committee members to keep going I'm happy to stay if others are and hear from people I can stay for a few more minutes okay we'll stay all right great with those four I think we can keep going so all right Brian why don't we do one more round if anybody has a final so while Brian looks at that I'm looking at the questions and just seeing if there are any other ones there and I don't think we have any new questions posed in the q&a box okay okay so we'll jump to the raised hands I see Thomas you you can unmute yourself and then you can talk Thomas are you still there welcome back to you Beth you're up hi thank you for taking my call just trying to get things set on my screen I wasn't able to hear the whole presentation but I've been keeping up and paying attention for the last couple of months at least when I became aware of it I thank thank you for making some extra time I appreciate that you guys are staying late you've been here for a while and the comments that you're hearing are from frustrated residents so I have enough parking here at my house for us and for our tenants I also want to say I'm a cyclist and I also maybe uniquely used to be a bicycle courier here in town if any of you remember like lightning bicycle couriers so I worry a lot about bicycle safety especially in this town but I also worry a lot about my neighbors and what I've seen in my time that I've been here is an incredible increase in the pressure on parking more and more there are cars parked across the driveway there are more cars double parked and I don't see a particularly significant increase in bike lane usage and I know that this is not what you're here to decide I understand what your assignment is but I still think since you're giving me an opportunity to comment I want you to hear what I have to say I wish that you were taking the residents concerns seriously especially around as you say essential parking needs from my perspective and listening to at least the part of the presentation and paying attention as I said before that they really haven't been addressed I've lived here in this house I'm I'm between north and pearl I've lived here for 24 years my spouse has been here for 30 and I guess in making a comment for what for whatever it's worth because in all sincerity it doesn't seem as though you're interested in what it's like here for residents around parking for or and it also doesn't feel like you're interested in making a recommendation to alter your course based on any of our feedback our feedback is really based on our actual parking needs and it seems that your perspectives and what you're furthering is based on data or observations that aren't accurate and using that simply perpetuates the problem that we have here the city I would say maybe due to COVID maybe because it didn't want to hear feedback I hate to be paranoid but didn't want to hear feedback about what what our needs here are or whether or not there's sufficient room for parking that meaningful feedback that we've been trying to give you hasn't been heard and I'm concerned that by not listening to it you're not doing this right and if you think that just doing what you're specifically charged to do is all you need to do I I guess I would recommend to the to you that you're doing it wrong calling it impact or stress from my perspective is insulting it's disrespectful essential parking needs I don't think they can be met if you're making decisions based on erroneous data assumptions that the idea that you can lose 36 parking spaces and not have an impact are my neighbors people who work all times of the day you know making assumptions about when residents are working there's a type of bias I know I know the people who work around here work tremendously long hours at different times of the day and are coming and going and I think it's not respectful to sort of lump them all in together um Jack you had said something about it's not it doesn't make sense to restart the 18th month process I think I think restarting it with the right accurate information and gaining residents feedback does make sense and I would encourage you to consider going back and making that recommendation so overall I just I want you to to hear me say that I'm disappointed in this process you can continue to say that that it was far reaching and that you got the perspectives from people but we're telling you that you don't you don't have it and the information that you have isn't correct and it's it's incredibly disappointing and it's also really insulting all right uh Thomas if you're still there I see your hand up you're welcome to talk otherwise that's the last hand I see so are we able to um basically we are consensus all right we have a quorum here to close this this meeting and we'll be preparing some documentation as we approach the NPA and so we'll be in touch with the committee as that approaches okay thank you also for all the hard work you put into this okay even though you're taking a little bit of criticism incredibly detailed part of the job but uh it's I always strive for for detail and so Beth obviously if you can hear me send us along any specific points that you uh that you're curious about and always want to try to understand we understand things the best we can so thank you all um committee I need last words no thank you thanks everyone when's the NPA meeting uh we have to reach out to them to get on their calendar so fully in November as we're aiming for we will we will let you know as soon as we get it scheduled all right thanks oh do people should people like the people who participated tonight do you have their contact or will they be able to know what the next steps are I don't think we have anyone's direct contact information unless they provided it to us previously or not Brian's email list but yeah that last slide that John shared again has all of our contact information you can also find it from the the agenda like basically however you found this meeting today yeah follow the paper trail and you will find us we're happy to follow with you directly and I think we have new email addresses actually from the survey I think that we asked whether you want to be contacted again and so we have a middle list there all right thank you for all your work on this and thank you all for staying late I am appreciative thank you all for staying thank you all this is uh yeah it's a lot for all of you you look at this daily but this is uh not your daily look usually so we appreciate it and thanks to all the members of the public that came out and stayed this late too we all work out of jobs and everything it's great to hear more of your feedback this time thanks everyone