 It's November nights and the first thing we have to do is approve the agenda for today. So, if everyone can take a look at what Mike sent around. So, I had a question. I thought this was going to be a hearing on the change we made last time. Is that happening later? Was I off on the timing there? That's going to require a 30-day notice. So, I have to prepare all of the physical documents and send those off to various agencies. So, our goal is to hopefully get it in December for the public hearing. It'll take a little bit of time. Okay, got it. Thanks. That's helpful. So, the next step, Mike, is for you to draft the wording or follow up with the wording. Yeah, most of it I have done already. We're just checking on a few other items in-house. There were some things that people have mentioned that they wanted addressed. So, sometimes when it's open, we'll add a couple of tweets here and there for other minor things. There was a mapping error on the design review district when we adopted that. Actually, the map removed two properties or three properties that it shouldn't have on Terrace Street. It was only supposed to remove two, but when CVRPC did the map, they removed five. So, we've got to put three of them back in. So, I've got a couple of those that I just have to coordinate with the regional planning commission to get a draft map. So, I can include it in the packet in those types of more cleanup things that aren't necessarily policy things. That's why we didn't really go over them because they're more cleanup items. Good. Yeah. I'll move to approve the agenda. Okay, we have a second. I'll second. Okay. So, we have a motion from Barb and a second from Stephanie, all in favor of approving the agenda? Say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay, I saw some mouths there. Any hoes? Did John vote? He either yonder said aye. I might have said yes. All right, so it looks like we're approved, the agenda's approved, and we will proceed. Next thing is the comments from the chair. I've got nothing new for anybody. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It looks like everything was handled well last week in my absence. So, I apologize for not being able to make it. Just so that I'm totally up to speed. It looks like for the purposes of the PUD requirements, we removed the riverfront. We removed the riverfront. We removed the riverfront from those requirements, and that was the change. Is that correct? And we cleaned up that section, right? Mike, because there was, there was something about an urban center district in there too. Yeah. So there was a, we replaced what had said urban center with riverfront. So that cleaned up that kind of killed two birds with one stone. So that's what we did. So that's what we did. Entirely in the rural district. Yeah. In the rural district. So. Okay. And we just, we just made the change to the new neighborhood PUD. We did not change the conservation PUD. Correct. All right. Okay. That's all I've got. I'm going to take a quick look. I'm going to take a quick look that would like to discuss something other than the transportation plan. Anyone can bring up anything other than the transportation plan if they'd like. Alrighty. So with that, we'll move on. We'd consider the minutes from last time. So everyone can take a look. Mike, I had a question. new wording said it would be required for any development of either 40 parcels or dwelling units in the existing wording says lots do you want that to say parcels or lots does it say lots in there it's no it says lots in the ordinance surprised you got them all out right yes yeah it goes back to our old thing of when you say it use one thing and not two maybe i missed yeah i was surprised to see it there but it's it looks like it's on 3404 v2 unless i didn't i have the final draft yeah in my in my version it does say the word parcels okay because i thought i had the final draft 132 2018 all right yeah you'll have to download a new new version well but in the first paragraph no in the first sentence required for any development of either 40 lots or dwelling units and then goes on to say parcels on a parcel that is 10 acres or larger so that's not what your says no that's not what my version says in my so official all right so okay so that was cleaned up at some point yeah you must be looking at a at an almost complete draft it says final but it's not final it may have been final draft but that may not have been what was finally adopted i see just one other quick thing on the uh minutes on that changed wording the new wording um at the end of that it says not located in the riverfront district shouldn't riverfront be capitalized and uh closed parentheses uh closed quotation on that yes for for that i can make that change okay great that's all i have all right we have a motion to approve the man's with uh barbs changes i'm ready to approve the man's yes okay motion from and second from we'll give it to john i thought it was marcella that was a right the motion yeah there i am i was just realizing my screen isn't showing everybody so i was confused for a second well we're not seeing area right at all yeah she's on my second screen finishing dinner yeah okay uh so those in uh favor approve the men's with those changes say hi hi any post okay motion to approve and that brings us to the transportation plan um and i'm still catching up so i mean i'll hand it over maybe to mike to give us a refresher of where we were at and then um of course the members of the transportation plan who are here um if you if you feel a need to uh explain anything or to to interject please feel free to do so um so with that i'll stand over to mike for now uh yeah i don't think i have a lot to add from last time so last time we just kind of did a an overview of what um you the planning commission had received from the transportation committee um just reviewing a few of the things that are a little bit different in form and format um from what you typically have seen um with the fact that they have some sub-goals in there so we talked about that we talked a little bit about some of the um the aspirations at the last meeting you know there's a conversation about what um the what we felt whether you know as staff and hanif commented on what the transportation committee felt was kind of their the primary kind of message that they that the commission the the transportation committee was trying to get across and you know i'd mentioned that i felt that it was really um kind of getting down to that concept of being easy to live in monpilia without a car and that was really you know if there's one single thing that it kind of focused on it was really to to start to balance the scales so that way we were looking at um all the transportation options on an equal footing so it's not cars and then sidewalks and bike paths as an afterthought all three of those um and whatever else of what other whatever else transportation options we have should all be treated on equal footing because um you know that's that that's really the the future of what we need to do to get our complete streets is really to to rebalance how we prioritize our infrastructure investments so i think that was where that conversation came out um and hanif had introduced and presented some of his um worksheets that he had these were excel sheets and i forwarded them to the planning commission um after the last meeting so you guys have had an opportunity to to see them and hopefully you had a chance to kind of look through what what they did and how they prioritized um and typically as as you know planning commissioners you guys know we were just prioritizing the strategies which is why what you received for me really just has the priorities priorities in those strategies but um hanif felt it was it was important for you guys to take a look at the fact that they had prioritized um the aspirations the goals and the sub-goals and the strategies and really so that way you guys understood kind of the context um you know because we're going to have to make some adjustments to this plan to match the other plans we want to make sure that you guys are fully understanding what the thought process that the transportation went through to get to what you have in front of you so that was a little bit of um a little bit of a quick summary i guess and i don't know if we want to kind of open up to the planning commission to see if you guys have questions or if the transportation committee wants to comment further on on a little bit of the background so so micah had we walked through the plan last time we walked through the entire thing not not in all the details we um you know we obviously spent some time getting through the the zoning proposal so that took a portion of the time and then we just kind of went through this broad big picture 50 000 foot you know let's touch on some things but we didn't go um goal by goal or strategy by strategy through this um we kind of took that 50 000 foot view and kind of decided we would um move those priorities the that excel table out to everybody so everybody kind of had an understanding and kind of left it to this meeting to start digging into those um questions of of you know whether we need to make adjustments to the aspirations or goals or strategies and start to have that conversation now okay so yeah before so so i imagine what we need to do a walk through tonight then and uh before we before we do the walkthrough does the transportation committee have anything uh to talk to us about before we get going um or would you prefer to just talk as we go uh Dayton yeah hi i just wanted to do a brief introduction to myself and uh why here because i think where i'm next to the transportation committee i'm here representing the complete popular complete streets committee which i've recently started acting as chair and uh honeyfus acting kind of as a liason between mtik and our committee and if it's a value tonight i don't need to take valuable time more than saying it's available but we've had eight complete streets members weigh in and kind of provide their ranking of the goals and sub goals similar to what the transportation committee has already provided so if that's worth discussing i'm here to provide it um otherwise i'm happy to sit and learn kind of the walkthrough of the transportation plan because i'm relatively new to reviewing it beyond these goals and sub goals as well but that's why i'm here and hi yeah hi thank you welcome and i think we would love to hear what the priorities of the complete streets committee uh okay they thought about it so maybe maybe um after after we go through it maybe um sure yeah whatever's whatever's good timing let us know that way that the planning commission will actually know what you're talking about it after we go through it um okay so costatinos or elizabeth do you have anything to add before we start walking through this elizabeth you're unmuted but we can't hear you yes i understand aspirations and you know i think it's a little confusing sometimes to people but um in the first set of aspiration in the first aspiration we work on you know some of the different modalities uh that are not car related um in the second aspiration and and costatinos can you give the more specific i have to say that i unfortunately due to family issues been out of a loop for two months but i'm happy to be back in um um can you give the more specific um uh nuances of what the first aspiration was versus the second aspiration um and i'm going to just say that the third aspiration was very important to m tick which was the energy aspect and so we fully well expect that you're going to integrate that into your energy plan or integrate somehow those two together so um i just wanted to say that much and i hear um as an original author um we've used jeff speck's book and we really tried to integrate as much as we can and um also as a full disclosure and workforce sustainable molecular coalition and um we're very excited about what used to be called on demand micro transit which is now my ride gmt and so um promoting that and part of the transportation plan is hugely important to all of us as well okay yes thanks loswith uh looks like bark that's something yeah i just wanted to ask datan or maybe the rest of the committee too in terms of am i right in understanding that the complete streets recommendations are all blended into this chapter is that right or are you anticipating having a different section i don't have to be having a different section i believe and and members of them say can correct me here because i'm i'm relatively new to this uh process i believe we've taken what m tick has done what has come up with these uh goals and some rules we've simply reviewed them from from a group of advocates that live in montelar and said we believe these are the most important right so we basically got 10 votes to review oh i'm looking at i think 35 goals or some goals um and we've ranked those and that's kind of what we have the results of so sort of a prioritization so it wasn't anything in there or missing then or anything you that complete streets felt needed to be added no certainly i'll only speak for myself and saying i it looked like a very thorough review and we did not have discussion saying why didn't they put hoverboards in there i mean i thought about it we didn't take it on time that's that's the next round so i was very thorough so just just prioritization great um so costiness did you have anything to say or would you like to just hold off the leader uh yeah i just like to mention that uh honey who actually is on both complete streets and m tick uh was kind of like uh the liaison between the two and we did get input from complete streets at the beginning of the process we could ask for for comments and quotes so that was uh part of our uh deliberations and especially uh since elizabeth was on that working group that put together uh the draft plan that we were viewed as a committee i think um along with heneve a lot of what complete streets was talking about i think should or should have been represented um and as elizabeth said i think um the aspirations uh what mike said last time was that i think the the main goal uh is having a month earlier where people don't need a car um to get around that you could live here work do whatever you need without a car i think that's basically what the committee all agreeing on is being the the final goal and the aspirations and strategies and goals kind of flowed through that original like top level idea okay that's great uh well if a little barb you have something yeah just a quick clarification since we've got members of the committee here um so i think you know we sort of got the idea that that was your overall goal that people could live in one pillar without a car um tied into that do you have specific goals about reducing the number of vehicles or potentially reducing the amount of parking downtown um um because those are sort of tied in in my mind to the idea of not needing a car well we didn't discuss like specifically you know we want to reduce the number of cars by x amount or x percentage but the idea and what we were talking about was that you would there would be reduced demand for parking and there was discussion on you know by enacting a lot of these strategies there can be changes in land use uh and we didn't talk about this specifically because there's a lot of different opinions in the committee we are we were pretty diverse group and uh what the final product you have is actually compromise of a lot of different opinions and thoughts that we had especially on the funding side and some of the strategies so i think the the goal was again you know reduce the number of cars by having people not need them and to that i mean like elizabeth said coupling it with the energy plan reducing emissions by having less cars and then um the land use piece of it would follow from that but we didn't come up with any specific things and sounds like elizabeth you have something to add you're muted it's barely barely to make it more attractive to be doing the walking and biking we're talking about once again we i don't know if you're all familiar with jeff speck's work however he did a lot of work on walkable cities and some of his criteria is that it must be beautiful to walk through must be interesting he must be safe you know so we're we were really looking at those as the underpinnings of all these different things but satellite parking being you know another big issue so we didn't get numbers per se i appreciate the concept of numbers i don't know how that would be measurable now we are talking um with the launch of my ride about trying to do a measure of current parking but we're in covid so we're just like parking is just a strange thing now um anyway enough said i guess i would just comment that uh this is the most or um definitely was the most diverse committee that i've worked with so far um usually when you talk about say the the energy or historic preservation or um the any of the other ones that i've that we've worked on the the committees were pretty uniform in their direction and uh in one of the reasons the transportation plan took so long is that there really was a diversity of opinion of how progressive or not um we wanted to push the envelope or they wanted to push the envelope on issues so i think constantinos is right when he says this this really is a compromise here there were certainly people who felt um we should be putting out a plan that says you know no cars or or or much reduced cars in the downtown and others that said you know let's let's aspire to to being able to have a community that you don't need to have a car but that doesn't necessarily mean nobody's allowed to have cars you know kind of understanding that cell difference between um you know people can have cars and people are probably gonna have cars and you know are we building a future towards electric cars or no cars um and i think that was a debate they they had amongst themselves and and this is very much kind of the compromise that they came down on and i thought you know it's a testament to them because this was you know a lot of people with a lot of opinions um and many very heartfelt opinions and i i think it was it was good that they you know they all gave their their views and they really kind of all also were willing to come to a point where they they understood this was this was the compromise that they were going to get um that they were going to get to if they were going to agree to something this was where they got to so i thought you know hats off to them it was a great job um being able to work through um it certainly was a lot easier to work through you know historic preservation or energy when everybody's on the exact same page of where where the end game is um and i think this was a little bit more difficult of a chapter to work through um so okay well yeah um thanks for all the background uh so uh what do you guys think should we just dive in here and can we ask uh Dayton to just give us an idea of what the complete streets priorities were because we have we did hear last time from imp tick on terms of what their priorities were talking about specific um aspirations and things is my understanding so i was hoping within the plan you know what was important for complete streets within the plan that was my understanding yes Dayton or no yeah my goals i mean i can walk people through and you know share my screen walk people through in uh two minutes just kind of what the top you know five were from our group if that's if that's valuable and i can wait to do it after we do a plan walkthrough as well i think one way where we could accomplish a number of these things is using the spreadsheet that was sent to us which i think actually has the um votes from complete streets parsed out as well as the transportation committee and uh while i think i understand um everything in this spreadsheet i don't want to assume that i do so maybe if we could use the spreadsheet as our way to walk through and get an explanation of how um what the different numbers uh represent in terms of votes and an explanation of how how this works which and thank you by the way i appreciate being sent in spreadsheet format because helpful so john are you saying that you that your preference is to look at this is to to kind of explore this through the spreadsheet rather than the draft chapter that would be my preference okay uh how do other people feel other planning commission members feel about that do you feel if you need to look at the chapter okay Stephanie seems to be like like the spreadsheet idea barb seems like spreadsheet idea um okay i'm fine with spreadsheet especially because that's kind of how we the direction we want to go anyway alrighty then uh let's uh i think okay we should walk through the spreadsheet then i think um i i still think it's a better idea for us to actually know what's on the spreadsheet before we hear from Dayton i think that it will it i think his comments will be received at a higher quality from us if we are already acquainted with it if that's okay well it might not be necessary then if if it's already reflected in the spreadsheet it's not it's not he's he's introducing new information a different group of people the spreadsheet was uh from the transportation committee as i understand it and so datans will be talking about the priorities of the complete streets group which so i can only assume that there'll be at some differences in how they would rank things okay that wasn't my understanding was was that a correct synopsis datan yeah i mean i don't know i'm not the spreadsheet master i think that might be kaneef but the i know that we sent the complete streets comments to mic this morning so that those can at least get out if they're not in your current spreadsheet but i think it's a prudent move to go through some existing data first rather than have me get tough up front okay so let's go through the spreadsheet that was prepared by kaneef and who's the most appropriate person for that with mic or would it be cosettino's well can mic share the can you share the spreadsheet as we go through it he emailed it well yeah yeah i know but as we go through it we're gonna want to see it on the screen sure yeah i'm trying to track down real quick i think mic mic has this spreadsheet he's just figuring out a share screen i think so everyone knows what's going on just while we have a second we there is a transportation little sub working group too right yeah i was going to ask about that we haven't met yet um but we were because we wanted to wait to hear what the planning commission at least i wanted to hear what the planning commission had to say about the whole plan beforehand so yeah um i think it's uh it's erin arian and myself okay great thanks mic if you're looking for the spreadsheet john shared the link in the chat just need to go back here here awesome all right okay so i don't know if mine has yep complete streets count and m tick count so when you're looking uh the totals are here on the left side those three blue columns so if you're working your way through it there are a couple of of things the votes are kind of over here in blue the reference refers to um aspiration a goal to um and then they lettered some of the ones underneath it a you know for the sub goal a and so that was how they they set the reference up just so you kind of get a sense of what this is and that's what these goals are all the way down running through on the bottom tabs you have the the various you know ranking of goals um this is the master table ranking of goals ranking of sub goals and then ranking of strategies so they went through and ranked each one um so it looks like it looks like uh there are complete streets ones for goals and sub goals so that gives you a little bit of an idea um of where these were so they they did a very complete i mean you can see there are a lot of a lot of these sub goals some of them didn't receive any um votes but that's just everybody had a certain number of votes and they tallied them up and this was you know so you can get an idea which one had more and less votes I think the front is where they all got compiled together if I understood this correctly so pulling those all together this is where you ended up with so um and again um you know they're they're the top the top goals were you know biking in Montpelier will be safer walking in Montpelier will be safer and the transportation system will contribute to a vital um and lively community where the three top goals but you can see there are a number actually the top six or seven here all received at least 10 votes um mostly coming in with uh themes around safety um safe easier efficient um and then the environmentally um sustainable goal also landed in the that top seven as well which deals with having um dealing with um the climate impacts of our transportation system is part of that and also items like stormwater runoff and those um water quality impacts are another part of that same goal so so I guess that's I'll I'll put that there um and if somebody wants me to move it to something else just let me know or I can or you're more than welcome to share the screen um I I just have to come out of share I if I stop sharing anyone else is allowed to jump in and share their screen as well uh we might that an integrated multimodal transportation network will connect strategically located parking facilities and transport hubs with downtown business and services who's also in the top ranking number six there and I also wanted to point out number nine which is public transit will be more convenient and available I think so my first thought looking at this is that when we apologize if you can hear my small child yelling the background um you get it most of you also have small time um I shouldn't talk right now um I my first thought is looking at these that there are a few that are the top priorities really relate to transportation and then a few of the lower ones are I think things that will be addressing in other chapters um more so like that line 14 more housing and commercial development in downtown that's something that we're we're certainly talking about with the housing chapter I mean I think some of the overlap with energy so it feels to me like those those top few are really the the priorities and really should be the the focus for us may I respond to that yeah go ahead um so the reason that that's in there is because as uh transportation options are made available that um reduce the number of cars downtown parking is reduced downtown potentially which allows for more different land use for that parking area potentially as housing which becomes a win-win because it changes the transportation for those housed people and it changes the energy costs for those housed people so there's a way in which these are all integrated and it's challenging for you because you have certain silos of energy and housing which are separate but we just wanted to point out um you know as the authors that they're very much married together and intertwined so I think what Stephanie was pointing out and you guys should be aware of this is that one of our roles in this is to make sure that there's not redundancies between the chapters so there'll be times in which we move stuff where it's so that it's not repeated across chapters so something like that's probably going to end up in the housing chapter there's synergies and and and you know um overlapping throughout the entire plan and so it's not like we're not acknowledging that there's an overlap it's just that uh we're trying to you know minimize how huge this thing is and make it more digestible so that's just what we plan to do yeah thanks Kirby I think the the intent is also to say not not to say that that's not important and it shouldn't be removed but if there's a strategy or a goal that really is in the housing chapter we can still say this is also really important for transportation so we're gonna make the intent is to set it up in a way where we're noting those areas of crossover but instead but instead of being duplicative we're just making sure that things are consistent and if it relates to a couple of different chapters then we'll note that so it's really a way to try and prevent it from being siloed in that way and yeah within that too that in other chapters we've used that opportunity to refer to a chapter where it would be fully described or covered so it might be that within the transportation plan that there might be a reference that says you know that we support the housing goal to increase more housing development in downtown Montpelier rather than for you as a as a transportation plan to try and come up with strategies that would be tied into that you could offer your support to that goal within the housing does that make sense yeah the take yeah the table the table that we're looking at right here are the goals so you'll probably have goals what you're talking about Barb is that's where we define the strategy so in a few other chapters we did go through and say for example in the housing chapter we wanted to have neighborhoods that were walkable and bikeable to the downtown and so they referenced that in order to accomplish this the housing chapter supports the transportation the strategy is that they support the transportation plans to have complete streets you know it's more better more elegantly written than that but pretty much there's that that's a strategy so I think we would still have these in his goals because to have a transportation system that's walkable and bikeable you need to have the density and you need to have density that's going to support that mode of transportation because clearly people could you know in some of these suburban towns towns across the country could go through and say they want to be walkable and bikeable but realistically they couldn't be because you'd have to walk for miles to get anywhere because the density is so low density that even if you built sidewalks there's not going to be a demand so you're kind of balancing you would have a goal for example that to have those higher density neighborhoods within the transportation plane because that's going to support a walkable and bikeable community but probably the strategy to implement that is to support the the housing chapter and those types of things and I'm I'm not sure specifically in this case if that's in there but it probably would be yeah I guess in reference to that particular one if we're talking about line 14 for housing and commercial development in downtown Montpelier that's one where I see that actually would have to tie into some kind of a discussion of reducing parking since we don't just don't have the available land so I guess yeah I guess that's sort of where it seems like this plan could be developed further in looking at you know once we do all these things which are all great to do and we end up with the result hopefully we end up with the result that there are reduced vehicles and reduced parking but without a specific goal to get there I'm not certain that that would be clear so let's see what I'm clear here um what was what was the the thought that went into ranking these I mean are we thinking of eliminating some of them or um so no right so um yeah I mean I can speak towards the methodology of how we got here so um we had a whole bunch of goals and strategies and each member was a lot of 10 points that they could a lot anywhere so they could put all 10 points in one one strategy or they could spread them around as as as they soft fit essentially just to get us a priority of what we thought uh needs to get done first essentially what's the most important to the committee so just because something doesn't have uh any votes doesn't mean it's not important someone actually we allowed negative votes too so people that were actually getting things since we did have um a lot of opinions on both sides people could actually put negative votes in so we actually did have a few um negative votes uh as well that canceled out some positive votes so um you know it was all about making sure that everyone's voice was kind of heard to see what was most important to people um not that the things I got less votes are not important uh and the idea was about you know not having these goals is because we really couldn't agree upon um what exactly we wanted to set those goals as we all agreed that you shouldn't need a car to get around Montpelier uh then we all agree that that's going to decrease demand for parking uh but by how much we really couldn't agree upon that it's like what Mike was saying is do you want to be a car free city or just an electric car city and some of us would uh prefer no cars like I'm saying the downtown where some people thought that was a step too far so that's why we really couldn't get to those those goals and saying you know reducing parking by 50 percent or whatever metrics that we wanted to come up with uh but like Elizabeth mentioned earlier you know we still want to have parking facilities whether it's satellite parking or some sort of other off-street parking we were thinking that part of the discussion was if we prioritize non-vehicle infrastructure which was a big part of our discussions so for example more bike lanes more sidewalks having it you know safer for non non car traffic that would lead into these changes of of land use whether that's more housing commercial space or recreational space within the rights of way um we thought that would be something that comes further down in other committees and other uh areas could speak to that and that's why we do have references to let's say the energy plan or the housing plan within our our chapter because we we understand that's going to come from other places so does that kind of help explain how we got here yeah I think the focus on um on what we do want is really helpful and um I think you know as opposed to focusing on how many parking spaces that you know we eliminate or add or um you know we could we could get rid of all the parking spaces and and we could have nobody here and nobody biking and we won't have accomplished anything but if we count if we count like the number of we focus instead on how many people are walking and and biking in Montpelier and if that you know goes up by x numbers I feel like that is a better measure when we ask ourselves like did we meet our goals did we get there and I think if we look at how many people are walking and biking in Montpelier is that's a much better indicator than than how many parking spaces because you know parking spaces are reducing them or adding them I think is it could be a strategy to get to a certain place but really the goal what we want is people in our downtown and we want them um walking and biking and feeling safe and we want our our community just to be a a healthy place where you know we're recognized as it's one of the few places left where you can you can live without a car and I think there's no easy way of necessarily uh measuring that in a meaningful way right now but I also don't think it's very hard to set up and that actually could be an action or a strategy that we emphasize in terms of measuring that through we could use a number of different counters we can use wi-fi signals to ping phones there's like there's probably five or six different ways that we can get at this and we don't have to necessarily determine what that is but I think if we if we say measuring you know figuring out a way to measure pedestrian and bike activity in our community and really putting that at the forefront so that we understand our progress could be something worth considering I think if we look at this in steps you also could go through for for for people who wanted to go to a to a say a a no car solution I think the first thing we would have to do before implementing such a thing would be to create a town that you could live in without a car I mean uh and and I think that's the first step and if in if in this eight-year plan we could get to a point that you could live in Montpelier without a car that would be a huge step forward for this community because uh I don't think I think in a few places you could I think if you you know if you lived on berry street if you live very close to downtown but I don't think this community has achieved that goal of having the ability to live here without a car it's still a necessity for so many people and then I if we reach that goal I think then then you know this city can look to that next level of of that if that's where the city wants to go it's that's that's the policy decision for the city council and the community and the planning commission and everyone to make you know what what our goal is but I think certainly taking taking this in steps and pieces um and and it's not always you know I always use as an example you know sometimes you're you don't use your a direct goal so if your goal was to reduce the number of cars in the downtown sometimes you don't use that as your benchmark um of what you want to achieve um and the example I like use is when we were in berry city we had uh 30 uh 30 percent of the downtown storefronts were vacant um we didn't use filling the storefronts as our metric we use job creation we felt if we created a certain number of jobs in the downtown that more people um in the downtown would help to fix that problem so we made a goal of 500 jobs in the downtown and and we did that and it did also help to balance the um to balance and to fill those vacant storefronts so you know we didn't target storefronts we targeted new jobs and I think the same way um reducing the number of cars in the downtown you you don't necessarily need to make that the target you make you know what is it that would make that happen well if we didn't need cars people would be more likely to walk and bike if we had a community that enabled living without it and maybe we get three car households two car households and two car households to one car households and maybe those one car households will eventually give up that car if that cost isn't necessary anymore what is and I think that Mike has been very helpful uh we as um uh the authors Hanif and and Steve and I had some lofty goals which we have to question whether uh within eight years they can be accomplished so we have to really think about what the real targets that can be met within the next eight year period is but I do want to underscore again that you know uh due in our estimate 65 percent of downtown is currently parking so you know I however it is addressed directly or indirectly um you know as Mike is suggesting an indirect approach it must be addressed um so I just leave those two points uh thanks Elizabeth uh so do we have an interest in looking at the sub goal rankings um strategies or should we go ahead and hear from let's go ahead and hear from Dayton about goals and see what the complete streets committee uh thought about their rankings uh who me okay sure um both the people up so I don't have a lot more to add I mean I think what has been shared here is really good it captures the majority of the complete streets input um and you know a lot of our discussion really was focused and if you want to you know slide it after after I'm speaking into looking at these strategies or sub goals a lot of our discussion really did focus on that um and really there's an updated sheet that I think has two more counts I think there's like six um complete streets members voting on this one yes six of us there's only two additional counts that I really have there's new information so take what you have and I think it it captures the majority of it um and myself and Mike could provide you an update with the additional two the key you know the key here that our top goals were maintaining what we have so maintaining our bicycle as shared use paths in good condition um and I think the other one that ran ran to the top with seven seven of our eight votes identified as both as maintenance goal 2.1 um and sub goal 1.2 adopt policy that CIP includes pedestrian bike projects it's it's written as equal footing um but I think that's really important so that the more the basically these projects to improve and develop our walking biking infrastructure don't get relegated down to the bottom we may have been really taking this on a complete streets approach they should be looked at and equal footing and written into the CIP one way or another so I think those are our talk to um when we have the the greater buy-in of of our committee um is that useful I mean that's kind of what that's I'm just reading the top two I can get in further but again I think you have a lot of that summarized in your mtech complete streets spreadsheets that we were just looking at yeah that helps do you want to do a circle back and talk about the goals at all was there anything that you think was worth pointing out um I can I mean to be honest with you we on the complete streets committee let me look at this quickly we didn't provide or we did not provide direct goal direct votes on goals so answer is no we we mostly looked at these sub goals and we're providing ranking on them and that was just a little bit of the direction we received um front from a need when we were talking and I I'm not going to take your time right now giving you my first blush looking at them I think what people are saying in this room sounds intelligent enough that I don't want to cloud the waters right now I mean I have opinions but we can we can take those offline but we're not all on I think we should be uh Barb did you have something yeah um it does seem in in one of the other goals or perhaps strategies that it actually talks about putting pedestrians and biking first before before streets so I think that's kind that could potentially be in a pretty important goal um rather than just saying it should be considered an addition to streets for the cip that in fact it should actually have priority did there seem to be um a consensus in the group about that we we looked at the equal footing I think we liked the language there that said putting on equal footing because if you're really putting you know think about the funding that goes into you know repaying a portion of route to just here in town um and if you put transportation projects for bike pad on that same footing I think we're we're a really strong position to be not just maintaining a sidewalk here or there but you know building better infrastructure throughout it's almost impossible it's a prior attack cars more than we already have uh so that would be a pretty strong uh trying to accomplish maybe if we got on par there yeah precisely that's my that's our feeling is that if we can climb to that rank it's a it's a big step up so um do we trying to get trying to bring this down to a more of a practical level when we've talked I feel like we've talked in a little soft form quite a bit here um which is great um is there anything in the plan that's a that's a concrete vision for moving toward this so like so in other words do we have strategies I mean do we like do we have in here X amount of bike paths or do we have specific locations do we have like ways to prioritize pedestrian and bike traffic for instance uh like like specific things piece by piece uh you know as far as bike paths one of the biggest things that was identified is the need for more north south uh bike uh connectivity uh you know as far as pedestrian sidewalks there was a desire for uh you know the clearing to be on par with streets and to improve uh you know sidewalk uh quality and to add sidewalks in key locations uh you know and then there was the whole multimodal concept uh which is includes the uh now now termed my ride uh you know and being able to establish um some places for instance on state street it's not that my ride could stop anywhere in state street but that there would be some little cutouts that would be you know almost like a bus stop that we're um a um a vehicle could pull in be at a bus or van that's a um uh basically a public transit and or taxi and so that the streets start to get organized so that they are promoting you know that service and then the integration of walking and biking and um and my ride uh so that people can for instance uh walk to the co-op and take my ride with their groceries home or you know something like that um or or bike to the co-op and and uh take their groceries in in the vehicle and put their bike on the outside of the vehicle so all these more integrated things are conceptually but you know we have to do that um little steps to build the shelters for instance so i will start there right now i'd just like to add there are strategies uh within the document that we sent below all the sub goals so for example all the ones that elizabeth just mentioned were some of them or um even things just as simple as maintaining or um our snow clearing and fixing potholes so like one of the uh one of the big complaints because like you know they fix the potholes in the regular cars right of way but then there's a pothole where the bike lane is and that doesn't get fixed at the same time you know simple strategies like that are also included there on top of you know the the big ticket uh items as well so um if you go through the strategies and by line you can see some some specifics of what we discussed yeah i'm doing that now i mean partially the reason why i was asking the question uh was to gauge how much your groups thought that uh you know how do you feel about if if we go if we went farther uh with some of the strategies if we did if if there was interest for the planning commission to put in some concrete ideas like there's been a proposal recently to turn some streets into one-way streets so that we can put in bypass um things like that like and i'm also asking the planning commissioner as well like i mean do we do we have a stomach to explore those things is that something for our own planning commission working group to explore as well i just i just want to know what people's thoughts about having some more i mean i see there are a lot of strategies so please don't take anything i'm saying like as any kind of judgment or anything because this this is wonderful so i don't want that to get lost but uh but yeah i'm just wondering if what people's interests are taking the strategies even if we're farther than things i think there may be ways to to push them and one things one things that i liked in this was i'm reading it right um just i'm gonna read this a14 um which is calling out specifically the downtown master plan and the berry main street scoping studies those are two really good planning documents that i think this you know higher level document some of its roles to point directly to those and say dig further like implement those plans because we don't need to plan and plan and plan again three times those plans have really good efforts that the city's already invested in and go further so i think the more that we can stand on the shoulders of other good work and just make this a tool to implement that work i think that's an excellent way and there may be a good way to pick one of those plans um recommendations and just write a strategy that directly supports it you're muted carby ask tina's then barb yeah i just like to build on that like that's what we pointed to other plans for example like montpellier in motion where it already lists sidewalk gaps or areas that uh have already been studied and are known to be problematic in some way or another and that's why we point specifically to montpellier in motion and complete streets and all the other studies that we've had over the past few years to implement those as part of our strategies but also um like i said at the beginning this this document is kind of a compromise during our discussion we did have a lot of very detailed discussion on strategies at our intake meetings and not all of them actually made into this document so i'm sure many members would welcome additional ones being put in and again we've at the committee we've all said you know there's other areas for public input so when these things do come to city council when this is being finalized the people that may or may not have agreed with the different strategies that didn't make into the final uh version will always have again an opportunity to voice their opinions again on that yeah i think it's it's a really good point to to continually call out the other plans that have already been done um as as you said dating because too often we have plans that sit on the shelf and don't really get the attention that they need so um the more we can integrate those plan references and the and what the plans are asking us to do in each case then i think it uh it strengthens both the plans that have already been done and the chapter itself so um i guess but it is it is pretty important to ask the planning commission for the transportation subgroup uh transportation subcommittee um are you willing to take on more as Kirby indicated so in other words do you do you feel like do you feel like it would be helpful to try to flesh out in greater detail i i totally the point is very well taken about reference to the plans that already exist that do go into detail so if you feel like yeah if you feel like i don't know it if it puts those things on a back burner or something i mean uh is that a concern you have like if we were to flesh out we were like would there be any harm that's fleshing out more strategies i mean it's just yeah just let us know what you think about asking this event tick or of your subcommittee of of intake um barb barbs on the subcommittee so she's she's she's curious yeah about what she should be doing yeah i wanted to just say um just throw one other thing in and i know it's out of order for what you're asking um i think that um when we're talking about multimodal uh marketing uh how we market transportation in Montpelier is hugely important how we have integrated information through Montpelier alive and or the city website which explains uh you know where this parking might be and how you get in between places and what the options are you know to integrate with trip planners that exist these are hugely important things but let me go back to um there are a number of um you know strategies that are well there are number of um actions that can be taken and described as strategies that are buried in the plans that are referenced and um you know i think that um i know that Henefa and i would be happy to go through potentially Constantinus i don't need to volunteer you but to go through and i'm sure Dayton would be happy to join us on that too look at what the key elements are i think that um mike already knows what they are being familiar with all of them uh and uh so it's always nice to have a little one uh you know i i think that that's work that we would be happy to take on and help the planning commission transportation subcommittee with to identify key um strategies okay yeah that that's helpful and if i know bar she probably will be in contact with you um so uh this sounds good uh okay was were there any more thoughts about about that i thought Dayton had some thoughts but i think he was just waving to a baby all both those things are true at all times uh no i think i just encourage simplicity i encourage review to remove redundancy as much as possible we always got to think about our plans not as do they say everything that they could possibly say but is can we can the person holding this plan in their hands in the popular city office pick it up and act on it and make some good change over the next eight years right so i'm happy to help in any way okay look and look at that and help help move that forward i think that's part of what i'm thinking about when i was asking that question that's part of what i was thinking about was i mean if there's certain things that that we really believe needed to be high priorities of concrete things like if it's closing down some streets or putting in bypass in certain locations or things um yeah i mean uh i think it would be i think it would i don't want to pressurize the right word but it would be a good incentive to decision makers to actually do those things over the next eight years if they're right in there so that that's kind of part of what my thinking wasn't asking about the strategies well i think implementing the strategies breaks into a couple of boxes let's all try to remember that so we've got our projects box and we've got our programs box and the projects box are those big things so when we talked about implementing the downtown master plan that's a big project um and and so um we would look at that the north south connector is a project that we don't have that planned yet so there's an idea that we should be that that should be the next big plan we've got a how are we going to make that north south connector and then how are we going to get that in the into the project phase um then from the from the programs standpoint the big one that um yeah we had to do some some education for the the transportation committee on was really your cip your capital improvement program is is your main driver that is the one that the that the transportation committee needs to be involved in because that's where when we talk about having a priority of putting bike and pad on the same footing as roads what you're talking about is having a priority of how you're going to write your capital improvement program you know when we drop a million dollars into your cip for next year how we spend those million dollars um that's that's where the rubber is going to hit the road and that's where we've got to be making those incremental those smaller improvements so how we implement the complete streets plan and how we fix the gap analysis that the Montpelier in motion is really a gap analysis of where their gaps in our our bike in our head systems um and where the piece that have to get fixed that's all really going to get implemented in your cip so we really need to be making sure that um we have active partners who are who are participating in that process and then there are a number of lots of these other little you know how do we what are regulations well regulations are really only going to apply to um individual projects um you know so if you are building a new street if you are building a new um you know sphere subdivision regulations we probably don't have a lot in there of of regulations other than you know speed and uh speed limits which periodically come up um I think there's a a recommendation which you know I'm I'm kind of in support of of lowering the speed limit in the downtown and I think that certainly goes hand in hand with the fact that the the downtown master plan did not or at least as as it was um written does not create bike lanes um the option was to dedicate more space to pedestrians um keep the keep some of the on street parking but not put in the bike lanes and I think if that's your solution then we need to lower the speed limits and and I would agree with that I was rather surprised we didn't get the bike lanes but um that's a different conversation for a different plan um but I think as as you start thinking about the big boxes we we don't have to necessarily put in this plan every nut and bolt that we want but we got to make sure we capture what are the big things in the cip and the projects buckets the regulations buckets and what are those plans additional plans that we need to do um and then the other one that did make a big difference when if we're talking about the big umbrella things were the policies and policies affect how we spend our money and how we allocate our land and I think that became a big thing when we started talking about um how do we do these uh shared mobility and a lot of shared mobility came down to we may have to give up parking spaces in our parking lots for a ride share or we may have to give up on street parking spaces for a pull off for um for the the the mobility um and so those were the things that kind of come in um from a policy standpoint that that is simply an active city if city council city council can simply go through as they have in the past to simply make a motion that says we're going to allocate two parking spaces for um the ride share and so I think remembering we're talking at a at a certain level we don't necessarily have to have in the plan we should build the sidewalk on east state street I don't think we have to get that detailed but I think we do have to go through and reference those plans and say how we're going to get them get them in otherwise the strategies in this plan will get too long but um make sure we hit all those important ones um which they they think transportation committee really got into the good details making sure line striping program is is is maintained and improved street sweeping is maintained and improved sidewalk clearing um and snow clearing was was definitely highlighted as something that just needed improvement it did forget about maintaining it isn't being done well enough as we are right now and if we want to be encouraging safe and efficient bike and pedestrian we really need to do a better job of you know getting those six inch deep puddles out of our crosswalks which seem to be at every crosswalk so um I guess I'll I'll leave those comments at that that we're kind of talking the these higher a little bit of higher elevation of what we're looking at okay can we uh can we have any of the planning commissioners who want to talk about any of the things we've discussed or something new want to make sure that everyone has a chance john yeah something yes I was gonna ask so we have to submit essentially you know our street typologies along with our plan and we have like the downtown master plan and a few of those things already done and I'm curious if we just have those and if we can just publish them as web services and I could I could help uh but once we have that map if we annotate it um with what um highlighting you know what's going to be different in eight years specifically so I think I think we should really put on there what um what are we gonna what are we gonna change and maybe prioritize it who are you thinking of um of doing that with I guess I just need I don't know if it was like SE group or who has who did our um master plan and whatever other road typology data we have but wouldn't wouldn't be hard to do assuming they have the road typology was done by ALTA we can get that one um that was the complete streets plan and SE group did the downtown master plan so just just so the planning commission understands the the street typology looked at everything except for the downtown and really wanted to look at from a complete street standpoint whether you were up on town hill and wanted to walk down how would you be able to walk safely from you know anywhere down here if you wanted to bike is there a safe bike route so every street would be given a typology where you would address how each mode of transportation would be handled and there's you know seven or eight street types and they were applied to all the towns except in the downtown because these downtown streets are just too complex and they really have to be master plan there's you just can't drop in a street typology for state main so we did a second project to do bury a part of bury state in main and did a master planning effort on that to go through and say okay we've got a limited amount of landscape how can we um design this to meet our goals um so these these two are really meant to to complement each other so the two planes are meant to work together um but they're done differently the one is a street typology and the other one is a master plan but they're really meant to connect to each other and I think Montpelier in motion is is forgotten a lot because that actually has priorities already in it says you know these are high medium and low areas that need to be addressed in some way whether it's a sidewalk gap or bike lanes or some some other sort of thing that needs to be remediated yeah I kind of wish we had done the Montpelier in motion after we did the street typology because then it really could have been a gap analysis of the street typology to go through its area where are the gaps in our complete street system you know where do we need a bike lane where do we need but instead we kind of did them in reverse um they still work and they still work together but I think it's it's an imperfect match but um what the Montpelier in motion plan did identify were those biggest most critical gaps especially in the sidewalks um especially in the pedestrian system it really highlighted those areas I can use east state as an example everybody knows you know if you wanted to walk up to a VCFA you can't just walk up one side of the street you've got to walk up and cross over because there's sidewalks that gap and disappear on you so the other one I want to make people aware of is going up Berlin street up towards shorewood drive where there's child care and there are many people who have to walk along the side of the road with their strollers to get to shorewood drive and it's just unsafe so I just point that out as something which would go hopefully on an integrative map that John's referring to yeah that was actually one of the surprises that came out of the the the complete streets plane was as we mapped things out we've said you know shorewood drive you know it never would have crossed my mind but that that should have a sidewalk on it at least one sidewalk on the side based on its its classification its use and its traffic and then once you know you know the nerds behind the computers figured that out then when we started asking people everybody was like well heck yeah that's that's that's been a problem for a while we just we didn't know about it because we never asked about it and shorewood drive just never came across as an obvious connector but it is a very important connector that that should have a sidewalk and it actually got built into the cip i think it's it's on the it's in the plans to go and build that sidewalk um and a lot of it comes back down to it having been identified in the complete streets plan like where where would we find past or current cip plans um are they on the website on the city website i'm just thinking about you know as as we look at this plan you know we don't want to be redundant um and if some things are already planned like that sidewalk um it would be good to know yeah i i actually don't know where the easiest place is to get it the cip it should be in the town report the the city report um but i don't know i don't know if it actually is published in there on the website it would be to have to take a little bit of looking i i didn't i didn't take a look at i do know the cip committee is starting to meet now we were just talking before the meeting about the fact that the budgets are starting to be worked on well the cip is part of the budget it is uh it is it's it's its own budget so um and i i'm pretty sure that the cip committee has started to reach out to to folks um about that or at least the transportation committee well that yeah it'd be great if you could find out where we could access that um all right if i can find either last year's or the draft i'll email that out because there could be some things on on previous plans that have not necessarily been done yet right oh certainly this year i mean this year a lot of stuff to see if you got caught but yeah yeah there's projects and the idea is also you know the cip i guess we could have a little bit of a two-minute primer on on capital improvement plans um for people who don't know they're usually five years seven years sometimes 11 year plans of capital improvements and the idea is to lay out over time what are all the projects that need to get work done so we can make sure we're setting aside money um we don't just decide what we're going to do next year when we do the cip we it's it's actually a plan that extends out for either seven eight nine years um and and lays out all the roads we're going to build you're going to repay these roads we're going to reconstruct these roads we're going to rebuild these bridges we're going to do these retaining walls and each of the years and what the estimated cost is um um and so one of the purposes of getting involved in every year and working on these is to make sure that um say for example we wanted to to add a sidewalk on a certain street and it was going to need a retaining wall well we might have to look at that six years out to start a process that goes through and says next year or the you know we should start working on the right-of-way acquisition for that so that way we could you know start getting that done in time if we want to build this because you can't just go in and say well next year we want to build a sidewalk any state if it means we also need to require the purchase of an of property and the construction of a retaining wall before we can build that um so you really have to be thinking five six seven years out because some of these projects take a number of years um to to build into because they have multiple steps it's not you know some of them are easy some of them are a matter of looking at this and saying hey look you're repaving um town hill i don't know when that's gonna go but let's say we're repaving town hill um you already own the right way we should widen this road and put in the bike lanes um you know let's add in the extra dollars or when we reline stripe it let's repave it and reline stripe it and make the lanes a little bit smaller so that way we've got more room for the bike lanes um and those those are the the questions that that you know that's where that prioritizing comes up um and if we're missing if we're reconstructing a street that's usually when we start talking about you know um sherpa wood drive should have a sidewalk on it well you know it probably makes sense that we talk about putting that sidewalk in if we're reconstructing that street um so that that I think that's where it's it's really a much larger it's an 11-year plan that really looks out at a number of projects um over time so that way you can start to go through and say um you know I'm looking at this six-year plan and all I see are roads roads roads roads roads where my sidewalks um and I think that's that's where the policy side pushes in and the politics side pushes in to go through and say you know we we want to see equal footing our policy is equal footing and we're not seeing equal footing we're going to take this to city council or we're going to take this to the to the letters to the editor or whatever the the pushes to go through and say hey our it's in our city plan that we're going to put this on equal footing and we're not following our plan and I think that's that's how this this document gets a little bit more legs under it um but again it's the key is knowing your your your power is in the CIP committee that's where you're going to get work done either the CIP committee or doing big projects um you know and we're probably not doing big projects anytime in the near future so let's start thinking about what what can we get done in these smaller steps um you know what sidewalks can we get fixed for a couple thousand bucks um you know and then look start looking those three and five years out start going making sure that that plan for five years um for east state fixes that sidewalk problem that we've talked about okay uh maybe we should we've got 30 minutes left unless someone has like more substance or policy policy stuff to talk about we can formulate a plan for how the planning commission would like to proceed um with the chapter are we thinking that um I mean I know I know John expressed some ideas earlier but are we are we thinking that we're going to just from here do nothing and kick it to our uh subcommittee or you know our working group our working group to to look at it and come back to us or something else what are our thoughts good part so maybe Kirby it would be helpful if the subgroup just looked at the the plan that's presented right now and um because there are um as Dayton pointed out there are some redundancies and we could kind of um um pull it together a little bit more for the planning commission and then come back to the planning commission and say okay where where are the holes or where do we want to step out from this plan and include more uh it might just be helpful because there's a lot here as you probably can see and I went through it and I was just trying in my own mind to kind of put things into different buckets and um anyway I just think that there's a way to simplify it as Dayton said so we could do that first okay that's yeah that sounds that sounds like a good idea um is there anything anything more uh for planning uh Elizabeth did you have something I'm not on the planning commission but I just thought that um so what I'm hearing is that in Barb's um uh review of the plan which includes all of the references to complete street uh you know um Montalier in motion uh you know conjugate away here and the CIP that that bit that um hopefully there would be a review of that and we would be happy empty um complete streets etc to help with that review uh so that uh there's a more comprehensive knowledge and also looking at the um the previous plan which uh you know we're building upon now we'll give a more comprehensive view so we're happy to help in that process uh well yeah thanks thanks for the offer um so yeah and yeah so you guys can connect offline and and organize that um so yeah just just so that the other people who aren't planning commission members know uh we've created some sub working groups uh to help us go through certain chapters just just what we consider the really big chapters I think that we have about five working groups right now uh and so transportation is one of them um so it's Barb and Aaron who's not here tonight and um area and I believe uh who is here um are the members of that particular working group and uh so so they're they're doing some of the legwork for the planning commission so we've done this basically so we can get more work in so that we're so they'll be working other than just twice a month uh so so they'll be working on that on the side does anybody else want to know make sure that we act on something in the meantime um like for instance I don't want to leave what John said earlier about coordinating um some maps or something I don't want to leave that just you know it like should should we do something for a momentum on that John I guess um so we've got the mafia motion the the ALTA and the the um SE group plans Mike I don't know if you'd be willing to I think you can even just give me their contact info but we can just ask to see if we can get the whatever files we can and then put them all up in one place um I can't remember it's been a while since I looked at the Montpelier in motion but I can't remember what the mapping or data component of that was that was Jim Donovan so I don't think that would be hard to get so you're you're you're not thinking the PDFs you're thinking the the the data files that went behind the generation of that those maps in there right whatever made those PDFs if we could grab that and then we could just put them all together in one interactive place yeah I don't know if I have those but I could we could the the contacts of everybody are still here I just have to get you the ALTA contacts so um it's Jim Arcane at SE and someone at ALTA yeah yeah I think it was ALTA I think it was there I'm trying to remember if they were out of Albany if they were out of New Hampshire out of everywhere yeah ALTA's everywhere I was just trying to remember which guy I have to get you the ALTA contact but the other one Jim Donovan obviously you know and um SE group is pretty easy to find so yeah we we just have to reach out to ALTA okay that sounds good um okay do we am I am I forgetting anything else or are we are we good we know we're going to be doing in the short term for this chapter just invite me to the subcommittee group I know I haven't been participating in the other subcommittees but in this case I think I should probably participate for a little bit because I unlike the other chapters where the they would finish up I would usually go through and polish up the plans to make sure that it met our format the transportation plan I didn't I really wanted to let you guys see what they came up with before I started to to to adjust it um to meet our format so if the transportation subcommittee is going to do some tweaking to meet the format I'd just like to make sure I'm there to to guide that process a little bit yeah yeah sure we could do that um I think um you know we may may have one step before that but if you want to be involved in whatever preliminary steps we get into Mike that's fine when we'll set up the committee meeting soon now that we've had a review by the planning commission uh do we have any planning commissioners who actually want to give some feedback to Barb and um terry on before they start working on the working group uh um okay we I was just gonna say um a while ago I don't know how long ago but a while ago we had looked at this before we had heard from folks from any of the groups that worked on the plan and we had talked about adding or potentially finding more space for some inclusive language about um ability and mobility different abilities um so I guess I would just ask if you give an eye to that as you go through that'd be cool thanks that's a great point thank you for reminding us yeah there there is a mention um in it about people with different mobilities issues um and also different um financial situations in terms of the public transit making sure that everyone has equal access um so yeah we'll definitely um keep those um in anything we would do anyone else have anything to pass along for the working group okay well uh I think that's that's pretty good that's a lot to think about I think this was a good uh discussion one of these a good meeting to I don't know I know I have a lot to think about uh so so thank you for everyone um thank you to uh Astinos and Dayton and Elizabeth for coming in we really appreciate your feedback thank you thank you and yeah uh I mean you know you're the ones who did did the real work here uh so we really appreciate that and I hope that as this progresses we remember to tell city council about how much contribution the subcommittee's made I hope we remember to do that because it's it's been huge um it's you know it's not it's not the planning commission's plan it's really the subcommittee's plan that we work on a little bit uh so that's great uh well do you guys have anything else to add before we adjourn okay then uh with that uh do we have a motion to adjourn I'll move to adjourn I'll second okay uh motion by Barb second by Stephanie all in favor of adjourning for the night say aye hi okay any opposed okay so our meeting is over thanks again everybody thanks everyone thanks everybody thank you