 The house is getting done. We are now recording. All right, and you've started recording. So pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12th, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, general law chapter 30a, section 18, this meeting of the Transportation Advisory Committee is being conducted by a remote participation. This meeting is being recorded to the web and could be shown on Amherst Media and broadcast on the town of Amherst YouTube channel. Anybody dialing in by a phone can press star nine to raise their hand to be recognized. People with video link can click the raise hand button at the corner of the screen. Otherwise I'm just gonna do the thing, look for your hands as you're moving around or as you're yelling at the screen. All right, so hello everybody. I'm gonna get the agenda up here. That's the other thing about having another screen is you can have lots of room for things. Sure, I just joined and I promoted him to a panelist. So he is in our meeting now. Oh, well, thank you. Thank you for keeping track of that. The, I don't have many announcements. I have one, I wanna say that the letter that I sent to DOT was very well received. I was surprised, first of all, at the prompt response. And then second of all, that it got passed around. It got, I was told that it was forwarded to other people. So they did appreciate it in the end, which is maybe less of a surprise nowadays because the DOT is getting better about catching up with what its customers really want. I don't know, is there anything? Oh, I guess, no, I'll save for another announcement for when we do next meetings. I'll not be able to come to the next meeting. So I volunteered Kim to take over, but I'll announce that when we get to schedule. Public comment, I see some public. Hi, George. Hi, Eve. And so Guilford was worried that this was gonna be too much work for our time tonight. But here we are on number four already. So I was wondering what it is is a parking guideline recommendations update. So last time we took a look at the memo that Guilford put together for Paul and liked it a lot and offered some tweaks and some ideas that would make it even better. I guess the big one being that the completeness of the street would help determine what the parking should be as part of it. I mean, that was something that was unspoken to directly in the original memo. So I'm wondering if there is an update on that. So two things, one is it updates on that. And second, if we want to do we, the TAC wanna do something maybe more formal. So updates first. So the complete street part, I kind of left that out because in a sense, this is a part of complete streets. Complete streets isn't a part of this. So it doesn't really flow well to make complete streets part of this when it is part of complete. It doesn't flow well. No, I understand, okay. So, but I added in the other things. You asked, I'll just share it with you. Can we go over it one more time? So here we are. I added the parking over here. I lost the bike lane thing. Yeah, and actually that's a good point. I mean, when we were working with bike lanes and other elements, those are pieces of complete streets. So I'm understanding what you're saying about the flow. Yeah, actually, there was a column here that said parking. I mean, not parking, but bike lanes. Uh-huh, okay. Well, where it went to. That was my comment too. I just was muted. Yeah, right. Tim. Okay. So that's the bike. I'll just call it bike lane for now. And then that's pretty much all that's pretty much all that I think was there anything, there was some discussion about a couple of other things but they were kind of vague. Well, adding specifics on intersections Yeah, actually I must have saved this to a different spot. It's not showing up where I am on this one. That was added in a minimum of 30 feet from the intersection was added into it. Is this, what is this from? Is this a proposed document? Proposed document that was, they came out of discussions with some counselors about the fact there's really no rules or guidelines for how we set parking or where we set parking. So this was sort of an attempt to kind of give some guidance on how we set parking. And then the issue, the one thing that can be left open to interpretation or for something we have to interpret it is usage, which is a vehicle volumes. Which that's the only thing that's really not laid out very well on this. Which we know we'll have to work on as we go along. I guess, can you hear me, Gilford? Yes. Yes, go ahead, Gil. I guess one thing I was just wondering if you could just at least just maybe in the preface to the portion with the table that you just showed us you might just say something like, or wherever it fits more readily, something like in accordance with the complete streets policy or something, just so that it's in there. So then people can go back to that if they need to, the counselors might be able to go back to that as something just a simple, just get that phrase in there. Yeah, exactly as part of. Yes, while he's doing that. I'm concerned about you guys designating the widths of vehicle lane widths and bike lane widths during this process because I actually think vehicle lane widths need a broader conversation. And bike lane widths are going to depend in part on what we've set up with level of service, whether you need a buffer or not. So I'm just concerned about a document like this that's intended to inform parking, setting standards for other things that you're not considering as comprehensively at this time. That's a good point. Yeah. But this works the other way around. It's responding to what is on the street. Yes, Kim? No, I was just saying, but perhaps this could be a minimum guideline or something like that. So that it doesn't interfere with those kinds of things, Eve. What do you think? Well, I mean, in terms of lane width for motor vehicles, I think there's a lot of argument that the minimum should be less than this. So I've given the example of when I talk to people in Eugene again, for example, and their arterials go down to 9.5 feet, including that buses travel on. And if you narrow the lane width, it's a good infrastructural way to slow traffic, right? And we've talked about that a lot. So I know that Guilford doesn't agree with that, which is why I think that it actually is, it needs a broader conversation. But that's why I'm uncomfortable saying that the minimum lane width is 10 feet. If you really want to see a good example of a minimum lane width, which I think is 9.5 feet, you should drive on the new section of University Drive on campus. And when you do it, follow the buses that drive down the road and see how they drive in almost half the score mark, the score mark between the bike lane and the travel lane. Well, yeah, but this doesn't, so this document should not work, I think to Eve's point, should not work as setting those dimensions. What should be set in those dimensions is the complete streets policy that we have or that and good traffic engineering and the emergency services. The part of that ends up being what is layered on top of that when it's done. And now I don't know how to make that clear. I mean, clearly when you read this, Eve, you didn't see it that way. You saw it as creating those requirements. And I imagined it working the other way as taking what those requirements are for those three types of streets and laring parking onto it. Sorry, I was just gonna add that in terms of bike lanes also that are a level of service in addition to the complete streets policy, the level of service matrix is trying to give recommended design standards. So I would agree with what Eve's saying, but the goal is as they get something started, and if we go back later on and choose different ones, I mean, I'm not gonna be here forever and probably about four or five years. It just feels like that. Yeah, maybe six years from my end date, I'm not gonna fight as hard as I fight in the past. So, you know, this is just a starting point and then it can change as you go along. I mean, to really think about where we're having problems with parking, the big places with parking is in the neighborhoods where you're not going to have a lot of room for having a designated bike lane unless you make the road one way, or you take the bike lane and put it up by the sidewalk and make the sidewalk bigger. And the other place we're having issues with parking is pretty much along the main roads where you don't want parking anyhow, but people are parking in what the shoulder is used for bikes now. Right, so Bruce and then Bernie. Yeah, I was gonna suggest that one possibility, thinking about what Eve is saying is you could say, based on the roadway classifications above the following are the recommended lane widths, total pavement widths and parking area widths and feet, comma, at the present time, meaning this might be open to change in the future. So, Bernie? Same thought, I was just gonna say, put the term current in front of recommended. Now, I'm gonna recall that the complete streets policy doesn't on neighborhood streets, does not on local streets, does not require bike lanes specifically. It's a shared, the roadway becomes more of a shared resource rather than sections of it being divided off as one of the aspects. So those are the two options you were talking about, right? Yeah, I think either pick one, either they both just let folks know that these are subject to change. I'm open to you. And local application. So could you just say that based on the roadway classifications above and the usual lane widths today, the parking area widths, the recommended parking area widths and feet are. So just so the recommendation is only about parking area widths, since that's the main thing you're really focusing on here. That's not the, the main thing is aside, which roads are wide enough to have parking on? So you have to kind of have what your travel lanes are. I'm concerned too, because this whole, the level of traffic stress system that we've been creating, it defines local, it depends not only if a road is designated local, but we're putting in other variables like visibility, speed of traffic and what's the other one? Well, just sort of the amount of traffic and that would determine what kind of bike and walking facilities you would have. So anyway, so this actually actually potentially contradicts what we're putting together in that system. Yeah, and so I'm wondering if the order, the hierarchy might be out of order, because really this is not setting lane widths. This is really, it's whatever the lane width needs wants to be in that road, however that's determined, the parking has to be compliant with that. Parking can't impose on that. So following, they're not recommended lane widths. They are actual lane widths. So again, this is not recommending lane widths. This document is not recommending lane widths. It is recommending that parking be allowed when the lane width is maintained or can be maintained. So the other way around this is that the state just stays a memo from the DPW addressing a concern from a counselor. And then a second thing come from the Transportation Advisory Committee saying, yeah, this is a good start, but we think as we move forward, these things need to be addressed as well, but we haven't addressed those things yet. Yeah, I think. Yeah, well, this is baseline. This is what is now. And it addresses an immediate situation. It's gonna be subject to refinement and change. And I think that if people understand that, then that's fine. And I guess the purpose of this, right, is just to, I mean, there's a couple immediate concerns that need to be addressed like now. So, and that's what they're asking for. So we can come back and say, yes, this is the minimum, but here is, here's our vision for Amherst Transportation Network in the future and how we can begin to comply with that at the moment, which is all of these extra things that they might not be thinking about right now. So, yeah, I agree. We should come back with updates to this document. So perhaps you could send this and then, and to us as well, and then this is something that we build on with the counselors in the future. Once we have our network, you know, public, yeah. Yeah, because the counselors are gonna talk this thing through as well and take input. And so, so I guess I like that Kim as a way of, I'll get to you Tracy as a way of moving on is that we, the TAC might draft a response to this. Yeah. So I appreciate, and part of that response is saying that we're gonna appreciate these changes, the tweaks that have been made to it because I'm taking for granted that the red marks here in the additional column, that that's gonna go, that's gonna remain part or become part of Guilford's communication to Paul and the council. And then we can respond to that directly by adding all of these things. And really in a way, it's, I guess our response is saying, oh, by the way, in order for complete streets to work with this, then we, this is what the other considerations that we have to, that need to be added to it. And I guess, yeah. So you guess yes? Okay. I was gonna say, I mean, as soon as we get our policies in order, then we can begin to apply them to things such as this, documents such as art reply to the counselors with our information or added information or added policies. So then I guess that's kind of what Guilford is suggesting. Okay. Is that what we, is that, oh, Tracy, I'm sorry. No, I mean, I think I agree with what's been said. And I don't know to George Ryan is here as a member of the TSO and the person, the counselor who had originally brought the, you know, his concerns to TSO. So I don't know if he wants to speak in a minute. I think it's great to have this as a baseline. I mean, one of the issues that's come up with Lincoln and sunset is also, and I mean, there's other questions besides, is there the capacity on the street for there to be parking? Like for example, right? People are thinking, or at least, you know, some of the discussions that TSO has been like, well, could we allow parking during these hours and not these hours, you know, can, so there's other considerations too, beyond whether, yes, parking's allowed, no parking's not allowed. And I, so I mean, that's something I think that the TSO would have to consider about like how it wants to, I mean, there could be, just as has been proposed for parts of Lincoln to allow parking, you know, overnight, but not parking during the day or whatever. But yeah, I mean, and I think, I mean, so I think this is really a good like first take. The other thing I keep thinking about in addition to the complete street idea is also just about, I would think that there could be cases where you wouldn't want on-street parking, like maybe based on adjacent land uses or things like that. So, again, this is like a really good first cut as a general policy, but then of course it would be refined as has been discussed, so. Yeah, so yeah, and that's interesting about the, you know, the nearby land use. I'm going to suggest that the time of day parking and whether it should be, you know, a neighborhood permit and all that other stuff, that that is best left to somebody besides the Transportation Advisory Committee, like let's say the TSO, because it's not a technical issue and really is a policy issue. You're right, you're absolutely right. Those are decisions that need to be taken. Right. And, but I'm thinking that's out of what I imagine our purview is. Yeah, so I think George wants to speak. Yeah, I see George's handgolf. Yes, George. Hi, George. Yeah, I'm listening really. I'm really speaking. It's okay. Just, no, I know, just to listen, but I did want to confirm if I could that I believe, Guilford, you are going to come and speak to TSO about parking. Is that correct? Is that the next TSO meeting? Is my understanding? I'm not trying to create work for you, Guilford. I'm just asking, and maybe the answer is, you don't know, and that's fine, or maybe the answer is you've never heard this request. But my chair, I believe, and she's not here today, unfortunately, but I believe she had told us at the last meeting that you are going to be present at a TSO meeting to talk about this issue. Is that ring any bells or no? It does, but I don't have it down for the next, your next meeting. Okay. All right, that's fine. It's your schedule, right? Okay. Well, I might not have just written it down on my calendar. Well, I will check with our chair, and, but I guess my point to TAC is just that we are looking forward to that conversation and to that presentation. And then we will, so that's really why I just wanted to bring that up, that we're going to have, I think, at some point soon, but maybe not next meeting, but soon a similar discussion with Guilford about the memo and about parking regulations in general, because as we said, this got started by a request from TSO and Guilford grabbed it and said, I think I can do something with this and he has, which is great. And so I think when he comes back to speak to us, that will be very helpful to TSO. And I really appreciate what you all are doing and your contributions. So I'm going to shut up and just listen. I will be bowing out after the parking, but I appreciate very much what you're doing and keep up the good work. Thank you. Thank you indeed. All right, so I had not planned for us to begin to put together a response. So this new idea to put the response to this for tonight. But I thought we're going to give a response only after we have come up with our own set of policies. Yeah, exactly. And so there's a lot of work that we have to do to get to that. I mean, there's a bunch of ideas that have floated in and I had not planned on that for tonight. I don't know if we would want to begin that now because besides picking Bernie to draft it. Well, I mean, I think we could wait. We're like still working on our bike ped map. And I mean, we do want to have like the network. And so in that context, I think we could wait on it. And it does seem like there's some other important items for tonight. Also, I mean, because it will go to the TSO next week, it'd be useful to hear what the TSO members think of what Guilford's proposing as well. And we can respond to that as well. Yeah, and thank you, Tracy, for saying that. That's, I guess you read my email back to you about whether or not to schedule time for the subcommittee tonight. Because I thought it was too chocolate block full to give that enough good time. All right, so we'll put that onto the work plan and we'll pick up, pick that up. Yeah. So let me get their hand up, Bernie. No, I don't have a hand up. I just... Although it's my hand, it looks like a hand. I'm agreeing with Tracy, I think we've got plenty of stuff to do now and in the near future. All right, thank you. Thank you, Guilford, for that. All right, major intersection decision considerations. So the main event for tonight I had hoped would be to begin to put together our ideas on how to make the decision of what we might suggest as a way to get to the decision of whether intersections in general, but Pomeroy Village Center project in particular, is a roundabout or a signalized intersection. And Tracy. Oh, just in terms of that vein, I'm sure you're going to talk about this, but I know that there is, right, the public forum for Pomeroy next Thursday as part of the TSO meeting and then also on Saturday, two days later, which is going to be a two-hour session. The TSO forum is only a one-hour session. So I just wanted to check about what's our time frame in terms of our, is it our intention to weigh in and provide some feedback prior to the forums or after the forums? Well, I was hopeful that our discussion tonight got far enough along that we had something to offer the TSO at their next meeting, next week. And what I'm imagining, and certainly we can change our mind about this, what I'm imagining is that rather than saying, that's the intersection we want, although I think it's clear what that would be, that we outline how to get to that decision, maybe in a way that makes it obvious as to what our decision would be. So when you consider a roundabout, here are the pros and cons. When you consider a signalized section, here are the pros and cons and compare them to each other. And that's what I'd hope to be. I'd hope to bring some fairly advanced forum to that. I think many of the things. This is the public comment to the meeting next week. Yes, Trace? I think, oh. Marcus is speaking. I'm sorry, Trace. Marcus. One of the things we need to address is our blind pedestrians, because that seems to be the big who are down in that part of town. I would be interested to see how many blind pedestrians we actually have in that part of town to see, so we can at least triage the situation. Sorry, my four-year-old is playing in the background. And then also understand how many orally alarmed road crossings we have in the town in general, because, I mean, it's all very well bringing this up as like, oh, we need to take into account this section of the population. But what is our existing situation today? So what I imagine for this exercise is that we would, first of all, identify the elements that would need to be considered in taking your decision about intersection. And we've identified them in our chats. And I just wanted to get them down onto a list. And I don't know if we do that on the screen or just take somebody to take notes. OK, Trace. And so the elements that we've talked about, we've talked about crossing safety and efficacy efficiency. We've talked about environmental impacts. We've talked about creating a sense of neighborhood. Can't hear you. I'm calling it as can't hear me. Oh, man. No, it's not you, Aaron. It's not you. Yeah, I could hear Aaron. It's fine. It's fine. It's fine. Sorry. Maybe you don't want to hear me, which is OK too. Yeah, Skilford. I'm sorry. I just wanted to say something that Amber wanted to say, but she had to leave. When she's going through the recordings that pull the minutes off, sometimes we get too wrapped up and talk too fast and talk over each other. So the computer's having a hard time distinguishing what's being said and who's saying what. So I guess what would be nice if we could all practice just being a little more organized and when we speak and how we speak and making sure we keep everything in flow so we can get a better recording. Because Amber was lost last time. Way too excitable. We are. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Amber. That's good. Thank you, Amber. So Chris also has to end up officially. But you have to push the mute button. Yeah. I wanted to offer some clarity about when these comments are being asked for. So I got an email from Darcy today regarding, I guess it was D-A-A-C comments. So she's asking that comments be given to the TSO. And they're going to be considering this topic on April 8th and also on April 22nd. And then the town council will take up this topic on May 3rd. So that gives you a schedule that you can work with. OK? That's all I wanted to say. Thank you. And on top of that, there's the two fora that the trace team mentioned. So in the next week and then the following two-hour session, which we haven't been invited to explore. Well, I sense we're always invited to come and chat about those things. So thank you. That's good because we certainly don't want to impede anything. Tracy, that's right. That's where we were. Tracy. Hi. So at the last meeting, you had suggested that maybe I put together like a few slides with some bullets related to this question about roundabouts and intersections. Oh, as a primer. Yes. And then also, well, I have been thinking a lot about this, both after the comments from the DAC about some of their concerns with the Triangle Street intersection, and also because I've been taking this roundabout class and also reading a lot of studies about roundabouts. But I can do that quickly if that's helpful. Would you? That would be, I think that would be good. Thank you. Tracy. Yeah. Now I'll say that my first, I'm going to share my screen in a minute. But before I do so, I want to say that the, I mean, I feel like some of the questions about the strengths of the different options and what the town wants to get out of them, that the town did such a great job presenting them at their presentations at the town council. And so instead of reinventing the wheel, I borrowed some of their slides without their permission. But I'm saying I acknowledge that they're from them. So thank you, Chris, and thank you, Guilford and everything that you guys have put a lot of work into it already. And I mean, I do think that it would be helpful for some of the attendees at the forum to maybe have some of these overviews, at least a few slides of it if they haven't seen it before. So I'll go ahead and share it. So just from recapping what Chris and Guilford and everybody had talked about at the intersection, again, these are the slides I brought from the council, the staff's presentation, and looking at that intersection, the deficiencies right now are the lack of pedestrian accessibility, the lack of sidewalks, the issues with the signals, the no bike lanes and the queuing that happens at rush hour. And here, here's another staff slide. And so it does seem, and thinking about this intersection, it really does seem that both of these main alternatives, both the signalized intersection with enhancements, including a left-hand turn lane, as well as the roundabout, could address these issues. And so this is what's in the slide that the staff had put together, because all of those elements are addressed. With the enhanced signalized intersection, the left-hand turn lane would be a huge help. And also with the roundabout, right? And this is just the last slide I had brought from the town presentation, just about all these different issues. Some of these do involve the TAC, a number of them in terms of the bus piece, the bike-ped piece, the ADA piece, the traffic volume, the safety. Those are all things that we're thinking about as members of the TAC. And then here's just my quick couple slides. So in terms of roundabouts, in terms of what roundabouts are designed to do, this is my one slide. So roundabouts are designed to slow the travel speeds down through the intersections and calm traffic. And they do that by having the angles entering the intersection, which are much the angles such that the traffic has to slow down. So when you have anything you read about roundabouts, when you have lower speed traffic, then you also will have lower speed crashes, which will lead to less fatalities in general for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians and less property damage. And then also a lot of the roundabouts have medians and islands that can reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians, including people with mobility issues. The roundabouts can reduce intersection queuing, such as that commuter hours because the traffic is always moving and also reduce vehicle admissions. I remember that counselor Ross talked about this at one of the council meetings. I haven't actually looked into the literature in this, but it makes sense that if you don't have traffic queued up and sitting there waiting, that you're gonna have lower admissions. And you can also reduce the electricity consumption by eliminating the signal devices and then the maintenance related to the signals. So this last piece, in terms of if you don't have signals, the vehicles can travel through the intersection constantly. And so this is where the challenges and what Marcus was bringing up about that this does present a challenge for some pedestrians, particularly those who are blind, visually impaired, but especially blinds and listening in on the DAC meeting last week. And I've heard this from DAC members before including Myra who's come to our meetings is that, I mean, in terms of when somebody who is blind is trying to cross an intersection, the key there for them is to listen to the difference between when there is traffic and when there isn't traffic. And if there's always traffic, they don't have those queues. Like there's never a hundred percent safe time. This is where some of the intersections downtown, which have, which block all the vehicle traffic at one time and everybody crossed for pedestrians is really safe from a blind pedestrian perspective. And so, I mean, there's quite a bit of literature about and design standards. I know MassDOT has in their design standards for roundabouts. They have suggestions about how to make it safer for pedestrians, including some pedestrian activated signals and things like that. But at the same time, unless all the traffic in the roundabout is stopped, like you're never gonna have traffic on and traffic off signal, like parts of the phases of the signal. So, I think at the DAC meeting last week, they were discussing and they might have even voted that they said that they would prefer not to have a roundabout that they would prefer an enhanced signal instead. And then this is just the slide, just because I've gotten emails about this and I've heard discussions, I think on the Engage Amherst site, people keep talking about this intersection as it could be a rotary. And there are a lot of rotaries in Massachusetts. If you read like the MassDOT information too, like there's a lot of confusion about what to rotary, what to roundabout. And so it seems like a primer, but it comes up a lot and maybe we'll even come up at the public forum. I know it came up at the district five meeting where a number of the attendees were saying, it sounds like, like I don't want a rotary here. So, I don't know, Marcus, do you have any questions? Give me your hand. I see, oh, Chris. Chris and Marcus, they have their hand mark. Yeah. So my question was if Tracy would send me her slides, because I'm putting together a slideshow for next Thursday and Saturday and your thoughts would be helpful to me. Oh. All right, well, my slides are mainly your slides, but okay. But the ones that have your thoughts. Yeah, okay, sure, I can do that. Thank you. Marcus. Yes, I'm sorry. So I may have missed the conversation, but I had to step away for a second. But for the making a roundabout more pedestrian-friendly, I mean, there are certainly options there. Of course. You know, using the Belisha Beacons, oral alarms, that sort of stuff, because that's why I'm curious about just how many other intersections or even crosswalks in town have sufficient, you know, up to a certain standard of awareness. You know, yes, sure, the centre of, the very, very centre of town has that. But none of the crosswalks around it do necessarily, you know, the only real Belisha Beacon use is, you know, on the college campus and that sort of stuff. Yes, Guilford would know, right? So Guilford, are the only two ones with the sound activated are the two like ones on like North Pleasant and South Pleasant downtown? Or are there others? If you want to call. So we started, I go. Yeah, go ahead, Guilford. Oh, sorry. So we started out putting those on every intersection in town that had a crosswalk. And as time went on, we started pulling them off crosswalks, mainly because the neighbours who live next to the crosswalk didn't like them. And the continuous beeping and the continuous talking of the device made people say, take them out. So they were taken out of almost everything. They're back in the center of town. The one at Route nine and Route nine and one in South Pleasant Street is there, but it stopped working. The one at Kellogg and North Pleasant stopped working. The new one, there is a new one in North Amherst at Pine Street. And it may be turned down, way turned down because we got complaints about it making too much noise as well. So we've used them in other places. And usually what happens is there's anybody who is living or residing close to them, they have problems and they complain about the noise at certain times of the evening. And that's curious. So are we getting complaints about them not being there either? Yes, people will come back and say, hey, it's not working. And we'll say, well, we turned it down or we getting complaints at night. What's happening and they're evolving like everything else and pretty soon, they'll probably be one that comes out that actually you can program to work at certain times. And that'll be more of what we kind of do. Yeah. Bernie. Yeah. I was surprised, a couple of civil engineers at UMass who've done some research in on this. And I sort of stumbled across one of their papers earlier today. But in terms of the location of Crosswalks there's gonna be an issue here, not only for folks who are visually impaired, but also for traffic patterns and people getting in and out of those businesses. So that needs to be, the consideration needs to be given for both those things. I also have come across some compromises on this to put like an on-demand signal on a Crosswalk so that when someone who's visually impaired or someone who has some mobility difficulties and needs some assurances that cars are stopped, they could trigger the thing, not unlike the lights that we see along Amherst College to assist in crossing. So you've got that option. The other thing is in terms of a signaled intersection, a signal intersection with a right turn lane or right on red can be pretty hazardous for folks who are visually impaired as well. So there are probably some engineering fixes to make people feel more confident. But the bottom line is for folks who are visually impaired regardless of what happens at the intersection, there's gonna have to be some ability to train people to the things that now lay the new layout in how to use it. So that's my two cents on all this. Thank you. So, Chris, is your hand up a second time? I don't, or do I have to put them down? I forget how that works. My hand is not up. Okay, it's down now, okay. Tracy, now it was- Well, is Marcus's hand still up, or is it down now too? It's down now. So I think to Bernie's point is that, I mean, again, there can be accommodations made for visually impaired people at the intersections, including having activated pedestrian activated signals, audio flashing lights, and so on. One challenge can be if, for pedestrian safety reasons, if you move the crosswalks out of the center of the roundabout, but then if you're visually impaired or blind, you're not necessarily sure where the crosswalks are located. And you can do training. One thing that's been said at the DAC meetings is that there was somebody who spoke at the last one and who does travel training for people who are blind and visually impaired to help them navigate and that he never recommends that people go through the roundabout as a blind or visually impaired person. And that when he trains people, he trains them to like, even if they have to go like a block out of their way to go at like a crossing intersection that's safer in his mind. So. So, yeah, Gilbert, you've got to push the D mute button. He actually says an uncontrolled intersection is safer. So, it's a lot of overcome there. I don't know about that. So, it's an interesting, I would observe that this is suggesting that the intersection design goes beyond round or square. It might go and to include for pedestrian, for the pedestrian safety part of it, developing not at this intersection, but away a little bit, save crossings. Yeah, and I think that, I mean, I would be curious to understand from the guy what kind of roundabout he was referring to because there are so many different types. We have no idea where the pedestrian crossing was. I mean, it could have been straight across the middle for all we know that he's referring to. So he says that don't go there. I mean, just a crosswalk. We're getting better. Upper Cushman, you know, with the lighted signs like that, just putting those is a hell of a lot better than anything like that, you know, any uncontrolled part. So. Yeah, then those are mid block crossings on Pine Street, you mean? The Pine, well, yeah, up like Bridge Street, Pine Street, wherever it is. Eve. I wanted to hear the rest of the slideshow. Oh, Tracy. I just had three more slides. I mean, it was really just for our connoisseurs. And we saw that, but it was a bit of a sidetrack, which I thought was good. Yeah, all right, so anyway, let's just remember rotaries are not roundabouts, roundabouts are not rotaries. Right. And I haven't corrected the person who wrote that in the Engage Amherst site, but maybe somebody could. Okay, so just, there were just, I just had a few examples. I mean, there's tons of examples about rotaries, including that have been created to improve village centers and to improve pedestrian access. So here's one that was done in New York, you know, New York State has done a lot of roundabouts, including like groups of roundabouts. So this one was done, it was completed last year. And so one of the things they do is that they do have the rectangular rapid flashing beacons, which are similar to the ones that are now on Route 9 in Hadley, like in the center of Hadley. And so, you know, they found that it greatly enhanced pedestrian access and safety by having those connections. So, I mean, there have been some roundabouts that have been around for a long time, excuse me. So Kittleson, they're Kittleson, which are consultants, they're the ones who put together the mass DOT guide and planning design guidelines for roundabouts. And they have on their website, they have an extensive database of all the roundabouts that they are aware of in the country. And you can also, you can search it for different adjacent land uses, as well as for ones that have signal enhancements or like rapid flashing beacons or other types of things. Excuse me, that part of the database doesn't seem to be very complete, but there's over 7,000 databases, I mean, abouts in their database. Sorry, so this was the first urban roundabout in New York state. So it's about 12 years, 13 years old now. It's a very small community. It's got a large number of elderly people. And so this roundabout replaced a stop control in their section, so it wasn't a signal. And they did similar to what happened at the Clifton Park one. I mean, they did have quite a bit of signage for pedestrian safety, including having the speed awareness devices to make people aware of how fast they're going and what the speed limit is. And they had the automatic flashing lights activation on the sidewalk ramps. And they found that, you know, everybody made people feel a lot safer in general there. And this is one, so, you know, this is a one back a couple of decades ago from Florida. And it was on a waterfront and it had been a signalized intersection. They replaced it and, you know, it really increased a lot of the pedestrian traffic. And one of the things that they were looking to do is that because it was near the waterfront, they wanted to really slow the traffic down to about 10 miles per hour. So what they did is they created curb extensions, just like other types of traffic calming features that they put in the roundabout to make it narrow and to make all the cars slow down a lot, as well as the median islands and so on. So that was my quick little summary. So, I mean, going back to the kind of the key issues, right? So these were the issues that were identified in the staff slides, which are the key issues, I think that we're probably interested in predominantly. And as, you know, as the slides talk about that both enhanced signalized intersections and roundabouts can address those. I mean, a lot of it really just has to, in my mind, it has to do more with the design about like how things are being implemented and where things are being placed and how the intersections are actually functioning. So. And I guess I would take for granted that it's a good design, whether it's a roundabout or a intersection. It wouldn't be, for instance, dumb signals. It wouldn't be a rotary by mistake instead of a roundabout or anything like that. But at the same time, I think that there can be design elements that some people think will work well and then like post-intersection, they're not working the way that was anticipated. I mean, so in the last two sessions ago, this roundabout class I'm taking, they focus on the public participation. And one of the key elements is that, even after you design it and after you build it, you still need to get public participation about how it's working. And I think that was one of the questions that came up too about the Triangle Street intersection, right? Because some of the concerns that were raised there, they said, well, after the intersections built, we'll reevaluate like how it's working. And so maybe that, maybe there would be a good time to do that, so. So I took out of that and off of recollections of our past conversations, nine things that maybe eight that might be issues that need to be considered when comparing the two, when you're weighing the two options, which is to say a well-designed rotary and a well-designed, well-designed roundabout, I got me started. No, I got me started. Well-designed roundabout and a well-designed smart signalized intersection. Pedestrian access. I just, my abbreviation is loss of LOS, loss of service, but just handling the volume that goes through it. And that's includes maybe in particular, in a rush hours, where stacking traffic is not a good thing. And it's related to the third thing I have here, which is emissions and just environmental considerations. Fourth, speed and crash safety. And five, I separated it from the pedestrian because it keeps coming up as a separate issue is accessibility for mobility impaired and visually impaired. One, I think this is for Guilford, maintenance, maintainability of this thing. When he says that we had so many more chirping intersections and many of them are broken now, I think that might be something that is an issue we should consider. I added from Guilford. If you're gonna do maintenance, don't do the chirping part. Do the part about the signalized intersection relies on power. So when the power goes out, the intersection stops. Okay. And the poles often get hit by vehicles. And then those are expensive poles to replace. So from that standpoint, maintenance is more about maintaining the light to make sure it works and then keeping the power to it when power goes out. I'll make it maintenance slash reliability then. Then as a sort of an outgrowth from some comments that were made at the precinct five meeting aesthetic. Now, I don't know how to define that, but I know that's going to come up. And even if we put it on our list as things to consider and don't have any way of considering and I think it's important that that is kept in the conversation, experience, local experience as an issue, how that might affect the decision. Anything else? I'm sure there are others. I just admit that because I know I haven't thought of the Bruce. Then any- Any questions for Tracy? Are there any roundabouts that have raised crosswalks or as you head up to the crosswalk, the pavement might be a different sort of pavement so that somebody walking who is visually impaired could feel the difference and know that's where they're supposed to cross? Yeah, so I think, I mean, in terms of design guidelines that I've seen for assisting visually impaired people in crossing at these intersections as well as other intersections is that it's always helpful to have a differentiated pavement as long as it's the kind that you can maintain in a New England winter that's not gonna get all uneven over time. Like the rick and granite? Yeah, I mean, you could do it at the crossing itself or even just like on the edge of the roadway to indicate it. Okay, thank you. Eve? So just a background question before I have a couple of comments but background question, so were there sort of rough designs or I keep thinking that what's really needed for the sense of place question is kind of an on the ground sketch of what the two would look like. Do we have anything like that at this point? Guilford, Chris? We have sketches of what? And on the ground view of what each option would look like. No, just what's in the slide show, that's all we have right now and that's just a rough concept. It's not the exact plan. All right, so then I'm gonna add one. So my three comments are one that I really think that that's essential for people to be able to make a good decision. Second comment is, I really appreciated your comment Tracy about that like no absolute stop of traffic ever. And your comment about, was it Bernie's comment about right or Marcus's comment about the right turn on red can make that also true in signalized intersections. But I remember after the triangle roundabout went in, I don't know why, but I often would do a mid block crossing with my bike east pleasant, just north of that triangle roundabout. And I suddenly realized like a mid block crossing is really difficult all of a sudden when there's just no stop in traffic. So like just that loss of a red light affects not only that intersection, but a block or two away as well in terms of the flow of traffic. And it seems like I had a pretty good comment by now. Yeah, I guess that's an interesting, so maybe I'm gonna add on the list here, number nine as near intersection impact or something along those lines, all right. When we did our walk, our neighborhood of this area, one of the guy who was part of the subcommittee who was a PBTA bus driver, he really talked a lot about how this intersection was just impossible for bus riders, but I'm assuming that both designs would count for safety of bus riders. Yeah, the triangle has some weird with the bus. Yeah, Kim. Yeah, it's interesting, Tracy, what struck me about your presentation is A, you know, one, I think, I mean, I've gone through that intersection quite a bit on my bike, car, and running. And other than running through the intersection, I can safely say that I have never seen anyone crossing there, and that might just be because of the time of day I go, I think it's a really barren intersection as far as like pedestrian traffic. I mean, hardly anyone's on those sidewalks. I certainly see people waiting at the buses, which, you know, on the bus stops there, certainly I've seen people waiting. So what struck me really a lot about your presentation is, you know, the idea that we could, that roundabouts would slow down all traffic, right? Approaching that intersection, because I know that I like to go, I had to Holyoke, you know, to bring my kid to ballet in the evenings, and I like to zoom right through there. And certainly a roundabout would slow everybody down and make everyone a little more aware. And I really feel like by that slowing down of everyone's traffic, you know, then everyone has to pay attention at that intersection. And then perhaps it's easier as a pedestrian to cross if the crosswalks are set back a little bit. I mean, I, that, you know, the fact that you talked about the, you know, that it actually might have increased pedestrian traffic through that intersection is really striking to me, because I think that intersection could really use more pedestrian. I mean, there are lots of people in those neighborhoods, but I feel like they never cross the road. So I like those two examples that you gave and like the explanation of the communities that were surrounding it. And it would be great if there were more of those so we could like really see does it do roundabouts, you know, increase pedestrian traffic in places like that? Cause I bet they would. So thank you for that. That was really useful. And I think it's really helpful in further presentations to include information just like that. Cause I think it might change some people in the community who are thinking about roundabouts. It might change, you know, it might start them thinking roundabouts aren't so bad. That gets to Marcus's comment about getting data about how things are working, actually working in town. So a bunch of hands, I'm gonna start with Bruce. I would like to agree with Kim as a pedestrian, if I'm walking somewhere, even if there is a button to press to do a red light to cross, if traffic is barreling along on a highway, it just isn't pedestrian friendly, even with a activated signal. Whereas I agree, if there is a roundabout, the traffic will all have to slow down, which to me would help give more of a sense of a village center rather than traffic is going at 50 miles an hour. And once in a while, when somebody dares to press the button, it slows down or stops. But how appealing is that village center going to be if traffic is barreling along? Yeah. Eve was one of the, no, okay. I thought I saw that. So that's a, I guess it's an interesting irony that the traffic goes slower through roundabouts. And yet the average time it takes for a vehicle to get through the intersection when it's around about is lower than when it's signalized. Which is one of the cool things. Tracy. So one issue that can come up in terms of the intersection queuing that you'll see in the literature, if you look, is that if you do have more stops, if you do have more pedestrian activated crossings that stop the traffic and so on, that it can then increase the queuing as well, right? So part of the roundabout is designed so that to eliminate that, to eliminate the emissions and everybody waiting. But there are some sweet spots with it, in different ways you can design it so that that doesn't become an issue. But if it's not designed with that in mind, it could potentially become an issue again, particularly as it approaches capacity for the flow. But I mean, that's kind of assuming that there's a level of traffic, a level of pedestrian traffic, where that would be an issue, right? I mean, to Kim's point, the only time I've ever gone there and crossed the road was trying to get permission to the moan and dove, so I could bring it up to the back of the moan and dove. But I mean, that's really pretty much about all it is. I could see an increase with the town's purchase of the golf course. When we get that up and running, people from around the community walking and cross there to go for walks and stuff like that, but it's still not gonna be a major pedestrian thoroughfare. My one concern though, when you get into roundabouts is just depending on how much traffic is gonna turn left or right. Because that will also build up your queues entering roundabouts. If they're not able to actually get onto the roundabout because of the traffic on the roundabout that is going across them. So you can run into that issue and that can then lead to signalized roundabouts and stuff like that. But I do have one question though on your presentation, Tracy. I don't know if you, I'm sure you, in there it said, there's queuing in the evening for rush hour, but there was no mention of any queuing in the morning. Is there a particular reason for that? Maybe that's a Guilford question. Well, so that's from the town slides. And I believe that. Yeah, right. But there's general patterns with commuting hours is that people go to work at all different kinds of times a day. Like some will go to work at like seven or eight or nine or especially around this area, right? You have people at the university who go to work much later and earlier shifts. And so, but typically like people, the evening commute is much more compressed. Like the majority of people will leave work between say like four and six or something or even like five and six. Whereas in the morning, it's just way more spread out. Maybe we've seen that in studies that we've seen in the past. Chris, you've been very patient. Hi, so I wanted to follow up on two things. One is that people have been saying that they don't see much pedestrian traffic in this intersection when they go through there. And my understanding is that there's a lot of pedestrian traffic in the daytime because there's an office park, the Amherst office park, it's on the west side of West street and there are places to get food on the east side. There's the, what is it? The Speedway, you know, little market there. There's, I think there's Jiang's kitchen, there's El Camolito, there's a bunch of places to get food on the east side. So there's a lot of crossing in the middle of the day. So maybe that's why you haven't seen pedestrian traffic. The other thing I wanted to mention was that if we do choose to have a roundabout, we may also be including some kind of pedestrian activated signals. And so the issue of having to maintain signals and also whether signals might get hit by cars or not could also be a problem with a roundabout. So I just wanted to mention that, that's all. Yeah, but pedestrian signals don't, when they fail, the intersection doesn't fail. Most of it doesn't fail. Bernie, yeah, I'll see, I got you. Yeah, I was just gonna suggest to Marcus that if he got his food at El Camolito, he could get the monadove without crossing these streets. One of the things about this particular area is the businesses down there, the shops down there get a lot of traffic later in the day from folks that live in Amherst Woods and along Station Road and even parts of Belcher Town. Those folks take different routes when they commute to and from work, but they shop a lot down there. And that got demonstrated when the bridge was out. Those little businesses down in that section really suffered because they got cut off. So there would be a differential between morning traffic and afternoon traffic. I don't live far from there. I've not been down through there that much during the day but there is the office park. There are apartments there. I would suspect that there'd be more traffic midday. And also one of the important things, and maybe that goes on the list, is that today there is an amount of foot traffic. Tomorrow, we're hoping, we're expecting that there'll be more as that town center, that village center begins to develop. And so we do need to think about people that are not there yet, among others, think so. Eve. That was exactly what I was going to ask. Chris, what's the vision of what's the potential for future bike pedestrian and transit traffic through that intersection? Yeah, and I guess maybe to draw that point out a little bit more too, I was impressed when we were doing our work on the North Amherst intersection at how much traffic in 20 years has changed. And the life of this intersection is going to be certainly 20 years. And I don't know how good the predictions were 20 years ago, pre COVID, but I certainly would want to think about them going forward. You know, going forward. So I just, by the way, I've taken the decision to let this go on and set aside our marking up exercise, just because this is going very well. You know, I'm gonna add that, future, future-proofing. No, I'm not gonna say future-proofing, because I hate that. Look, having those kinds of things must have, those kinds of studies must have been done on this intersection, no? I don't know. Because, yeah, we certainly got those and that HOT intersection, that was a big... Right. Yeah, that was a big roundabout versus, and our support of a roundabout versus a signal. I imagine that part of our recommendation might be what studies, what research would need to be done to get to the right answer, and certainly a traffic survey. I'm sure there are, the Gilbert is already figuring out how to get that done and what it would be, but that would be one. I don't know if there's a reasonable way to extrapolate that into the future. That will be done. Yeah. And what are we gonna find there? You imagine, lots of traffic. I mean, how many tens of thousands of trips in a day go through there? You, it's actually, it's dropped off quite a bit. So what you'll probably find is that the traffic will be about, but it was pre-COVID in about another 10 years, five to 10 years. Is that long, you think? Yeah, I mean, so, I mean, some of the land uses in that area, like you have the school, the Montessori school, and you have the, like the gymnastics place and things like that. I mean, those are uses that don't have traffic now. I mean, I would be, I think I had brought up earlier that at an earlier meeting that I'd be hesitant, like if we base some of the future conditions in terms of the traffic volume based on what it is, like with COVID. The restaurants don't even have, right? Those are big draws, the restaurants and, you know, and the gas stations, nothing, because there aren't as many cars right now. No. So one thing too, I was thinking about, and I've seen in some of the comments as people talk about this intersection is also for students who are walking from Crocker Farm or from East Hadley Road. So how much, I mean, it's like a mile and, I don't know, maybe between a mile to two miles distance, but I was wondering how much, like is that, I mean, students who live that far away from Crocker, they do take the bus, right? They're not walking. I don't think, is that right? I mean, East Hadley Road students, East Hadley Road, well, it depends on the age of the students, but even East Hadley Road students are typically taking the bus. But just in terms of, like, if there was to be a roundabout there and there was gonna be more development just along that section of 116 between that intersection and coming into town, like making it more villagey because, right? We're talking about like the improvements at Graff Park and like the Shea Streets intersection. And so if you were, I mean, it could be, if you do have a roundabout there, it could send a message that it's like the beginning of like kind of a village corridor type thing. Like you're entering a more developed area and that you should be slower accordingly. And there could be other additional traffic calming along that corridor at some of the other intersections. Yeah, we're also gonna deal with the road crossing over at Knot Palmer, right? We were talking about it a while back with the bus stop. At Potwine? Potwine, so it's all kind of, Right. Yeah. So yeah, my crystal ball shows that there's a wetland to the north. And so maybe the development won't go that way much, but certainly south and east and west, there's room and activity. So, Kim. To your point, I mean, that wetland right now, everything narrows right there. And it's not gonna, we're not gonna get extensive sidewalks or that road is not gonna widen through that wetland. That's just more of that intersection. Well, isn't that where the sidewalk is closed right now? The one on the south, right, yeah. What's, Guilford, what's the timeframe on fixing that? Oh, it's in the works. Yeah. Oh. Six months, nine months, three years. No, I imagine by the end of the summer it should definitely be back in place if not a little sooner. Good. So I'm gonna note that on the map that we're not gonna work on tonight, that this was gonna be a purple line that came down over that narrow place in the road, even south. That's a good point, yeah. Yeah. Which will keep, at least through that part, it will keep the traffic at a minimum, you know, right there to your point, Tracy, which is just north of that. And to your point of like just slowing everything down because something's gonna have to happen at the graph park intersection as well. Like that's gonna happen. But also like, I know at one of the meetings, I think that in the district five meetings like people talked about it, like having signage and things like about it, you know, directional signs, like go see different parts of town, but also just sort of sending the messages like you've entered a village and that kind of thing. And so, I mean, Kim, you had asked about other intersections where, you know, where there are roundabouts. And as I said, that Kittleson database has a thousand of them. I mean, some of them are obviously more pedestrian friendly than others. I had just picked a couple, but like two of them, I took out of this one case study book that's got like lots and lots of examples. So, I mean. I just think it's really helpful in the sense that it might get, you know, like to me, the demographic information that you said in those communities was like 30%, you know, over 65 or something, which means, you know, people who, who perhaps want to go slower through intersections or maybe just want to enjoy their surroundings a little more. And that kind of, that might strike more of a chord with people. I mean, yeah, what, I mean, we must be above that though, right? Above 35% in terms of over 65, especially down that end of the tech. I don't know, actually, Marcus, I don't know the apartments back there have young families, so. Also south of that intersection, right? There is a big bank of like condos or something there too. Yeah. And we know from our talk about the pot wine intersection that there are lots of young families a little bit further to the south as well, so. But also those people have the same concerns, right? If you're with small children or you're just learning to ride their bikes, everyone wants to go through the section, intersections in safe way, so. Bernie, nope, I see the hand up. Well, I didn't because that's, because they didn't take it down. Oh, I see. Okay, that doesn't go down. You know, did you see that there's two Bernie's? Yeah. That's his twin brother. Right. So. There's two errands too, but that's. There's two errands, yeah, and the cat. But he's supposed to he wants. The cat wants to go inside. I'm planning on going to the TSO discussion next week on this. And is it okay if I sort of take a sense of, we don't, since we haven't put anything together and what I'm going to offer to Kim for next week, for next meeting is by my notes with the 10 considerations that we're considering or think should be considered into taking this decision so that we can work on that formally, but otherwise, is it right if I go and just offer synopsis of this discussion, which I would point out is leaning heavily to around about with, that is designed correctly and has some other accoutrements to provide for everybody who might be using it. Yeah. Great. Yeah, because I do think it's important that we have some kind of voice there, you know? Yeah. I mean, I guess I'm not really, I mean, there are, I mean, as I showed right, there can be positive attributes around about, I don't feel really tied to around about design. I do feel like a good, enhanced signalized intersection particularly with the turn lanes because that's like where you get the most backups of traffic. I mean, I would like to, if there is a signalized intersection there, maybe there can be additional traffic call we put in, like such as like, like drawing the curbs in and things like that to like narrow the road just to also speed the traffic down in the same way. Similar. I'll leave it as a slightly towards roundabouts. I mean, the concerns for the visually impaired pedestrians, it does concern me a lot, so. Yeah. Yeah, no, that's, and not only because of the effects on visually impaired pedestrians, but that it's a common problem for any pedestrian, especially when there's mobile impairment and anything like that. All right, so good, thank you. I, before, before I invite Bruce to make his motion, I just wanted to say that I can't come to the meeting in two weeks, I'm going to get a new knee and I expect that I may not be entirely coherent having, having got that brand new knee that day. So we, we, we elected Kim to, to stand in my place when these things happened. So I'm going to, she doesn't know this yet. She knew that, but she doesn't know this, that I'm going to offer that she, she handled the weekly phone call to put together the agenda as well. I mean, there's, there's some big decisions to take and some, some complicated things, but I like to touch bases with, with Guilford, you know, late, late next week, so that we can get everything pulled together. Um, I just have a quick comment. Do you want to, I'm sorry, Bruce, I saw you. I did see you. Yes, Bruce. Do you want to do the minutes quickly? Sure. But just, if there's not, if there's not further discussion on that, if Kim is okay with that. May I just ask if Marcus is okay? Cause I see he has a bandage on his head. Well, that's why I was going to, I was going to make Aaron feel bad about just having his knee replaced. I've got a new head. It didn't work. I'm still here. I'm sorry. It didn't work. You're okay. I'm fine. I had a skin graft last week, last week. Sometime, last week. Oh. And stuff. Speedy recovery to you. Thank you. Speedy recovery, Marcus. And a speedy recovery to you, Aaron. Yes, yes. Actually, you know, in a, in a way, I'm looking forward to it. Just, just dragging this thing around has been, been a big deal lately, more lately. So, so minutes, did everybody here, many of us get a chance to read them? There are two, we'll go back a month. Tracy. I would make us request that we don't receive the minutes, like just a few hours before the meeting. I just don't always have time to look at them. And so, I mean, I know that Amber's minutes are great and she does a great job. Well, I'm happy to take that as a suggestion that we postpone these minutes until next time. We can put it on our agenda for next week. I mean, it's fine. Well, that way. But, but Guilford, you've, you've still got to tell Amber how much we appreciate her getting up in the evening. She gets into us at that moment. It's there. It's, I'm super impressed and very appreciative. Yes, Tracy, you wanted to finish that. And I saw you. Oh, for the minutes. Yes, it's, I know that there's some committees that still don't have somebody taking minutes for them. And as somebody who used to take the minutes for the public transportation and bike committee, I'm grateful whenever anybody else takes minutes. I always. Yes, having, having been a secretary for new meeting, yes, I appreciate that too. Eve. I just wanted to make the practical suggestion that we used to do in TAC, which was just give a couple of minutes for people to look the minutes, you know, because a lot of people don't always get to it ahead of a meeting. And if you just make the make five minute window to look it and think about the minutes rather than a one minute window, then it is just, it works. Yeah. Just a thought. Okay. No, we, we, we always run over even if we don't spend time reading. So Tracy. So I just have a quick question about, so Chris had mentioned that TSO will be discussing the Pomeranian intersection on the eighth and the 22nd of April. So our next meeting is on April 1st. And Erin, you won't be here. So I'm assuming that we'd want to provide some written comments to the TSO before their discussion on the eighth. And I just wanted to just check with people about the logistics of how we thought we would do that. So what I will offer is are my notes with the 10 bullets that tonight that you could take as a starting point to put something together next time, but just the frame to frame the comments. And let that be the big task for next time. Darn, I'm gonna be missing it. Well, and we could, I mean, sorry. We could also circulate something after the meeting for comment and just, you know, be aware of the open meeting law requirements like where we're not commenting in real time, but that would still be a chance. Well, so let me send this directly, maybe tomorrow. And I'll let comments flow back to Kim if that's okay. I mean, I'm increasing your workload now, Kim. I'm noticing this so that that can be pulled together for the next meeting, that's a good idea. Yeah, let's do that. And I will offer to help Kim if she wants help. Sure, yep. Thank you. Yeah, two doesn't count. Good, that's it. Thank you, thank you, everybody. Bruce. I moved the weird turn. Thank you so much. We'll see you in a month. Yes. Good luck. And I'll be spying. Good luck, Erin. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Bye. Good luck, Erin. Bye. Thank you.