ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES

May 4, 2016

 
CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. in Council Chambers, 1175 East Main St.
Regular members present: Chair Dave Young, Pam Hammond, Marie Donovan, Michael Dawkins, John Williams, Joe Graf, John Fields, Lisa Beam (left at 4:45), Cynthia Rider, Lynn Thompson (left at 5:08) and Joe Collonge
Regular members absent: Emile Amarotico
Ex officio (non-voting) members present: Katharine Cato, Michael Faught, Mike Gardiner, Pam Marsh, and Sandra Slattery
Ex officio (non-voting) members absent: Lee Tuneberg, Bill Molnar, and Rich Rosenthal
City of Ashland Staff members present: Tami De Mille-Campos
 
ANNOUCEMENTS
 
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of April 6, 2016
 
Minutes approved as presented.
 
PUBLIC FORUM
Karen Chapman, owner of Bloomsbury books, resides at 112 Almond Street
She shared that many small towns around the country have lost their downtown businesses as they face the reality of competition from online retailers and the big box stores. Ashland has been fortunate to retain a vibrant downtown core with many interesting stores. The business owners and Chamber of Commerce have worked hard to attract customers to downtown Ashland. Bloomsbury Books supports local schools and organizations through donations and fundraising auctions. She also mentioned that many of the businesses are ticket outlets for the local theater productions and music. The downtown businesses employ many people and the profits stay local rather than going out of state to corporate headquarters. Now they are faced with the possibility of eliminating more parking spaces which would make it more difficult to shop local. Losing parking spaces and the proposed 3 to 2 lane configuration on East Main Street would mean the customers will discover that Ashland is too difficult of a place to shop and visit. She said it may be good for some who would like to see Ashland traffic free but it is not good for the economy. She would like to see people encouraged to shop local.
 
John Brenes, works at Music Coop with his wife (268 East Main), resides at 501 E. Ashland Lane
He said he isn’t too sure what the reason for this is. He has heard it is loading zones, bicycle lanes etc. If it is a bicycle lane, it could be put down B Street. The biggest complaint he hears from his customers is that parking is an issue.  He can’t imagine why anyone is thinking about taking more parking places away from the merchants. He feels this needs to be thought through in a better way. This is something that would negatively impact every downtown merchant and the hundreds of people that drive to Ashland everyday looking for a place to park. This will cause more congestion, and more circling around the block because there isn’t enough parking. He added before 18 parking spaces are taken away let’s find an alternative where people can park their cars. 
 
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
Donovan read a letter to the committee (see attachment).
 
Graf corrected one thing that Donovan said which was that the Transportation System Plan was developed jointly by the Transportation Commission and the Planning Commission, not just the Transportation Commission.
 
Faught said the main purpose for today’s meeting was to make sure we have everyone’s questions and issues and make sure we understand all of them so we can come back with the answers to those.
 
Hammond said this has been a hard committee to serve on for many reasons. Mostly because we are here to keep an eye on what the goal is. She has said many times that she refuses to look at anything that says parking will be lost. Recently she is also concerned with disruption to the downtown businesses and who is paying for it. That has been said over and over and we really haven’t gotten the answers yet.
 
Faught said we are just starting with the multi-modal part. He said as staff we have been really clear that we understand the only way this is going to work is if we make those 18 parking spots whole again. He said we are equally working on the parking strategy. He shared with the audience that losing parking has been key to this entire group throughout the process and he didn’t mean to minimize that.
 
Chair Young wanted to go on record as saying that two years ago he told Faught repeatedly that before we roll out this multi-modal plan those parking spaces better be made whole first. It wasn’t done and here is the result. He is sorry it turned out this way because now we have a lot of people whose dander is up because they perceive the committee as being flippant about this.
 
Hammond said “dander” might not be the right word but they all have responsibilities to a lot of people and are very concerned that they are able to keep their employees there and on the job. Their livelihoods are really on the line and we can’t discount that in any way.
 
Collonge said last month when we were talking about this new striping and stuff, being an innocent guy who does electrical design, he wasn’t sure how that could be a big deal and thought you would just repaint the stripes at night. He discovered that the cost of doing this because of all the infrastructure and underground utilities, was about five to six million dollars and you don’t do five to size million dollars’ worth of road construction in a day. That surprised him because he didn’t realize that impact by simply looking at the plan. Whatever block of time you take to do the work, it is going to be a disruption and at some point maybe it isn’t worth it for that kind of cost?
 
Fields said he was looking for the mission statement because we spent several weeks talking about it and then never discussed it again, he isn’t sure how on course with that we actually are. The first two and a half years was all about parking. A lot of energy was put into it and after two and a half years we ended up with a format for putting together another committee who would study parking! Then the last two meetings multi-modal has been incorporated and is the biggest cost to the plan. He thinks if you would have flipped it and spent two and half years talking about multi-modal and two meetings talking about parking that may have been a better distribution of the effort that is required. He said their goal was to capture 300-400 parking spaces and if we believe in the 85% rule as outlined in the plan and that part is effective then if the parking problem is resolvable, it gets resolved with that. The bigger problem though, is the redesign of the flow and making the downtown truly multi-modal which is very complicated and expensive. The question is, how long will this part of the process take to really find out the costs and will people support it? He said it is always a question of do you create a plan and then let people respond to it or do you tell people what it costs and then have them shoot it down; either way it is a painful public process. He isn’t sure where this committee is going. He forgot they were going to be working on the redesign; he thought the redesign would be handled on the planning side. Faught said we can talk about strategies but at this point we want to make sure we have everyone’s key questions and concerns.
 
Cato found and read the statement of purpose: “To support the development of a vibrant, growing, and attractive destination for shopping, entertainment, recreation, living, and working. The components of this plan need to be simple and intuitive for the user, providing an understandable system that is affordable, safe, secure, and well-integrated into other access options (i.e., transit, bike and walk).”
 
The committee pointed out that statement was directed at the parking piece of the plan.
 
Graf said he goes back and forth on what is the best way to do things and finally he decided that it is important to try to get the multi-modal piece accomplished because that is an important part of the Transportation System Plan (TSP). There is a hole in the multi-modal circulation system and we need to solve that. If we don’t solve that, he believes we will have failed. At the same time, he recognizes that the plan as outlined gets rid of critical parking spaces so he decided to come up with this list of all of the potential parking spaces close by, where we could try to make those spaces whole again. He said when he hears people talking about six million dollars it scares him because it feels like it is six million dollars to put in a bike lane. The difficulty is how to tease apart what is streetscape; bike lane, multi-modal, loading zones etc. and which of those are going to be disruptive to the businesses and cost a lot of money as opposed to not being disruptive. He thinks if we can take care of those parking spaces then there are all kinds of ways to work through the “might as well’s” that he would lump into the streetscape plan. We would love to have a beautiful streetscape but maybe we can’t afford six million dollars for that. Maybe we can do some kind of phased approach as a way to test things. Once the parking spaces are made whole he would really like to see what it is going to cost to do each part of the plan so that way the committee can make the choice as to what is most important.
 
Thompson said her assumption is that you go out and try to find outside funding for this. If you are seeking grant funding and the funding is tied to multi-modal aspects then it is going to be important to see what a program that meets those requirements would look like She isn’t sure if you design a plan first and then seek funding but she feels it might also be a good idea to keep in mind what it might require in order to get funding.
 
Dawkins shared he doesn’t feel it has been a waste of two and a half years. This is the way the process works. When the TSP process was going on they reached this piece of it and recognized they couldn’t deal with the downtown element and still deal with the rest of the transportation system. Half way through this process there was a notion that this committee should maybe split into different sub committees to address some of the elements separately, such as multi-modal and parking but that isn’t feasible because this is a whole process with all of the elements working in conjunction with each other.
 
Cologne said if we are going to do it right for the next twenty or thirty years, there are a lot of things that we aren’t addressing now that we should make arrangements to do (conduit under the streets for future parking meters). In other words, if you’re going to dig the sidewalks and streets up, you might as well do it once for the next fifty years so you don’t have to do it again. In order to do that you have to do the long range plan on what it would cost to incorporate all of those things.
 
Faught thanked everyone for their feedback. He reminded the committee that part of the motivation to delay the downtown piece of the TSP was in part so the impacted businesses would be represented during the process. He said he thinks Dawkins is right, it is one system. He thinks there are some components that if some of the concerns can be addressed (cost, cost benefit, construction delays etc.), might make this an easier process to move forward. All of those questions are going to be answered. He spoke to Thompson’s point about funding and stated that he sees the funding coming from grants. Downtown projects historically have been popular for grants. But that requires a plan to be adopted before receiving a grant. He shared with the committee that we had applied for a grant not too long ago and it got kicked out because there wasn’t an adopted plan. He feels confident we can find grants for this but only if there is full support of the plan. If it isn’t supported we wouldn’t stand a chance from the political arena to get any kind of funds. Al Densmore who is in the audience agreed with that statement. Faught shared with the committee that Al is the one who is out there lobbying for some of our other projects. He informed the committee that we could slow down on the multi-modal piece. He thinks the parking component that Rick Williams did is pretty simple and straight forward but the multi-modal piece is really important that we get figured out and make sure there is support for it. He said him and Parducci will work diligently to try to get the questions answered fairly quickly, it could mean a couple of months of trying to find the answers and solutions. OBEC is already looking at cost estimates which include looking at everything we need for the next fifty years. He plans to have Jaime Jordan from OBEC here to talk about those cost estimates. His goal is to have some concept ready to go for public involvement in October/November.
 
Chair Young said he agreed with Collonge’s recommendations to include looking at what is needed in the long range plan. He also spoke to Donovan’s earlier comment regarding the downtown businesses not being included in the TSP process. He said that wasn’t the case, as the two commissions were working, Faught brought the white papers to the Chamber board and let them see some ideas about potential treatments to the downtown. At which point, Hammond came as President of the Chamber board to read a statement (with well taken points) similar to what Donovan read today and Slattery recently read to this committee. Then the Mayor came and cautioned them to be careful dealing with the downtown.  Then the two commissions decided to “kick that can down the road”. It wasn’t for a commission not including the downtown business members. He feels that is important to point out. Hammond pointed out that after that she was appointed to the Transportation Commission and stepped down as the chair of the Chamber board. Young said after that point for the next year or so the Transportation Commission deferred everything relating to the downtown pending this committee forming. There was a lot of thought given about needing to include the stakeholders by him and others. With that said, he added we throw around the term multi-modal a lot. Multi-modal just means, other modes of transportation (transit, bicycles, pedestrians, skateboards, scooters, and cars). The real term he thinks we need to be keeping our eye on is, multi-modal equity. That is the term that is used across the world to show there is equal standing given to other forms of transportation. If multi-modal equity is looked at then there is something to actually measure and weigh things against. He also shared, all of the points and concerns that have been brought up by the downtown businesses are extremely respected and well taken and he too would feel concerned at a major change if he owned something in the downtown. His vision, or rather his opinion, is that currently there is a bicycle lane coming into the downtown from the north and it ends abruptly at the north end of the downtown and then begins again at Siskiyou Blvd. There is no continuity, so if anyone thinks the argument is that they don’t see many people on bikes, it is because the bikes can’t get anywhere seamlessly. In modal equity, it is only fair that people have an equitable stake in the transportation system and can choose another mode of transportation such as a bicycle. His opinion is if people are concerned about taking parking spaces to put in bicycle lanes, we could do a pilot program as one option.
 
Parducci said when we are talking about this multi-modal aspect, it comes directly out of the goals and policies of the City of Ashland. It is the city’s goal to incorporate and encourage this multi-modal component; it isn’t something new that is being suggested. This cannot be done if some of these options in the downtown area aren’t considered. She feels it is important for everyone to focus back in on why we are all here and why we are looking at these scenarios and projects. We have gotten off track because this 3 to 2 lane conversion has some misconceptions that got out into the public and then people felt like we were taking the parking away. However, the goal has never been to take any parking away. The goal has always been that we are going to replace every parking space that is proposed to be eliminated. She feels like if everyone can focus on what the actual goal is a lot of these misconceptions will go away because the 3 to 2 lane is one of many projects being proposed as part of this multi-modal component. They always thought it would be sufficient to inform everyone that these spaces were being lost but would somehow be made whole again and that was going to be adequate but it sounds like this committee wants more than that. This committee wants to know where those spaces are going to be coming from. She said they are up for that task and she wanted the committee and the audience to know that. They are looking at the ideas that Graf gave them, and she spent an afternoon looking at aerials to see where other parking spaces could be picked up. They recognize that the details are important for this committee and the businesses.
 
Cologne said it is important for the plan to show that the trucks will no longer be loading and unloading while parked in a thorough lane, they will be in designated loading zones.
 
Thompson said she thinks it is important for the downtown businesses to see the loading zone plan because she noticed in a couple of the block sections the loading zone is located only on one side of the street and not on the other. She wonders if that will be feasible for the businesses. Faught said early on he did meet with the local trucking agencies and those loading zones were strategically placed base on their feedback. Parducci said that is something that definitely needs to be addressed to ensure that the businesses receiving deliveries are able to accommodate them.
 
Parducci walked through the list of Conditions/concerns expressed by the committee which was included in the meeting packet.
 
Parking fees used for parking related uses - This needs to be explained better within the document.
 
Costs for improvements - Make sure to break the costs out.
 
Where are the funds coming from - if the grant funding doesn’t happen how will it be paid for? And if grant funding isn’t available which projects would be completed and which would not?
 
Timeline for building the package - how long it will take from when the plan is approved until we get the funding and then construction begins?
 
Parducci informed the committee that we recently learned from ODOT that they had applied and received grant funding for a signal at Main and Water Street so we now have money available if we choose to signalize that intersection. We are going to add it into the scenario and evaluate that.
 
Parducci mentioned she had recently thought about how Lithia is two lanes of traffic and Main is three. Lithia handles the same amount of traffic as Main Street carries so she doesn’t think it is a matter of capacity but rather a matter of pedestrian volume and parking is much more utilized on Main Street than it is on Lithia. She really feels like the two lanes on Main are going to be adequate in the future as long as it works on Lithia and there is nothing that shows in the projections that it isn’t going to work on Lithia. Beam said the one difference you have between the two is that you have significantly more merchant based businesses on Main Street than you do on Lithia. The needs of people parking on those two streets are drastically different. Parducci agreed that you do have more disruptions in traffic on Main Street because of people pulling in and out of traffic stalls. Kato shared that she sees more traffic and that Main Street is more utilized but people are more tempted to use that 3rd lane to go quicker through town and that poses safety issues. Parducci agreed that the 3rd lane is underutilized and is more of a convenience lane for getting around people or getting through the downtown quicker. She added it does take some time to wrap your head around whether or not it is ok to have a little bit more congestion in your downtown area. Sometimes that is thought of as a negative thing to have congestion but in terms of businesses, there are many studies that show the positive economic impact that has when vehicles aren’t flying through the downtown. You want cars moving slowly through the downtown and people taking interest in the things around them.
 
Chair Young asked if there is maybe a hybrid version to look at in terms of diagonal parking on the streets. For instance on Third Street, which is a pretty low traffic street, the Transportation Commission has never received any complaints from the diagonal parking aspect except for sight lines. His thought is, possibly at looking at some configuration on Oak Street that would accommodate diagonal parking on one side. He isn’t advocating for it but he wonders if it might create more parking. Parducci answered yes and said that is what we are going to look at when looking at Graf’s ideas. They are going to step back and look at every potential street that angled parking could be incorporated. Some of the streets are too narrow to accommodate angled parking but they are going to look at those things.
 
Rider shared one of the things she doesn’t think we ever came to a recommendation about was regarding the downtown employees and where they are supposed to park. Faught said the work that Rick Williams has done gives us a methodology to get to the employee parking and that is the other offsite locations for employees. That is where the next committee or the employee that we hire, will begin to start fostering those relationships and contracts between privately owned lots and businesses.
 
Slattery said one of the things that we haven’t listed is that the two components of the draft plan feel very piecemeal and she thinks we need to take a look at having someone such as an urban designer or someone who has the expertise in creating something that looks good as well as functions. It feels like that piece is missing so she thinks that is something that should be considered when looking at costs. If we are going to create this expectation of cost we really need to take a look at that urban design and how it functions and all of the pieces such as wayfinding, lighting, landscaping, planters etc. Those are all real costs and she would hate for everyone to move forward with one piece because it seems financially acceptable and then in reality we end up with a community that doesn’t look as good as it looks now. Chair Young asked Slattery how she sees that happening. She said she doesn’t see this happening with just staff and if we are going to do something of this scale we really want somebody who has some experience.
 
Williams echoed that because he thinks this is also something the community would really support. If you go to cities like Boulder, Colorado that have great street design and aesthetics it makes a huge difference and attracts tourists and people into business areas.
 
Slattery said she thinks of our downtown as an economy and it is great that people want to ride their bikes through downtown, which she isn’t saying isn’t important, but in terms of what the downtown is, it is our core economic driver for this community. She can’t anticipate anyone supporting this plan if it is just about 3 lanes to 2 lanes. She thinks the only way it is going to be supported is if there is some kind of vision that people would see it as a benefit. She said there may be some social benefit to doing this but she has yet to be convinced that there is economic benefit. It’s really a community decision as to what the cost benefit is.
 
Councilor Marsh said the committee has been tasked with parking and transportation but there is a much larger global issue out there and right now the downtown merchants are seeing lots of sticks and not a lot of carrots out of this process. The urban design which includes what we want the downtown to look like and how we want it to function is the carrot, the opportunity that exists to renovate the downtown so we are prepared for the future generations. She speculates from the Council’s point of view that is going to be front and center because it doesn’t make any sense to go down this path if we don’t have the wherewithal and desire to focus on what this whole thing adds up to. Chair Young asked if she sees this as transportation can’t exist by itself. She said the downtown area is all a part of an organism and transportation is a part of it. If you are tearing out sidewalks and taking out planters, what you are doing is beginning that re-imagination of what the downtown should look like and how it should feel. Chair Young asked if she holds open the possibility of phasing, without tearing up streets for a while to enact some transportation infrastructural changes, which may be tweaking the parking habits to allow a bicycle connection through downtown? He said what he is hearing her say is that we don’t want to consider doing anything unless we have the whole package. Councilor Marsh said she isn’t prepared to speak to that question but what she does think is that we are going to want to pursue the question of urban design in our downtown and this is the opportunity to do that.
 
Williams said he thinks it is also an issue of scale and he thinks the scale of this thing is big enough that it is worth looking at (urban design). Chair Young said he agrees that urban design has to happen. He has been a little surprised that the planning department hasn’t been here because they at least as a City department are much more into the urban design aspect. He just wonders if functionality from a transportation standpoint has to be kicked down the road for more years at the expense of possibly considering the urban design.
 
Dawkins reemphasized that when they looked at the TSP, there were 5 white papers regarding urban design and that is where they got hung up (should we have places for people to eat, should there be planters etc). He would say to what Young is asking, that the urban design is the most important thing and he sees a lot of the community not wanting to support what Young wants to do (doing an experiment to see whether or not in works). He feels we need to look at the overall plan and fit that component into it. He said the community got together at the Armory about 15 years ago to talk about what they wanted the town to look like and a lot of the same ideas were talked about.
 
Graf said we can think too small and make a big mistake or we can think too big and it is so scary that nobody wants to do it. The challenge is to find the happy medium so we come out with a fundamentally better downtown that is done right, and that is the hard part.
 
Thompson said when looking at the drawings she was concerned with the width of the loading zones on the right lane and wonders if a truck fits, especially with a proposed bicycle lane and widened sidewalks too. Another concern she continues to have is with the loss of the signal at Helman and the break in the traffic that it creates and allows traffic coming from Church Street and going up Church Street.  Also whether Laurel Street is going to create enough of a break in traffic so that people will be able to get across because there will be a funnel of traffic coming along Lithia Way. It is hard right now and she worries about that being increasingly difficult. Similarly, Bush Street doesn’t have a true lane in the middle so she wonders without breaks in traffic if people are going to be able to safely turn left onto Main Street from Bush. Parducci said there would be a middle turn lane as part of the plan and it doesn’t show in the drawings because the beginning point they were showing was from where the transition currently begins. They will be sure to extend that so it is clear for everyone to see in the drawings.
 
Graf said something recently came up in a discussion he was having regarding the 3 lane to 2 lane and he thinks it needs to be addressed somewhere in the document; if there are trucks loading on both sides of the road and a third truck shows up to deliver within that block and decides to block one of the lanes of traffic leaving only 1 lane of traffic open, how will we handle that? Faught said in his meetings with the trucking agencies that was a very important point brought up and to ensure that doesn’t become a problem there would be police enforcement if the truck does stop in the lane, or they could pull onto one of the side roads to avoid that. He was really clear to the trucking agencies about not allowing that to happen.
 
Hammond said there are all sorts of different types of deliveries and for her she gets pallets of deliveries which would be a challenge to move from a block away.
 
Donovan asked how emergency vehicles would handle getting through downtown with the 3 lane to 2 lane conversion; say there is only one free lane of traffic due to delivery trucks and the one lane of traffic is backed up? She was curious if the modeling can show something like that. Parducci said she could show that on the modeling and how the traffic would back up, but that would probably be no different than what happens currently when there are two trucks on opposite sides of the road loading at the same time.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chair Young said it sounds like initially we would do advanced communication with the downtown businesses and the trucking agencies. Also have something that the businesses can give to the truck drivers and pretty soon they will start understanding what the expectation is. Faught said there will probably be long term enforcement which will be a critical component to this working long-term.
 
Parducci said if anyone comes up with anything else they can email staff.
 
The next discussion topic was the list of potential parking space locations that Graf had submitted to staff. Graf joked that he is a Scientist but he is not a parking expert. He looked at the maps and came up with potential spaces, hoping that staff would vet them first before putting them out there. Faught said he was just so happy that Graf had done that and he wanted to get that out to the committee to see if it spurred any other ideas from other committee or community members. He pointed out that it actually generated an idea from Brandon Goldman in the Planning department about some potential angled parking on Water Street that we are going to look at. Staff encourages everyone to start thinking of ideas.
 
Parducci said she had planned to go through and point out some of the key concepts that were brought up and then staff will look at each of these in detail and come back to the committee with a summary.  
 
Chair Young asked if some of the truck loading zones could revert to normal parking at noon instead of 4:00 pm. Parducci said in talking to this group today she feels a lot stronger about needing to observe the truck loading/unloading in the downtown. She said they didn’t do it before because it costs a lot of money to have a lot of people logging there observations all day long for several days and then compiling all of the data. In the beginning, they didn’t want to do that but she thinks maybe that is something we need to do now. Once we have a better picture of that then she thinks we can answer some of those questions.
 
Dawkins said about a year ago he had asked Faught about a section along Granite Street, heading towards Nutley. A section of curb is painted yellow and is unutilized. There is also more curb painted yellow on the other side of the street. Having some familiarity with that street, he feels it can handle more parking there. Faught said we hadn’t looked at it yet but we would take a look at that. Another thing we would look at is painting parking stalls so that people don’t leave huge gaps.
 
The parking space near Chase bank that was removed from the loss count is being added back in as a loss, taking the total to 19 spaces even though the space is only 13 feet long. So they will be sure to account for that additional loss and make up for it.
 
Parducci said the plan is to review all of these at the next meeting and then the next few months will be spent putting this into a document for the committee to review.
 
Slattery pointed out the morning of the next meeting (June 1, 2016) is when they are having the public meeting that they are sponsoring so they will have a lot of feedback for this committee at the meeting.
 
Fields said he is trying to visualize, if you take out the Helman light and you take out the Beaver Slide (he lives on Oak Street) how people will be able to get onto Main Street from the loop road.
 
Parducci said she was here counting during the time the film festival was going on which was a very interesting time to be doing counts. They had 368 pedestrians in one movement at Pioneer/Main in an hour which is a lot. She said she thinks they have a pretty good feel for what peak conditions are like in the downtown. She said she personally counted at Helman because she wanted to watch it. She got to see how far it cued up when the light was red and how it affected people trying to get into that loop road. If you can visualize that no longer being signalized and cars being able to gradually move through there, that cue will go away and open that up for the loop road. She has been previously told that everyone crossing at Helman is old, and they walk slowly. She said that was such a misconception because she would say 80% of the people she saw cross there were not old at all. Slattery said to keep in mind that it also depends on the day because there could have been a school group or something like that and that is why she saw a lot of younger people.
 
Chair Young said it was too bad Thompson had already left because he was curious if it might be possible to consider eliminating the ability to cross over to Church and have it be only a left turn onto Main Street? He asked if those people needing to get onto Church could turn onto Granite and then go up to High Street and onto Church. He said that would be a little bit of a detour but he wondered if that could be modeled. Parducci said you could model that to see if it works but her concern is that you would be putting people into a weave where they have to pull in and find a gap and then move over to the right lane so they can turn pretty quickly onto Granite Street. Young said that is true but they are going to have that difficulty anyways. Graf said the other possibility would be for people to go to Bush, then to High and then to Church.
 
Faught thanked the committee for clarifying these and said staff would work quickly to try to get all of these answered.
 
NEXT STEPS
The next meeting will be held on June 1, 2016 at 3:30 p.m.
 
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 5:30 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Tami De Mille-Campos, Administrative Supervisor