e e e e e okay welcome to the traffic commission meeting on June 20th 2024 uh let us stand for pledge of allegiance Al flag United States of America stand Nation indivisible andice for all yeah uh sure okay yeah okay uh traffic commission members present this evening include Chris cherell DPW superintendent Nick rrom city engineer uh Chief Chris brigh fire department and I'm Frank stringy city planner we're going to move to the uh a request which is the last request to make from councilor McKenna this is number five correct this is established two lanes on Winter Avenue heading towards Broadway between low Street and Beach Street at imaculate conception to provide for a right turn lane onto Beach Street left turn lane straight Lane for Beach Street and Winter Avenue and also establish two lanes on Beach Street from Harrington Street to win Avenue heading towards Winter Avenue to provide for right turn lane onto Winter Avenue and left turn straight Lane for Winter Avenue B Street counselor you'd like to speak thank you uh jir McKenna W one counselor um I'm just asking for um some line um linage uh some arrows and some lines because the the uh two lanes are already created it's just you know I mean it's been created for the last I have no idea probably seven eight years but there's no there's no lines to separate those cars and I'm just afraid of accidents so it's a safety concern but those lines I mean people line up on the left side and the right side in front of uh Immaculate Conception to take a a right to Beach Street or go straight to um win Bava go left to Beach Street and the same thing on the other side so what we're going to have to do here we're going to have to uh um take a measurement of the width of the roadway because those travel lanes and turn Lanes have to be a minimum of 10 ft okay so I we have to see if we can get them both in there we're going to eliminate you have to eliminate parking on the right hand side on Beach Street as your head towards win through ble well you only have to uh just a quarter of a way just so before you come to the light right after where where the kids um play in the playground there would be no parking there and then people could just line up says from Harrington Street to Winter P Harrington street is right near uh the playground I don't think there's any houses or anything uh in between them there might be one house yeah the only thing parents line up there and park their vehicle waiting for the kids to come out of school but we'll we'll send that through and Nick maybe take a look at that see if the with I mean it's already being done EX in there it's already being done you know it's just I know line up there doesn't mean it's legally if we we allow it has to be within you know uh the accepted practices for L okay with okay all right thank you take a look at it going to uh okay we're going to public hearings representative of the MBTA would like to have a discussion on regarding the mbta's but better bus Network Improvement plans for the 110 and the 116 bus routs possible changes include consolidating stops on the east side of Broadway and moving the stops to the west side Sidewalk improvements on Broadway at the new bus stop locations and this would eliminate the MBTA need for the access road through to the fire station um I believe there was a presentation at last meeting wasn't it lari yes I believe so this is the public hearing and so the public hearing is for these specific changes so if you would like to speak anybody from the NBTA that would like to present the proposed plan and what you were requesting from the traffic commission yes C it off God I'm quick I like to keep things moving you know so the last time you were here we discussed some modifications to the proposed plan including eliminating the stop on parav and consolidating with the stop on Broadway if it makes sense I can jump straight to the proposal or I'm happy to do a recap of the background if that would be I think we we that was accomplished last meeting okay this is the public hearing to to okay actually vote on the changes the MBTA is requesting Great Is there a way to oh might just take a minute for them to have it up they might be waiting for you to actually SL like show open okay yeah great oh no did they break it okay so we're having some technical difficulties so we can we'll just swing it we'll just swing it I Chief okay oh good you you all have a copy of it at least excellent okay so yes the The Proposal that we brought um apologies to the last presentation um is to consolidate the stops on the east side of Broadway and move stops to the West Side add sidewalks improvements on Broadway at the new bus stop location um and this would also end the mbta's business need for the access road to the central fire station um that is a proposal we brought and I am happy to take questions I think the concern last time and and I believe you're going to have some backup data from your transportation Engineers regarding how that affects overall volume of traffic flow on Broadway mhm and I know there is specialized uh signalization that would give special treatment for the buses and would allow things to move a lot quicker than they do now absolutely if that can be explained great give us breakdown have you to okay I had some great visuals but um if you go to for those of you with a picture to slide 17 um this is a proposed uh Q jump phase and so page we did the calculations of how many I Les we would anticipate with the updated service plan mhm sorry uh slide 17 is that page 17 uh presumably maybe page 18 it just say proposed Q jump phase oh the one you've got your hand on right there okay this one nope keep going that one yes got it I can do this at least for folks over my shoulder um so the proposed uh the proposed reconfiguration just to recap would add a a shared right turn lane and bus lane on the curb at Broadway and Central and Broadway at Park in each the Northbound and the southbound Direction directions on the Northbound side of Broadway before Central AV we're proposing a shared bus stop for the 110 and 116 as part of the bus lane installation we would add a Transit signal head um that would give a uh Transit only signal to the buses to pull back into traffic to continue straight on Broadway we did um at the last hearing there were questions about the impacts of the transit signal uh cycle on the intersection operations um the proposed signal cycle would add 10 seconds of protected movement for the bus which could travel straight and at the same time any vehicles in the right turning lane would have the AB ility to continue right either ahead of the bus or following behind it after it's continued straight into the intersection the need for this uh Transit signal head is because on the far side of the intersection um is parking and so the bus would have to merge left into oncoming traffic from the right hand lane so this makes that a safer an easier operation this signal is about is 10 seconds long we anti anticipate it being called 10 times an hour so that's 100 seconds Which is less than 2 minutes of time an hour that would be reallocated to the bus movement away from straight traveling vehicles I do want to underscore that right turning Vehicles which is also a heavy movement through that intersection would continue to be able to travel right during that signal so it doesn't stop all operations of the inter C so if the bus has stopped there mhm what about Vehicles taking a right around the bus onto Central Avenue so you mean traveling like on the left side back into the right Lan and going right certainly happens um those Vehicles during that signal would be able to have a permissive right hand turn um I would not advise a driver to do that I don't think that's illegal tra traffic movement to go around a bus but I thought there was something who said at the last meeting that somehow the signals themselves would notice that they would know that people are either getting on or off the bus and it would not turn green during that period right so the um the way that the transit signal works is that it catches the bus before it enters the intersection we put a sensor in advance of the intersection and we time it based on our anticipated amount of time that the bus will be stopped what we call dwelling um to let passengers on and off the bus at the intersection it would then insert this um special signal movement in the cycle um so that the bus is not stuck in that intersection longer than is necessary and is able to proceed out um does that answer the question that you had or or is there what can you help me um better understand I thought this the cameras themselves yes um like they would be more adaptive to I I thought the previous person that came up here said that they would not be called until the like the bus is closed so like the bus itself wouldn't be keeping people from making that right hand turn yes sorry so once the dwell is over the bus can pull forward um and we we would use a second uh camera so before the intersection there's a sensor and then at the intersection there's a camera we talked to the signal vendor and they they did confirm that the cameras are smart enough to tell the difference between a bus and a truck or a bus and a car um and they would know that the bus is in the location and prepared to pull away okay that is I think that's what was being described last time I think the key point that I really want to so basically the I'm just trying to ask it would limit the amount of time time that that bus is in the intersection in the intersection stop holding up that right hand lane that's correct B my concern okay yes um I do really want to underscore that with the the look that we did to understand how much time would be reallocated 93% of the straight movement right through the intersection would remain unaffected every hour this is a very very small change it's 10 seconds about 10 times an hour okay so this I I I see here there are a a number of proposals I had planned to not pull them up unless unless necessary um so I would I would advise you to look at the proposal on SL oh my goodness the image on slide 11 is the one that we're discussing so Frank would proposal to be part of this as well moving those stops further down the road can I clarify ify that yeah we have so we have three separate proposals that were part of what we were bringing to you for consideration the first part is a package so that's why they're named proposal 1 a 1 b c d those all would happen together we need all of those things to make the stop movement change uh work separate from that would be proposals two and three um so proposal two is to balance the 116 stops on Broadway by moving um the stops up to Mountain AV what this does is it makes the if you zoom out to the entire route we don't want stops very close together or very far apart too close together it slows a bus down too far apart it's very unpleasant for people walking um and so what this would do is put those stop spacing at a better interval um this is something that can happen or not happen um we would just not have a stop at Mountain nav if you um if you don't want that stop moved there um and the spacing would be a little bit longer than we prefer I think it's 1,300 ft which is within our guidelines but it's the outer edge of our guidelines can I just ask you a quick question so absolutely the stops that you're proposing uh to move to mount nav where where would they be located um so Mount nav if you're going north would they be located south of mountain naav correct both of them would be located south of mountain naav so the one going south even would be after the intersection uh yes we pref we tend to prefer Far Side stops they're easier for operators um to pull into my understanding is keeping the Northbound stop on the south side of mountain nav is so that it could be serviced by other bus routes that take a turn shortly after okay so those to add those you're were Lo there's two or three parking spots that need to go away correct correct so there would be um three sorry four parking uh spaces lost up by Mount nav I will say that at um oh this is so small at Fernwood um um you will be gaining two spaces um from the closed stop so the net impact is a loss of two though I do know locality does does matter sometimes those two yeah so these changes are shown with retaining the stops on Park on Broadway between Park and Central this one here is that right um I'm sorry so the changes you're proposing under proposal two and three include retaining the stops will you propose in between Park and and Broadway yeah move this that way and then that presumes that um the stops are relocated um to to Broadway so this is being presented as one package yes but I do want to say nothing proposal one proposal one is All or Nothing proposal two I think would be great for the bus operations but if we don't relocate the stops that's okay there's no point in doing it if we're not relocating the stops to Broadway yeah our concern there is loss of parking on Broadway for understandable proposal the mount value that's a that's a major consideration for the community um proposal three um similarly does is contingent on proposal one happening um and it's more a notification because we are in a public forum that we intend to close the inaccessible stop um in the driveway of the fire station and that we would again end our our business need um for that driveway so the buses would no longer travel through there with the new stops that have been installed again this proposal is contingent on relocating the stops um as part of proposal one so we have you as a proponent do we have any other proponents want to speak concerning this request okay one more thing item real quick I'm just sorry Tom um I just look down to the proposed signal movements yes with Broadway and park mhm so this would the sequence three in the packet yes with the Q jump face would only have to be utilized for the 116 that's it this is the 110 wouldn't utilize that okay no the 110 is is not so it's not all bosses going through the intersection it's just the 116 it's the 116 yeah correct and then the same going for Central LA would just be the 110 correct okay just the one taking the right yeah the 110 goes goes east west and the 116 goes north south and that's why we wanted to have them located in proximity to one another to make that north south to to East West transfer easier for the passengers that are going to be transferring between those two routes that's why this particular intersection is despite the challenges of the intersection where we've focused I got you thank you yes sorry to jump ahead are there any other questions from the commission members the presenter no just um you know the fire station right there at that intersection seems like you're moving everything closer to the fire station and every day I look out there there even this afternoon I even that video I mean it's just it's a nightmare I mean four cars line up in the queue if a bus is coming out Central to take a left there I mean this there it's just there's nowhere to go out there it's going to definitely uh impact us getting in and out of the fire station you know as far as the um the right away coming around the station that really doesn't impede us much mhm but this moving the the bus stop right um you know at the corner of parav um and the other bus drop going away at Walgreens that's a perfect location for a bus stop right there you're not taking away any parking spaces it's been there for a million years it just plenty of room there doesn't impede us so I I I have some major concerns with this and um you know don't have too much incentive to vote in favor of it other than perhaps given a trial some type of a trial basis for uh so um the concern that Chief has regarding the elimination of the stop at front of Walgreens is that necessary because of the uh the shot distance between the two stops now so yes I think we would not want to keep the stop at Walgreens and have the relocated stop in the southbound Direction um on Broadway or on right there on Park um it puts the spacing very very close together it's I think like 300 ft um which is is it'll make the bus go very very very slowly um so we would we do have an alternative configuration in here um where we essentially I do want to say the the reason we're here today is that we anticipate when we make these service changes there are about 500 new people who will be making this transfer um every weekday and we wanted to make that transfer as pleasant as possible it's not fun to transfer buses um and so having a stop that is both around the corner right if you're not familiar exactly with where you're finding the bus stop it's very helpful to have a direct line of sight to it so the closer in proximity that we can put the two stops to one another um the better and easier it is for those Riders um the the transfer as it would be where no changes made is 575 ft um fortunately those individuals Don't Have To Cross uh a street in the Northbound Direction so that is one upside um I one of the reasons that we split the 110 and 116 bus stops was in recognition of the sensitivity of the fire station so in the southbound Direction that's why there's the two stops one right around the corner on Park um and and one on Broadway um to to limit the number of buses that would be stopping in that location yeah that one you're moving though is right at Broadway in park I mean that's that's a problem mhm for us so so what what if we what if we did this um maintain the bus stop in the nauy direction between Park and Central and why can't we combine consolidate the stops where they presently are at front of Walgreens um because the 110 comes up Central it turn yeah it turns turns down Central I know I know we if if you look on slide 36 we do have a variation on the design where we solve the transfer problem essentially in the Northbound eastbound Direction and we leave as it currently is in the southbound westbound direction that would give us the opportunity to put this infrastructure in on one side of the street it would be the opposite side from the fire station and to see how it operates with this increase in bus operations after the service increase in December and we can come back next spring or summer and have a conversation about how things are going in the southbound and an westbound direction if that's something this commission would be interested in doing what are the members think about that I mean that would have less impacts on on the fire station and would allow us to better understand the movements that are going to be taking place can you just run through that again you so yeah so the southbound won't change but nor we would leave it as is Northbound you would have a new stop a new Consolidated stop across from or in front of the bank right yep in front of I believe that's Citizens Bank yeah and the one in front of uh the one in front of um Right Aid would disappear correct so we would close the r Aid stop we would retain the Walgreens stop um and we would close the stop in the fire uh Lane the fire driveway I don't know how to refer to that um so we would keep keep things as they currently are the tradeoffs there again are the the longer walk distance for folks making that transfer and we're unfortunately not able to upgrade the um stop like the physical stop um because of the constraints in the current location um if we moved it closer to the intersection there's space for us to build a shelter which is nice um but again we can treat this as a a step a stepping stone that's what I was thinking well we'll continue with the hearing and yes we'll ask for further proponents evening Commissioners Tom scy chief of planning and Community Development um so I know you've heard the presentation now twice but just to reiterate um Riv is one of a handful of communities that's going to be at the um tip of the spear as it were for the better bus Network redesign so this is a redesign taking place across the whole region that starts in R um and you know because we're one of the first communities to adopt this I think we bear some degree of responsibility for making sure that the better bus Network redesign is really better for the buses and I think in order for us to do that um we've got to make some decisions on how to ensure that the buses are moving along um efficiently and in a way that we can bring more folks into the MBTA bus system um I know from our master plan the number one concern we heard from residents was traffic congestion and one of the best things we can do is make sure that we have efficient Alternatives um to driving in cars and this is one opportunity we have to to do that now now I know that there are a lot of different tradeoffs that we're discussing and I know um you know speaking on behalf of Mayor Keefe he would prefer a tradeoff that does not take parking away from Park AV um a as was you know originally proposed and we appreciate the mbta's willingness to work with us on an alternative that lessens the impact um on Park AV to to parking um you know at the same time I would say our partners at MBTA have been working on this with us for over a year and a and we'll continue to be partners in this effort and you know what I would recommend to the commission is irrespective of what decision you uh ultimately fall upon I think we should have a trial implementation period that we um implement this and have have a look back similar to the discussion we had about Harris Street and the improvements there where you know whether it's 90 days some period of time afterward we're coming back as a community and reflecting on what works what does and tweaking things as as needed and I know MBTA is willing to be a committed partner in that effort and coming back to the table um you know I think particularly with Transit signal priority with Q jumping we have a lot of new technology that I think these tweaks are you know the efficacy of these tweaks really hinge on the efficacy of that technology so I think it's worth you know this is not um an untested technology it's been used elsewhere but but it'll be tested for the first time here in R so I think as we're testing it um we're going to need to treat it that way as as a pilot to see what works what doesn't and how how we might want to tweak things so I would just you know reiterate MBTA is a great partner in this effort and they're willing to be here at the table with us and to come back to the table so whatever decision you make let's let's make one that um you know we're confident in moving forward as a pilot and we're willing to come back later and monitor performance and adjust and tweak accordingly thank you are there any other proponents are there any opponents sorry hello Pao Riv police uh they're going to move are am I getting this right they are going to move two stops in the dog Lake as you come on where you make the left to go on to Broadway from parav and then make they're going to put the stops there is that what I'm looking at yeah that was the first proposal the stop would be a Consolidated stop in front of valaris on on Broadway in front of all ours on that side and then another one on the other side yes yeah yeah I got that's a even though I I know uh I know she said it was the 10-second cycle it's it's just that when you come off right there to come up and then now you add the people have to get on the bus with two stops it may not make a difference coming straight but when you're making a dog L it does make a difference when cars are trying to push into the turn LAN right there that's where I see the problem coming up with that one because that the bus will add the extra length of two two cars behind it so it would be one two with it three spaces of cars people trying to get on it will add time right as you're coming and to make the ride onto Central or to even go straight that's my only concern with that one that's why the proposal which um maintains the bus stop in front of Walgreens and maintains the bus stop on that's still coming from basically keeps it the way it is presently so also uh the other thing for the pedestrians I know it's a good deal for the buses here but uh that's a central part for a lot of people that I know they go to Walgreens that are disabled and a lot of them walk so now instead of moving it in front from instead of just leaving it there and I know it does make it simple for the buses but it does ADD a half maybe a half a block for either person which is fine for me but it may not be fine for a lot of people that do go there and have walkers and have canes that's my other concern uh and I do agree that that uh stop which is at the fire department should be taken away because I think that puts the bus drivers at a bad disadvantage because of traffic pedestrians and we know what happened one time that scenario would be done regardless of which proposal okay that would be eliminated thank you are there any opponents or anybody else who' like to speak hearing none seeing none I close this hearing close that part of the hearing um members what are your wishes and um concerns yeah our Central fire station is right at Ground Zero here um I wouldn't be comfortable with anything other than a maybe perhaps a pilot program for a certain amount of time and maybe incorporating proposal six to start with into uh in into this uh proposal so let us ask uh once again for proposal six we're maintaining the bus uh consolidated stop in the Northbound Direction on on parav between Pac I mean on Broadway between Pac and Central yes and and leave it as it currently operates today in the southbound westbound Direction that's proposal six yes hey um I'm kind of hesitant on that because the the only reason that being if we only meet them halfway if we do a 60-day trial period we're again going to have to do another 60-day trial period with the other Stu if we want to move forward you understand what I'm saying I I agree with that I I I think we're going to do a trial period or a pilot program for 90 days um we should lay out the program most preferred by the MBTA which is maintaining Consolidated stops on between PK and Central in both directions and uh have that for a 90day trial period we'll see what happens and uh if things have to be tweaked after that we'll come back yeah if I could make one request that we make it um a six-month period instead of a 3-month period um it's going to be new operations for for the bus operators it's a massive service increase and it's going to start in the Deb of winter I would having done a number of performance evaluations on bus lanes and bus programs in the past 3 months is a very very short amount of time to get a good amount of data I happy to do it I just I would strongly encourage a slightly longer period of time um for us to to be able to monitor the intersection and it would also have the benefit of not being in the debt of winter sorry system as oh yes yes sorry we also have uh we could tie it to the ratings we we changed service on a predetermined schedule um and so this schedule change that um we're building for will happen in December of this year um and so I suggest it starts um after that and then um at least for two ratings but I can follow up on that or or um we can do it for 90 days okay so along with this would be U proposal reconstruct sidewalks add ventes and shelters were necessary we'd like to add one more thing in there there's a number of dead tree Street trees right in that area that we would like to to have them replaced as part of this program Street trees okay I think there's like four or maybe five right in the block between Park and Central along Broadway and stripe do not block the box that's part of The Proposal updateall the transit signal head in short bus lanes yep and um close the inaccessible stop at Broadway yes in park so that's all before the commission do we have a motion is this is everybody comfortable with this with a six-month pilot program motion to enact The Proposal what is it proposal four with the I I'm heading on the sixth month I just like the ability to call you guys back before us if we see some type of an issue with the not having that extra stop on Park a understand instead of having two buses being stopped in that street I think we might I mean we need to come back in 3 months and absolutely talk about that second stop on park that's fine that's my only concern if we may we can implement it for six months and then we could also check back in in three if that makes sense so we can come back and see how things are going and then but still have it run the 6 months just to have the proper data that we need if that makes sense so we can if it's not working we can cut it short after 6 months but we can check as long as if Chief brigh sees any issues with that intersection that 100% needs to be addressed right away with that extra stop on p g absolutely I also it matters to us that the bus operations function here and if the traffic operations do not function here the bus operations do not function um I I want to underscore that this is this is not a cars or a bus proposal this is we all need to to play together um so absolutely I'm happy to come back in 90 days and then a report again 90 days after that if that's of of use and I'll pick up my phone if you call me sounds good okay so the motion would be to implemented for a a 60 a six-month trial period however coming back in in 90 days to discuss if there are any issues with that current program proposal okay is that the motion on the four correct we have a second Mr chairman just to clarify that's proposal four correct this proposal for proposal for the both Consolidated stops on Broadway yeah corre okay um second all in favor I I all opposed none hearing none voted so AED thank you very much see you in 90 days let's hope it work after December first I think they're going to be implementing it in December yeah go on to public heing number two is to amend schedule 11 of title 10 handicap person's parking by adding 23 baits uh I do have the uh the parking director Zach babo gave a uh submitted a letter in in favor of this change uh to add 23 baits are there any proponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing any opponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing commission members Mr chairman um do we have a um any information from Mr too on this one yes I believe he was uh something he was also in favor do we know if it meets all the criteria yes it does yes uh in that case I make a motion to approve second second all in favor I None seeing none voted and so AED number three amend schedule 11 of title 10 heing person's parking by removing 136 park durav again uh parking director speaking in favor of this this is uh um this is a parking space that is being I mean a handicap space that's being removed because uh it's no longer needed I think it's just a matter of uh just a vote of the traffic commission to remove the sign oh yeah let's let's first hear are there any proponents on this hearing none seeing none any opponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing do we have a motion motion to approve second motion to approve there has been a second all in favor I I I opposed hearing none seeing none voted and so ordered number four men title 10 sections 10 3 32 210 to 1032 to11 to allow parking of vehicles with pupil plates not to exceed six passengers in all areas except area is at a currently 24/7 R resident parking are there any proponents thank you Mr chairman members Paul agenzio 245 reservo Avenue W for city council um over the last couple of months I had two residents approach me uh they own private vehicles uh they have pupil plates on these uh vehicles uh cuz they businesses to trans support students um these are private vehicles that are registered to homes and pay excise tax here in Rivier um and I proposed we do the same thing as we do with commercial plates now uh one per household uh nothing larger than uh six passengers and they would pay the same fee as a commercial plate owner does uh I did some research with the assessor's office uh there's only four 42 of these um plates registered in rever and uh some of them are larger than six passenger so I think we're probably talking about 30 Vehicles MH and this would uh help these residents out that uh own these private Vehicles live in their homes own or occupied and uh pay excise tax here in re um if you have any questions i' and also we amended this I heard from a couple of City councilors uh that have the 24 seven uh parking restriction in their areas and uh parking is already at a premium so this would exempt those areas from this uh pupil plate uh ordinance thank you okay you have any questions I'd be happy to answer are there any other proponents hear none seeing none close that part of the here proponents yeah turnone so okay yeah we are here because uh we have we are neighbor of the Rivia City and we have an ises we are belonged to the 89 a walnut walnut Avenue and there is a temple there there is a church there where we belong and so we are here to know if you guys at some point can he help us with the parking problems that we have all the the church because we drive most of us don't live in Rivia so we really need um help that's why we need help for you guys and see what you can do for for us okay uhhuh he's the pastor of the church okay he doesn't speak that much English but he understand okay do you have a translator here so he can be more comfortable is Spanish no we do not I if if I knew this was happening on the agenda we don't have this item on the agenda we would have had a translator here yes um okay so this is a new item this is not on the agenda so uh oh so it wasn't oh I have no this is this this item before us that is regarding pupil parking plates oh oh oh okay I got you oh okay so working with do to you'd have to talk to the W counselor and have him put together a request to the traffic commission so how can we get in touch with the country um yeah we can give you his name uh who who you give me the name you go to R go on the city's website oh on the website yeah okay and they'll have the list of City councilors and you're looking at Water you hurry up I'd two counil she'll give you the name right now okay okay okay so thank you I'm sorry about that yeah once we receive that request we'll take it up at the next meeting okay and then okay thank you app thank you okay back to item number four are there any opponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing commission members uh Mr chairman I'm oh this opponents yes yeah go ahead offic lero again uh and this is concerning uh switching uh the people plates as to be added that they can park anything under six passengers correct correct uh I'm opposed to that because at any time when you get these the the pupil plates can be obtained by somebody who is getting a delery or a taxi and there are five other designations where you can get a pupil plate and once you do that it's usually followed up by if it's a taxi it's considered a business liver is also considered businesses uh which then I I think it just circumvent what what the what the original intent was was not to have pupil because once you do that then anybody else who does have a pupil plate can just park anywhere I'm opposed to it because these are businesses yeah well we can easily make that fixed by uh prohibiting uh liy veh vehicles or taxis from this ordinance it only applies to pupil plates only yeah but that's the the point is that uh they were they don't just pupil plates don't just have to be used for pupil travel only they can be used as Livery vehicles and then used to transport students because the drivers then are subject to uh more string ENT uh uh regulations as to the license and uh background checks okay that's that's my only concern that it's that's a valid concern yeah that that uh these uh that these vehicles are used other than just transporting I'm not saying all of them but these vehicles are used for transporting somebody who calls up a livery business and they have a pupil plate which they can Al they have to do is file it with the registry of motor vehicles put a pupil plate on continue as a livery and also pick up students in the morning thank you okay thank you well so Frank what would be the concern these people would be using this vehicle to pick up students in the day and just then leave it on the street while they use their personal vehicle in the drive in on the driveway not uses the pupils at all but use use that as a way to have and just park it wherever they want and it just wouldn't move so much in the way that we uh concern commercial vehicles yes the pupil plates they would be able to pack overnight on the street that's correct that that's the purpose for this um and we treat it the same way as we have all these commercial vehicles um I'm not quite understanding where the Livery part comes in there's Livery plates there's pupil plates uh there's taxi plates this if this just concerns a vehicle with a plate on it that says pupil now I understand that person can use it to transport somebody else uh but we can all get an Uber and we can all transport anyone we want with our Uber so I mean I I don't see what the uh what the problem with these residents who live here trying to survive and and uh paying excise tax and R that how we move from pupil to Livery to taxis it's they're all different plates and the parking enforcement will see these plates if they're doing something other than uh transporting pupils I maybe they are but like I said we can all transport people in our Ubers and lifts well that that isn't the intent of this this ordinance change it's like you said so um if there is a loophole we'll have to see how this goes and if we uh we get complaints from people saying that they're not using their vehicles for pupils but just uh liveries and now I don't know if that means there's going to be an increase in pupil plates or not for that purpose so we know how many we have now right and uh so we'll have to so so the the concern is if we allow pupil PL people will go out get pupil plates and use it for Li apparently apparently I I have all the respect for this off but I don't I don't see that that uh yeah well we can add language in here that such vehicles cannot be used as delery vehicles at least we'll have it in there to cover us if we do have to go after somebody okay okay thank you very much okay Mr chairman um I'd like to know what the uh what the parking enforcement office uh what their opinion is if they're able to uh you know enforce parking from a pupil plate or you know a taxi plate you know if they have if what their opinion would be on how that would get enforced um and so in lie of that I'd make a motion to table until we can have some input from the parking enforcement office could I'm I I I do have a communication from the park parking director um he did not he did not come out in favor or against this proposal I can't imagine he would have an issue with it but I'm so he's what did the parking Department say no he didn't come out he submitted a memo of of items that he was in favor of on the agenda but he was here last time we spoke on this and he didn't he didn't come up in opposition when it was presented Jan if I ask him I can ask him before we table it and we'll get back to him I he would be the one dealing with this issue yeah it would directly affect him Park Department do you have a problem is this a is this immediately concern if we my my yeah I represent Mr C I would have no problem if if you feel more comfortable tabling this for a month no problem if that's the wishes of the commission we we'll table until we hear back from the traffic thank you parking director there's a motion on the floor for that second yeah motion to table until we all right hear from the parking director all right we have a second second all in favor all opposed hearing none so ordered item number six amend schedule 13 of title 10 towway zones off street parking areas by adding Gibson Park both sides time of Towing 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. 7 days a week and that's part of uh number five which is also amend schedule 8 of title 10 restrictions generally by adding Gibson Park 2hour parking during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. I did re receive a uh uh communication from the parking director that said he is in favor of this given the amount of vehicles that are parking there due to the construction of the nearby uh projects in the area um are there any proponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing any opponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing the uh before we go on and the vote of this this is oh this is written up as a 2hour parking restriction I believe commission when the um apartment building is complete when construction is complete we have boosted up to 4 hours 4 Hour remember having that discussion before yeah yeah so we could uh make that part of the motion if you wish motion to approve uh Mr chairman on the condition that we change it to 4 hours at the completion of that building okay you have a second is there a second Mr chairman just quick question we we're talking about number five five and six go together oh both of them together okay yeah so this is five and six second don't we talk about all in favor I I all oppos hearing none seeing none voted it's so AED let's move on to item number 7 amend section 10 34010 section g resident parking sticker by removing 145 Harris Street again I do have a uh a memo from the parking director who was in favor uh removing this building from section G and list each unit uh having uh two bedrooms he's stating that there uh is a need for overflow parking um so I will ask if there are any other if there are any proponents for this change for 145 Harris Street hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing are there any opponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing let's see Mr chairman yes question um is this do we know if this um property was developed under a uh parking variant no I don't believe it I believe it was let's see there there are 12 units and only 14 parking spaces so it was built many years ago they must have received a variance for it I don't have a record of it that's why it was put into um section g and the the uh parking director is asking one parking sticker only beow per unit as Allowed by the parking department so there are there are 14 parking spaces there may be one or two units that may need a a sticker for off street parking for their second vehicle so it's not every every unit in the building apparently there are two bedroom units and uh a lot of many apartments have two vehicles Mr chairman um you know with the fact that this property was developed assumably under a uh with a parking uh variance or relief of some type I make a motion to deny there's a motion to deny we have a second I'm going to have to second that okay all in favor iOS voted so aed's street so okay let's go to let's go to Number Eight Men schedule 8 of title 10 parcking restriction adrenaline by removing Foster Street no parking both sides from 100 ft westly from Broadway and adding Foster Street no parking both sides Point 60 ft westly from Broadway again um the traffic uh or the parking director excuse me uh it's basically stating this is necessary to clean up signage it was posted recently as markings along roadway had become faded and difficult to enforce when the signs were posted according to the ordinance it eliminated six parking spaces that did not need to be removed and the current 60 ft provides more than adequate space for larger Vehicles entering Monahan Lumber so it doesn't need to be 100 ft feels 60 ft is more than sufficient for turning radius purposes are there any proponents other than the parking director hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing are there any opponents hearing none seeing none close that part of the hearing motion by commission Mo to approve second second all in favor I I voted and so AED let's go on that's if a public hearing business we' uh going on to a request a request to install a traffic caling speed bump on Mountain Avenue to be located 20 ft east of Kilburn street now we uh the last discussion we had was that we would develop guidelines for location of speed humps um speed humps basically can be 4 in High by 12T wide speed tables are basically 4 in high from Curb to curb uh and flat on top so most most of the ones that have put in the city considered speed tables I believe because they go curb to curb unless I'm I'm mistaken Mr chairman we have one speed table that's on kushman AV yeah so the ones on P are speed bumps those are speed bumps so they're they're 8T wide about 4 in high they don't go curb to curb to allow drainage so this would be a speed HP the intention of this uh Mr chairman was um to basically U mirror what we have on pav um and um I think I think there's one on sjin street as well uh so it would be identical to those so um I think an analysis has to be done whether this is is a feasible solution for that location if there are any other issues involved such as drainage that may be impacted um we can make a motion to send to a public hearing and um do the necessary analysis make sure it meets all our guidelines U Mr chairman I I did look at this for uh drainage um it would allow you know to be installed the way uh it was described it would allow for drainage uh along the gutter line uh Mount nav is uh a hill so um that shouldn't be an issue and the location um in terms of you know where the speeding is and in proximity to uh intersections and driveways um looks to be the best location um but I think that we certainly can uh make sure that uh the guidelines and the criteria are met um prior to the public hearing so I'll make a motion to uh move this to the public hearing we have a second second all in favor I oppos so AUD to a public hearing Council hi I've been getting a lot of requests for Speed humps uh what do you think the procedure procedure is should I send those requests to the engineer uh Mr rrom can go go out assess if it's a proper place for one if he does then come back and then put it through the traffic commission yeah I think that's a proper Pro protocol okay that we when we developed these to take a better look at these before they went in that we'd have them evaluated before they get to the traffic commission to make sure that it's a feasible location okay so so there are a lot of requests coming in yeah I can imagine okay who requested this one so this came from the mayor's office okay all right very good thank you okay okay item number two amend schedule five of title 10 oneway streets this is location at Cambridge Street in a souly direction from Mountain Avenue to Pac Avenue Paula jenio 245 Reservoir Avenue W for counselor uh I have several residents uh contact me from Cambridge Street uh we have recent well over the last few years we've made some one-way uh streets off of uh Pac Avenue uh the concern on Cambridge Street um they feel as though they're using it kind of as a cut through people from the hill are coming down south Cambridge going across Cambridge to access Adam Street um the so they are looking for a this to be oneway coming down the hill from pav excuse me from Mount naav to pav the traffic study that I believe was done several years ago you sent me that map and that uh document uh indicated it should go the other way but I don't have any uh backup as to why that is yeah um listening to the residents and and agreeing with them that it is being used as a cut through uh to get to Adam Street in fact one of the residents used their cameras on their house she she did a little bit of a traffic count and she's prepared to come here if this does go to uh public hearing to tell you what she's uh what she's seen so uh I would like it to go to a uh public hearing and then we can have further discussion with the residents uh motion to send this to public hearing motion second second all in favor I we'll be moved to a public hearing question number three amend schedule 8 of title 10 parking restrictions generally by removing no parking from the OD side of the street and add no parking to the even side of the street on River Street from Mills AV to haav No Parking On The even side of street so we uh we just put up signage there for parking only I think on the east side I'm not sure they were put on the wrong side of the street I had them they moved them to the correct side the correct side okay now I'm just concerned what is I'm kind of confused what this is asking now it switch it back to how it was before it was moved it says River yeah I'm not sure if this request came from the counselor or not did yeah okay so it would have to be moved to a public hearing if there's a motion to do so let me just check real quick and make sure it's not already corrected okay I think that might have been what she was asking for cuz we since our last meeting with there we moved them to the opposite side I just don't I don't see them changing their mind again going back to the where they origin one street they they have an issue I don't she did last week side of I can't remember but we had to move to the opposite side I told him to move everything to the opposite side I can't remember remember if it was on the North side south or north right now the north side is the do you have any records of that we we approved do you have anything in there on what we approve which side no no cuz that came before us last time okay where they if you wish we can send it to a public hearing and motion to send to a public hearing and let it work its way out sounds good to me have a motion to send the hearing second all in favor move to a public hearing and uh there is no other business before the commission so we have a motion to adjourn Mr chairman I see I see one more request we do to remove handicap parking sign 90 Kimble oh you're right I have an old one another request before us is to uh amend schedule 11 of title 10 handicapped person's parking by removing 90 Kimble Avenue again this is uh simple request I'm assign the people have moved and there's no need to have the sign there so uh a vote of the traffic commission to approve removing the sign make a motion to move this to a public hearing uh I don't think we need a public hearing there is oh make a motion to remove they just want to remove there's nobody needs it anymore second make a motion to remove all in favor I all oppos right and there are no sides at all okay we don't have any anything before us yeah it's not on the agenda we can have onet yeah and Prospect Avenue T the street is a very narrow Street and there is a there is a stop sign on to the street going on to prospect but when the from Prospect Avenue make the left turn to go on to the street that street is very narrow and there's a tendency of somebody whacking somebody even though the automobile stops at the stop sign on two the street going up to prospect but going down from prospect on to two the street there's no stop sign on theet on either way either no stop signs at the only stop sign is on T when it's going to make the left or right there but there are three places where there are no stop sign on the left side a prospect on on the left side well anyway there's three stop signs missing on tuna and prosp i' like have okay we'll request take a look at it I'll go take a look at it I have no problem look at I think the problem is that the only thing I there's no other intersecting street it's it's just a fourway it is a four-way so maybe on this street but the the main road I I'm hesit putting on the main road oh it's a dead endend it's a dead end Prospect andad end can you push the there you well you can see me you can hear me without the because I'm loud that's from the generator of my ice cream truck people couldn't hear me so anyway get getting getting back to serious thing that's a very dangerous turn there from prospect on to Tuda okay there was a mail truck parked on Tuda the street and uh if anybody had made a turn from Prospect onto T the street they couldn't make the turn because I was stopped going the other way and the truck was stopped right there and nobody no sign there to stop to make sure that it's clear okay thank you we can't do anything with this this evening but uh we'll take a look at it put request through your white counselor so we can get on the agenda for next meeting okay okay you want me to put a request in through your your ward counselor he he was here just a minute ago well obviously okay um meeting adjourned you e