[0:08] [ inaudible ]
[0:09] >> oh, is that what it is? Okay.
[0:13] >> lift off.
[0:20] [ inaudible ]
[0:38] [ inaudible ]
[0:54] [ inaudible ]
[1:03] >> spend the kids in here and it's 30.
[1:06] >> oh, we're on. Okay, here we go.
[1:08] all right, sorry, the mic sign.
[1:13] welcome, everybody, to the august 12th.
[1:16] believe it or not, half
the month is almost over.
[1:19] the regular meeting for the
laguna hills traffic commission.
[1:23] welcome, everybody, for being here tonight.
[1:26] we look forward to a wonderful
conversation and getting our work done.
[1:31] and we're going to go ahead and
open up with the pledge of allegiance.
[1:34] and I'm going to ask, let's see,
mr. Caputo, let's have you lead us
[1:41] in the pledge of allegiance tonight.
[1:44] all right, a pledge of the
united states of america
[1:51] and to the republic for which
it stands, my nation, under god,
[1:56] indivisible with liberty
and justice for all.
[1:59] thank you, you can be seated.
[2:07] all righty, so at this
time we'll call on the clerk
[2:10] for a roll call.
[2:14] >> let the record show.
[2:15] we have a quorum with four committee
members present in the chamber.
[2:18] >> thank you, thank you.
[2:20] okay.
[2:23] all right, this brings us to
public comment on the agenda.
[2:29] this is the time to address
the traffic commission
[2:32] on any matters, not
listed on this agenda.
[2:35] that is within the subject matter,
jurisdiction of the commission.
[2:40] public comments are limited to three minutes
per person as determined by the chair.
[2:47] at this time, clerk, do we
have any public comments?
[2:52] >> yes, we have one request to
speak and zero electronic comments.
[2:58] the first audience member, or the only
audience member to speak is larry bremer.
[3:01] >> okay, great, sir, if
you could -- I'm sorry.
[3:06] >> I don't know if larry is --
[3:08] >> he thought he was going
to be on the agenda probably.
[3:13] >> oh, is he -- >> larry bremer
thought that we were part of the handle
[3:17] whilst in the form of the member's fashion,
and all this kind of specific housing.
[3:22] >> so he left.
[3:24] >> okay, okay, great.
[3:26] are there any other public
speakers for this item?
[3:29] I mean, for this time.
[3:34] >> no, has this item 3.1?
[3:36] >> well, it's just a public comment.
[3:38] just -- >> no.
[3:42] >> okay, so to be clear, we don't
have any other public speakers,
[3:46] and there was an electronic
-- no electronic comments.
[3:51] okay, all right, that moves us forward
to presentations, and there are none.
[4:00] that moves us forward to
administrative reports, agenda item 3.
[4:06] 1, discussion, a request
of acacia knolls resident,
[4:11] to park on the south
side of beckenham street.
[4:14] and at this time, we
will take staff report.
[4:18] >> thank you very much, chair miller.
[4:22] I guess I want to preface all of this
by saying that as many of you know,
[4:28] the special meeting tonight
was meant to talk about parking
[4:32] and street sweeping issues,
but then there was interest
[4:36] in the city council and the
topic back on june 23rd.
[4:40] at that point in time, they
directed to hold a joint meeting.
[4:45] unfortunately, their schedules didn't align
[4:48] with the traffic commission scheduled
to be able to talk about that tonight.
[4:53] and since it was the same topic, I
had to unexpectedly flip the topics,
[5:01] making this august 12th
meeting more of a regular meeting.
[5:06] the september items I
anticipated talking about,
[5:09] and then moving what we were planning
on talking about tonight to september.
[5:14] and so that's the reason
why this feels a little odd.
[5:16] I don't know how many of you
got all that from all the last minute.
[5:20] email correspondence,
but that's what happened.
[5:23] and so this item I would
have brought in september
[5:30] after our parking and
street sweeping discussion.
[5:33] so then I had to frame this item knowing
that that is still coming in september.
[5:41] and so I just want to preface all that
before we got into this agenda item.
[5:46] and then I will try to
clean up my agenda item.
[5:50] I will admit that when I was
writing this agenda item one,
[5:53] I was unaware of a certain
circumstance and two.
[5:57] I was off last week thursday and friday.
[5:59] compressing the week.
[6:00] so I came back on monday and found out some
new information, thanks to city of staff.
[6:07] and that was what led to
some of the amendments today.
[6:09] anyway, so I take full responsibility
for that in my apologies.
[6:13] next slide, please.
[6:14] thank you for the clarification.
[6:15] because I was expecting a workshop
and I had to grab my jacket for tonight.
[6:20] yeah, I appreciate.
[6:22] thank you for asking your
question, commissioner caputo, too.
[6:26] because yeah, that was
the whole, again, I apologize.
[6:30] so I'm glad you grabbed your jacket.
[6:32] yeah, very dapper in your jacket.
[6:34] thank you.
[6:35] thank you.
[6:37] so during the july 15th
traffic commission meeting,
[6:41] you may recall city
staff provided the results
[6:44] of a residential permit park
and district for camberwell,
[6:49] street, sunset place, and
around back-and-hand park,
[6:53] rather than reading all
those lists of streets there.
[6:56] and then also during the july
15th traffic commission meeting,
[7:01] I reviewed a presentation that I
made to the city council on june 23rd,
[7:07] concerning parking on the
south side of laguna hills drive,
[7:09] which was approved by
the city council by resolution.
[7:13] and citywide parking issues,
[7:15] and I talked about on
july 15th and on june 23rd,
[7:20] that in my humble
opinion, in my personal view,
[7:24] the solution to citywide
parking issues is generally
[7:26] to provide parking near
where parking demand is
[7:28] greatest, which I recognize
isn't always possible.
[7:33] next slide, please.
[7:34] so during that discussion of
that separate permit parking,
[7:38] but for camberwell street,
[7:42] back-and-hand park and
sunset place neighborhood,
[7:45] one public speaker indicated the
proposed permit parking district
[7:49] would negatively impact
the ability of vacation roles,
[7:52] residents to park around
back-and-hand park,
[7:54] if that permit parking
district were approved.
[7:58] and then a second public
speaker requested that parking
[8:00] be reopened on the south
side of beckenham street,
[8:04] and no overnight parking is currently allowed
on the south side of beckenham street,
[8:08] but it's for indication
roles in beckenham park.
[8:11] and then subsequent
to the july 15th meeting,
[8:14] I received a personal telephone
call from the public speaker
[8:18] and inquiring if the south
side of beckenham street
[8:22] could be open to only occasion roles,
[8:23] residents using the established
parking permit program process.
[8:28] next slide, please.
[8:30] so for reference for talking
about this neighborhood here,
[8:35] we're talking about camberwell
street and around beckenham park.
[8:44] so this is the neighborhood
that we received requests
[8:46] from so out parking on the
south side of beckenham
[8:49] street adjacent, so
they're intrigue-gate.
[8:51] next slide, please.
[8:54] and then you may recall that the
traffic commission recently implemented
[9:01] no overnight parking on the purple line.
[9:04] I believe that was, what was that?
[9:09] may, or march, march, then it was march.
[9:12] and then that was adopted by
the city council by resolution.
[9:16] and then what's not
on this map is on june
[9:18] 23rd, the south side
of laguna hills tribe,
[9:20] between indian hill and pacifica valencia,
[9:24] was approved for overnight parking.
[9:27] and that was the intention
of that was to allow for,
[9:31] I would say, a pressure relief
valve of sorts for the stock port
[9:37] apartments and for the alicia village
apartments will the park on laguna hills drive.
[9:42] next slide, please.
[9:44] so I told the telephone caller
that the traffic commission,
[9:49] which is you, would need to consider the
request and provide direction to city staff.
[9:53] so it would be helpful to receive
emails from immediate neighbors
[9:57] indicating an interest in
the idea in order to agenda
[10:00] is the item for
consideration of the traffic
[10:01] commission, which brings
us to this item tonight.
[10:05] and so you have several
emails now in your agenda
[10:10] packet, and I'll email
them out regarding that.
[10:15] and so the original gender
report released on august
[10:17] 7th indicated there was no
prior precedent for the city
[10:20] establishing permit parking on a
city street for the exclusive benefit
[10:24] of an adjoining private
residential property.
[10:27] and that statement was
made in error my apologies.
[10:30] there is prior precedent for establishing
permit parking on a city street
[10:34] for the exclusive benefit of an
adjoining residential community
[10:38] has discussed in the amendment
to my agenda report released today.
[10:41] and I've got one example out there.
[10:44] and that is the belitz-hira
community association
[10:47] of permit parking on an adjoining
public street next slide, please.
[10:51] here is belitz-hira.
[10:52] this is laguna hills drive.
[10:55] interestingly, it's not that far
away from what we're talking about.
[10:58] it's approximately the line shown
in yellow, suddenly of their driveway.
[11:06] and it's for a relatively short distance.
[11:09] it's for 400 in some odd feet.
[11:12] so it's probably good for 25 cars,
20 or 25 cars, if they pack it in there.
[11:18] next slide, please.
[11:20] actually, it's 570 feet.
[11:22] so that would be good
for a little bit more than that.
[11:27] so the resolution was adopted in 2009.
[11:29] so it's been out there for 17 years.
[11:35] and that resolution and that
agenda report were attached
[11:38] since it's a supplemental agenda report.
[11:42] and then in reviewing that
agenda report from 2009,
[11:46] the summary is that was
supported by the city council
[11:50] because the lack of
parking within the property
[11:54] and city staff specifically
stated in that 2009 report
[11:58] that the parking did not meet present-day
municipal code requirements for parking.
[12:04] so given all of that and the
information has just come to light,
[12:06] I didn't have an opportunity
to perform the same analysis
[12:09] on this property.
[12:11] that was done for that property
but has I already explained
[12:14] the agenda report had
already been released.
[12:16] so here we are tonight.
[12:17] next slide, please.
[12:19] so if the same rationale
is used to justify parking
[12:22] for occasion nulls, city staff
believes the following information
[12:27] is important to have in order
to assist the traffic commission
[12:29] in its discussion of the request,
either now or in the future.
[12:33] how many kind of minimum units are there?
[12:35] do they have garages?
[12:36] how big are they garages?
Do they have driveways?
[12:39] can you park on the driveways overnight?
[12:42] I lived in an association
in dana point a year ago
[12:47] that had condominium with full, sometimes
full length driveways in front of it
[12:51] but the ccrs didn't allow you
to park overnight in the driveway.
[12:55] these strange things.
[12:57] and how many guest parking
spaces are on the property?
[13:01] so those are some of the
bare minimum questions.
[13:02] next slide, please.
[13:04] I did receive this afternoon
reply to those questions.
[13:09] I didn't get back to my desk until 445.
[13:12] so here are the answers here
of 99 units and occasion nulls.
[13:17] they all have garages.
[13:18] they all have two car garages.
[13:21] not every unit has a driveway
that can be parked on overnight
[13:24] because there are units,
some units without driveways.
[13:28] I didn't get any
indication about whether
[13:29] or not there was a ban
on overnight parking.
[13:32] and then there are approximately
15 guest parking stalls
[13:36] that apparently have,
I don't know for sure,
[13:41] have some churn over
requirements or something.
[13:43] I'm not sure exactly.
[13:45] next slide, please.
[13:47] we are also on receipt of the following
information from the original requester.
[13:50] he had all of this to say.
[13:54] I think rather than reading
all this to, I will pause
[13:57] here for a minute and I
will hear it for yourselves.
[14:01] I can grab some water too.
[14:31] everybody good on that page?
[14:33] speed reader.
[14:37] no, you need more time for it.
[14:39] more time to take notes on this slide.
[14:43] anybody need more time on this slide?
[14:46] everyone's good.
[14:50] next slide, please, robert.
[14:52] so, city staff's
recommendation is that the
[14:55] traffic commission
received the city staff report
[14:59] and postponed detailed
discussion due to the upcoming
[15:02] city council traffic
commission joint meeting
[15:05] on september 16th to discuss policy
and direction on citywide parking issues.
[15:10] optionally, the traffic
commission may want to discuss
[15:13] this particular request
now in order to help shape
[15:15] options for discussing citywide parking
solutions for the upcoming joint meeting.
[15:20] and then my personal additional
thoughts and blue here are
[15:26] if the citywide parking solutions goal
or objective could be to find parking.
[15:31] you're a parking demand as great as should
this type of solution be in a toolbox.
[15:35] just putting it out there.
[15:37] as the traffic commission is aware of,
[15:39] I always prefer to start with the target
[15:41] and then let people pick
it apart rather than just,
[15:44] you know, have a wide discussion.
[15:49] so that's the end of my staff report.
[15:52] - okay. - and I'm happening.
[15:54] that's for any questions.
[15:55] - okay, great.
[15:56] we're going to open this
up to commissioner questions.
[15:58] right now everybody's mic is live.
[16:00] and we're all city council members.
[16:03] because that's the names on the screen.
[16:05] so I don't know who's pressing what.
[16:07] but we can just, you know,
go through the process of,
[16:12] if you'd like to ask questions or speak,
just go ahead and press your button.
[16:17] and I'll just call on you.
[16:19] because right now it's
everybody else's name.
[16:21] - I don't know how to drop.
[16:24] - oh, no, yours is going off.
[16:25] - yeah.
[16:27] - oh, if you hold it.
[16:28] - press the right button.
[16:30] - yeah.
[16:31] - there we go.
[16:32] - oh.
[16:33] - it's on now.
[16:34] - yeah, so.
[16:35] - okay, there we go.
[16:36] okay, it's off.
[16:37] and I still have.
[16:39] - but I have.
[16:40] - so there's three mics live.
[16:41] okay.
[16:42] so at this time we're going to open it
up for, um, questions from commissioners.
[16:47] let's start on this.
[16:50] thank you.
[16:51] - okay.
[16:52] - um, going through the report.
[16:54] thank you for being
very comprehensive on it.
[16:56] there was a lot of
information that, you know,
[16:59] I'm glad you got response
back to how many units there are
[17:02] and the requirements for the garages.
[17:06] do you know, or can we find
out before the next meeting
[17:09] if the hoa requires
garages for vehicles only
[17:12] and not for storage or any
other use of the garages?
[17:19] I know in my particular hoa,
your garage is only for vehicle use.
[17:21] you must put your first
two cars in the garage.
[17:25] first or three cars putting on a response
you have and then use of the driveway.
[17:30] so I am curious if that is in their ccnr's,
[17:33] currently that the garages
are for vehicle use only.
[17:45] - are you good?
[17:46] that's it.
[17:47] okay, go ahead.
[17:48] - two questions.
[17:49] one on wilkes, it's permit parking.
[17:54] who has, who has those permits?
[17:56] are the permits?
[18:06] - yeah, those, the homes on wilkes are,
[18:09] I believe our single family
homes is just for the people
[18:13] who live along wilkes.
[18:17] - so a question would be possible
[18:18] to spread that to a lesion
holes also because one solution?
[18:32] - potentially, I would need
to get a recommendation
[18:36] from the traffic commission on that.
[18:40] it's potentially available.
[18:42] I don't have any, it's
a double sided street.
[18:46] so you've got curb length
in front of the homes
[18:49] and then you've got, sorry,
it's a single loaded street.
[18:52] so you've got, side of
the curb is no, you know.
[18:57] - it stops at the end there.
[18:59] so I fact it in park.
[19:04] - the second question
is, do we know what the
[19:05] percentage of rentals
in a lesion holes is?
[19:10] and the reason I ask is, I
live in a gated community
[19:14] and as the rentals increase,
so does the amount of carbs
[19:20] because there's a tendency
to have multiple families called.
[19:26] in those units, they have more carbs.
[19:33] so I'm seeing that as, I'm
on the board of an hoa
[19:38] that's gated and we're
starting to see some issues
[19:42] there as the percentage
of rentals increase.
[19:47] so I just be curious to see how
much the rentals are and that affects it.
[19:55] but just a comment, I think
we're finally cleaning up
[20:00] the safety issues around pecking in park
and I just be inclined to let line dogs wide
[20:10] but if we could do
something with the whirls
[20:12] as a temporary measure,
it might help lesion
[20:16] holes and I think mike
had a good point that,
[20:22] to help the kind of, help
themselves is to push them cc&rs
[20:33] 'cause everybody wants to
use their garage as storage
[20:38] and it really wants to
pay $200 for storage unit.
[20:43] but I think we have to push for these
both on apartments and the condos
[20:54] that people have to help themselves out
and if they could do that, that could help
[20:59] 'cause having just 15 units, 15 parking
spots or 100 units throughout the small.
[21:07] if I could see it, I could see it for us.
[21:12] so just a thought and
a couple of solutions.
[21:14] I'm with what commissioner
caputo said in possibly using wilkes.
[21:22] so to tail onto that question, so
the idea on your first question was
[21:28] to take wilkes, which is already
existing and to extend that to where?
[21:33] - to a lesion holes.
[21:34] - so if, is that--
- can you do it just allow them to?
[21:38] - yeah, it permits also.
[21:40] - can you do that without the 67% vote?
[21:48] - so, like the two examples,
so there was two examples.
[21:53] so my original erroneous
gender report talked about
[21:56] a commercial complex
where there was no vote taken.
[22:00] and then my amendment to the gender report
[22:03] also pointed to the fact
that there was no vote taken
[22:07] because these two in this
one are the unusual situation
[22:12] where you have a private development,
[22:16] residential or commercial
looking to park on a public street.
[22:21] so those two prior examples,
there was not a vote taken.
[22:24] instead there was a
justification, a rationale,
[22:28] that was arrived at by jointly amongst the
[22:31] city council traffic
commission and city staff
[22:34] justifying for doing that.
[22:38] so this wilkes place roadway
[22:44] already has permit parking on it.
[22:47] I guess my only thought on that,
[22:50] I'm putting a link on it, is, you know,
[22:52] they requested that and
then now you're changing,
[22:56] and essentially changing by adding,
you know, more people to that.
[23:00] I don't know, you know.
[23:02] - it hasn't been done.
[23:03] - it hasn't been done before that way.
[23:05] so I, you know, the answer
hasn't been done that way before.
[23:09] but prior precedent would
say that a vote isn't needed for
[23:14] off-site parking, but this is
a new wrinkle in all of this.
[23:19] - right.
[23:20] - okay, good, good.
[23:21] - I'm gonna see him top it.
[23:22] - I'm sorry.
[23:23] - that's on the same conversation.
[23:25] - the parking permit on
wilkes was that requested
[23:28] because there were other parking happening
[23:31] and it could have
been the people from
[23:32] location roles that were
parking there already,
[23:36] which is kind of that shift.
[23:37] and that's why they
wanted the parking permit.
[23:39] is that because of what was
happening from location roles?
[23:42] so we don't have that information.
[23:43] so it's hard to determine
if we added it back
[23:45] in what would be the
overall play on that.
[23:48] - yeah, my guess is the spread
from the apartment, right?
[23:50] - yeah, that's right.
[23:51] - yes, everybody goes
in from the apartments.
[23:53] - yeah, right, so okay.
[23:55] neil.
[23:56] - yep, the question I
have is I know it in past
[23:59] when we've kind of
debated about stop signs.
[24:03] we city staff has really
put the onus on the traffic
[24:08] commission to follow the municipal
code and any applicable state laws.
[24:12] but, you know, kind of
seeing this agenda item
[24:15] and then even some previous
ones where we've opened up
[24:17] parking on los aliso's or,
you know, on indian hill,
[24:21] it seems like it's in spite
of the municipal code
[24:24] and like the recommendation,
at least in the black and white.
[24:27] so I'm just trying to, I
guess I want some clarity
[24:29] on why when it comes to
parking matters, you know,
[24:33] we can ignore some of the stated protocol.
[24:37] but, you know, we're very
clear to be on like stop signs
[24:42] and other types of like
traffic control devices.
[24:45] so just...
[24:51] - I don't know that I
would couch it that way,
[24:54] but I would say that stop
signs are safety control device.
[24:59] parking is a convenience.
[25:08] and so I personally see
that it's two very different
[25:11] categories both from
a liability perspective
[25:14] and a safety perspective.
[25:16] and so, and there is an
m-u-t-c-d on parking.
[25:21] there's an m-u-t-c-d on stop signs.
[25:24] so that's, there's
national guidance on that
[25:27] and I don't have, we don't
have the same things here.
[25:30] and so parking controls
are mostly within the purview
[25:34] of the city council and so if
some direction needs to change
[25:39] with regard to that,
then that would be on
[25:40] a local level rather
than national guidance.
[25:48] - okay, the only, I just had a
few questions, this whole idea
[25:55] of creating parking for
specific people groups.
[25:59] this, I understand our
regular permit parking that,
[26:05] you know, okay, but people groups are,
[26:09] I'm assuming they're getting
some type of colorized sticker
[26:14] or something for their
specific people group
[26:16] and who manages those
stickers, when people leave,
[26:21] when people move in, how did,
what's the management program
[26:26] for people groups specific parking?
[26:30] - so the current, I'll
just give you an over.
[26:35] the current permit parking
program generally is by
[26:39] neighborhood, and so all of
the neighborhoods have their own
[26:43] decals, stickers, hangers,
and so they're all labeled
[26:50] accordingly, so they're
all separated accordingly.
[26:53] and then most of them, not all of them,
most of them expire on an annual basis.
[27:00] so that's the mechanism for renewal.
[27:05] and the only difference
then is, is that in terra bella,
[27:11] you're just doing like, I
guess for lack of a better term,
[27:14] off-site parking, that is guaranteed to
a neighborhood that is somewhere else.
[27:19] - sorry.
[27:25] - so the only difference with terra bella,
[27:27] the reason why it makes it
so different is because it's,
[27:31] it's not really, we're saying
we're creating permit parking
[27:35] for their neighborhood, but it could
be a neighborhood somewhere else.
[27:39] it doesn't have to be
geographically connected.
[27:43] you can put, you can,
you can say this, this
[27:46] street, down the street,
is gonna be our parking.
[27:54] - I'm not sure I'm
following them, I apologize.
[27:56] - it's terra bella didn't
have enough parking, right?
[28:01] so you're designating the
street, that is, in this case,
[28:06] close to terra bella as their parking
space, their parking garage, right?
[28:13] so it's not in front of their
homes, it can be somewhere else.
[28:16] so theoretically with that,
you could designate parking
[28:21] in another location is what I'm saying.
[28:26] like, you could pick
out a block, a few blocks
[28:29] away and say that's
our block for our parking.
[28:32] - if you believe that that is
an example worth following
[28:38] and you were to draw
that, that out to a conclusion
[28:43] where you could assign
any public street, I suppose.
[28:45] I'm not making that
recommendation, ignore my,
[28:50] even, I'm not making that kind of recommendation,
I'm not making any recommendation.
[28:54] so I would, I would say that,
[28:59] that's up for the traffic
commission to debate,
[29:03] or decide and happy to provide
any thought process on that.
[29:05] but I, I mean, I'm happy
to write thoughts on that,
[29:10] but I would say, okay, I
don't have any information
[29:12] otherwise on that.
[29:13] - and we know for sure this is the only
place in our city where this is taking place.
[29:18] - yeah, again, I apologize,
so there was 14 permit
[29:23] parking districts, and
so my understanding is
[29:27] out of the 14 permit parking
districts, 12 are neighborhood
[29:31] based for the frontage
of residential streets,
[29:36] and then we have the commercial district,
[29:39] and we have this bella terra neighborhood.
[29:42] oh, is it in here?
[29:43] oh, let me see here, okay,
so, those are the only two,
[29:57] that I'm aware of out of the 14.
[29:58] - okay, all right, that's good.
[30:01] any other questions for stan at this time?
[30:05] okay, we're gonna go ahead and move forward
[30:09] to public comment on this agenda item.
[30:12] are there clerk, is there any
public comments on item 3.1?
[30:17] - yes, we have one speaker,
[30:20] the author of that nice
letter, george falcone.
[30:23] - okay, sir, if you could come forward,
thank you for being here tonight.
[30:28] - thanks for calling it a nice letter.
[30:30] george falcone, I was here last month.
[30:33] so, after the meeting last month, when
the discussion was about the permit parking
[30:41] in the other areas, I was here,
[30:46] and my comment was more
about the reduction of parking
[30:51] around, sorry, around begging and parking,
[30:54] we lost about 40 spaces with that.
[30:57] it did clean up the park, so
there's no doubt about that,
[31:03] but it did reduce
parking, and it affected us.
[31:08] now, we are 99 units,
they're all privately owned.
[31:12] how many renters?
[31:14] I don't have that number, but I am,
I own my own property, in my wife.
[31:22] and we saw the loss of 40 spaces,
not just affecting the occasional's,
[31:33] not, you know, this isn't
just solely a selfish matter.
[31:36] it does affect the community, because
suddenly the apartment dwellers,
[31:41] or whoever else is using
that parking, and doesn't
[31:43] even matter who it is, they
are looking somewhere else,
[31:48] and that's why you guys have this,
you know, bigger issue, broader issue.
[31:53] and it came up by not a
resident of occasional's,
[31:56] better resident of sunset,
that they brought up,
[32:00] the idea, well, why don't you
park on the side of the street?
[32:03] and I'm sitting here in
the audience, thinking,
[32:06] okay, I'll bring that up,
you know, it's already
[32:08] offered, you know, by
other community members.
[32:11] what's unique about this side of the
property, this street, a beckyham street,
[32:16] and this side of the street
is, it is directly adjacent
[32:20] to our community, and
directly adjacent to our driveway.
[32:23] so, the idea of parking on wilkes is,
it's also adjacent to our community,
[32:30] but there's no direct
connection to it, right?
[32:32] so, and it's not to say it's not a bad idea
[32:35] of just saying that this one is by topography
and by everything else is right there.
[32:42] it also doesn't affect
any other neighborhood.
[32:45] so, directly affect any other neighbors,
[32:49] or any, you know, like
if we were on wilkes,
[32:51] then possibly the people across the street
[32:53] would be, wait a minute, I didn't have
people parking in front of me, now I do.
[32:56] so, this was kind of a
reason that I brought it up,
[33:00] was to help alleviate,
not only the parking for
[33:02] occasion knows, but for
the broader community,
[33:05] because if, I think,
[33:08] staff probably hasn't gotten to the point
of actually counting how many spaces I did,
[33:14] it looks like we probably
have about 13 to 14 spaces
[33:16] available if we do that part of the street,
[33:19] that reduces the impact on the rest
of the camp street for others to use.
[33:27] and so, that was kind of my idea
when I brought it up to the streams.
[33:32] so, I just wanna share that.
[33:35] - okay, great, why don't
you sit there for a second
[33:38] and let's ask the
commissioners if they have any
[33:40] questions for you,
anybody have any questions?
[33:44] for our speaker, we're good.
[33:46] well, we appreciate you being here tonight
[33:49] and sharing your comments.
[33:50] thank you so much.
[33:51] - sure, thank you.
[33:52] - five things.
[33:53] - are there any other
comments on this agenda item?
[33:57] - no.
[33:58] - no other comments.
[33:59] okay, we're gonna bring
this back to the commission
[34:03] for open discussion and
recommendations on direction.
[34:08] and, mr. Caputto.
[34:13] - can we back on the screen,
[34:14] the staff recommendations,
there were three options
[34:16] that you as a recommending,
can I see that again?
[34:19] - there we go.
[34:23] - I have no other comments, but I'd
like to make recommendations if possible.
[34:29] - what would you like to make a motion?
[34:32] - or, okay, what would your motion be?
[34:34] - I'd like to move this
agenda to our next meeting.
[34:42] it hopes that we can get some more answers
regarding the parking from cc and ours,
[34:47] so that then we could then adapt this
[34:50] into what our topic really is, is
on parking for the city overall,
[34:53] as opposed to continuing
to maneuver parking areas
[34:58] without the city 'cause we are
continuing to move it around.
[35:06] so, until we have
resolution on the overall city
[35:06] problem, it's hard to
continue this conversation.
[35:10] - okay, so you're asking
to move the agenda item
[35:14] to our consolidated meeting with the city
council, and also what data did you want?
[35:22] - I think it's gonna see
an hour of information
[35:24] on the parking in the garages.
[35:25] - okay. - it's use of garage.
[35:27] - okay, is staff clear on that motion?
[35:32] - I am, I guess, so for the
september 16th meeting though,
[35:36] I was planning on putting
on a singular agenda item,
[35:40] which was gonna talk about citywide parking
[35:45] on street sweeping issues, and then review
the, and that would basically be a review
[35:49] of my june 23rd staff
report to the city council,
[35:55] which I also reviewed here on july 15th,
[35:57] and then I had envisioned that
once we got direction on that,
[36:02] that would allow us to
re-agendize this particular item
[36:07] if warren said for the november meeting.
[36:10] - that was what I would like to do then.
[36:12] - okay, so you're changing your motion,
[36:16] then to move this item to the november
meeting, but also grab the data for that.
[36:26] so staff understands that, okay, and do,
I have a second, okay, we have a second,
[36:31] and clerk, can we take
a vote on that motion?
[36:38] - commissioner caputo.
[36:39] - aye.
[36:42] - commissioner jones. - aye.
[36:43] - vice chair patel. - aye.
[36:46] - chair miller. - aye.
[36:49] - motion passes unanimously.
[36:50] - thank you, thank you,
motion passes unanimously.
[36:53] thank you so much for being here tonight,
sir, and bringing your comments, thank you.
[36:59] okay, we move forward to
our next administrative report,
[37:04] 3.2, discussion of citywide
street related traffic,
[37:12] concerns, and the residential street
management, traffic management policy.
[37:17] and at this time, we'll
receive staff reports.
[37:21] - thank you, next slide, please.
[37:26] so on april 30th, 2026,
[37:31] four months ago, the traffic
commission held a special meeting,
[37:38] and one of the items on the special meeting
agenda was the strategic planning workshop
[37:43] to discuss a comprehensive
approach to traffic related concerns,
[37:47] which included discussion of
citywide's speed related traffic concerns.
[37:53] and at the conclusion of that item, the
traffic commission recommended a few things,
[37:58] that city staff returned
to the traffic commission
[38:00] with a review of the compass
data collection program
[38:04] that we briefly previewed.
[38:06] and it's a software program
provided by the orange county
[38:08] transportation authority that
captures anonymized vehicle data.
[38:12] and then to a literature review of the
acceptable prevailing speed threshold
[38:17] for residential streets
identified in existing lagoon hills
[38:21] residential traffic management
policy number 350.
[38:25] in addition, the traffic commission
recommended that the commissioners be prepared
[38:28] to present their individual
recommended edits to policy number 350.
[38:33] so because the first item
list requires a real-time review
[38:38] of a proprietary software program
that can only be accessed by city staff.
[38:42] and the second item
requires an additional
[38:44] context not easily conveyed
in the agenda report.
[38:47] I'm making this city staff presentation
in response to items one and two above.
[38:56] and then so the recommended action will
be to receive a presentation of city staff
[39:03] and provide direction to
city staff regarding policy 350.
[39:08] next slide, please.
[39:09] and so I want to talk about
what this compass program is
[39:15] that we briefly started
talking about in on april 30th.
[39:20] so the compass program is a
proprietary software program
[39:28] from an australian company
that takes anonymized vehicle data.
[39:35] next slide, please.
[39:38] so what is a connected vehicle?
[39:41] so most modern passenger
private and freighting vehicles
[39:47] have a sim card embedded
at the point of manufacture
[39:51] and the sim card allows
and internet connections
[39:54] to connect to other
devices or smart sensors
[39:57] and these connections
allow the transfer of data
[39:59] between the car and the manufacturer.
[40:01] vehicles that have this capability
are considered connected vehicles.
[40:06] and so as the program proponent indicates
connected vehicles are like smart devices.
[40:16] and so some of the information presented
[40:18] in this brochure was
written a few years ago,
[40:21] but it's still relatively
accurate even today.
[40:25] so as of 2023 it was
estimated that by 2030,
[40:30] 96% of all new cars will be globally
connected in the united states as of 2020,
[40:38] 91% of the new cars sold were
connected and my understanding
[40:43] from compass is that vehicles generally
built after 2018 are connected vehicles.
[40:51] so the connected data connected vehicles
provide is known to be more accurate
[40:56] than other forms of data collection.
[40:58] I think whether you realize it or not,
[41:01] even the cell phones that you
carry, sends anonymized data
[41:05] and anonymized data
can track where you're at
[41:11] and how fast this device moves
[41:14] and it can surmise that
you're in a motor vehicle
[41:16] and that's also one of the
ways that data is collected.
[41:21] in this case, we're talking
about your car though,
[41:23] I mean newer cars.
[41:25] so the data connected vehicles provide
[41:27] is known to be more
accurate than other forms
[41:29] of data collection according to
the proponent of the software.
[41:34] different sensors in
site connected vehicles
[41:36] are streaming via the cloud,
machine learning analytics
[41:39] process, the raw sensor data
and users can instantly access
[41:43] the real, the network wide and
real time vehicle data from anywhere.
[41:47] next slide please.
[41:49] and then so how is this data different
[41:52] from other forms of data?
[41:53] and hopefully this will start to make sense
[41:55] in light of policy 350,
which we'll eventually get to.
[41:59] so traditionally most data
about drivers is collected using
[42:04] external hardware and you're
all familiar with tube counts.
[42:07] we've talked about that in the traffic
commission where we lie tubes across the road
[42:12] and we actually measure
the, based upon how far apart
[42:15] the tubes are, the
time it takes for the tire
[42:18] to hit the first tube
versus the second tube
[42:20] and you can calculate the speed
based upon the mathematics
[42:24] of that manual counts by people
using radar device, cameras,
[42:31] mobile phone data that I just
mentioned, external plug-in devices.
[42:36] and according to a compass, mobile data
[42:40] data sets can be
unreliable or could be
[42:42] heavily skewed in
vehicles or multiple devices.
[42:45] so if you're in a bus or a car
with more than one person,
[42:49] hardware-reliant methods
don't offer the same level
[42:51] of granularity and large scale
hardware is difficult, expensive to scale.
[42:56] I can't put light tubes everywhere.
[42:59] so it would be prohibitively cost costly
for the city to do, for anyone to do.
[43:04] next slide, please.
[43:06] so connective vehicle data from motor vehicles
also has greater coverage and accuracy
[43:14] because it also collects
other data, g-force,
[43:19] which is acceleration, breaking, swerving
travel times, timestamps, median speed,
[43:24] making model, gyroscopic, and
axis changes in latitude and longitude.
[43:30] next slide, please.
[43:33] so the benefits of connective vehicle data
[43:35] for use by public agencies is
it can be proactive, granular,
[43:41] constant, and it provides
opportunities to scale.
[43:46] next slide, please.
[43:49] and so with this type of data, it leads
[43:51] to use cases across road
safety, freight origin destination,
[43:55] which is really important, really hard
to collect origin and destination data.
[44:00] the traditional method of
doing origin and destination,
[44:04] like if you want to know
how many people were
[44:05] cutting through a
neighborhood, for instance.
[44:08] you have seen in the past that
we have had cameras up on poles
[44:12] and people have asked
me what these cameras are.
[44:15] and I had forgotten that
the cameras were out there,
[44:18] and they're just up there
for a few days at a time.
[44:21] and what that was was just basically
[44:23] to photocapture plates so that
way we could compare origin
[44:28] and destination that same plate into the
neighborhood versus left the neighborhood.
[44:33] that's what that was used for.
[44:34] asset maintenance, transport
modeling, parking capacity,
[44:38] and a variety of other
things as you can see there.
[44:40] next slide, please.
[44:42] so the software, the
claim they ingest billions
[44:49] of vehicle generated data
from connected vehicles
[44:52] and online units across multiple
makes and models means
[44:56] that the software can help
solve complex problems
[44:59] that we can't capture
everything with hardware.
[45:02] and then they're passively
collected across every road
[45:05] so this helps folks like us
make proactive decisions
[45:08] backed by data, and then I
already went over some of the data
[45:13] that it collects anonymized data.
[45:16] next slide, please.
[45:18] and there are limitations of the data.
[45:21] so at this point in time, as
I already mentioned earlier,
[45:27] not all cars provide anonymized
connected vehicle data.
[45:33] cars generally built before
2018 don't provide the data.
[45:37] and then on top of that, not all the data
[45:41] is being transmitted all the
time to the manufacturers
[45:45] and an insurance to companies
like compass as anonymized data.
[45:50] so what that means in the last sentence
[45:54] is that not all of it is,
however, for a robust analysis
[46:00] using connected vehicle
data, it commonly accepted
[46:04] that if you have a sample size of 3% to 5%,
[46:07] you're generally capturing what's going on.
[46:10] and that's true,
generally, in the real world.
[46:13] not that this is a perfect example,
[46:17] but when we do speed surveys
that are required by state law
[46:20] every seven years to establish
speed limits, 85th percentile,
[46:24] required to collect a
sample of 100 vehicles.
[46:28] that is clearly it's not
all the vehicles out there
[46:32] that travel every day or across a week.
[46:34] but that is a sample.
[46:36] and so next slide, please.
[46:40] and of course, the data,
because it's only installed
[46:46] in newer vehicles, gives
you a new car about bias.
[46:50] connected vehicles are
going to be on new vehicles.
[46:56] and so it's important to consider how
[46:59] and areas, socioeconomics may
impact the level of cd data available.
[47:05] I don't think that's a
problem here in laguna hills.
[47:09] and then you have oems and
third party vendors and databases.
[47:13] compass is only a subset
of all connected vehicles.
[47:17] and it should increase in scales,
[47:19] older fleets of vehicles
cycled through the population.
[47:21] next slide, please.
[47:24] if there is one.
[47:30] if there is not, next one.
[47:32] so at this point in
time, I'm going to go sit
[47:34] where robert sat, and I'm going
to show you what the program is.
[47:40] here it is right here.
[47:48] here's what we're trying to fill
down and be mindful of here.
[47:50] we had a wireless line
up, and a fire was mine.
[47:55] hope on and here, right?
[48:00] [inaudible] hello.
[48:08] does work?
[48:10] so this is not a perfect program.
[48:15] where's the mouse?
[48:16] does the mouse?
[48:17] this is the mouse.
[48:25] I'm wondering if we need
to zoom in here so what is it?
[48:27] control s. Control x.
How do you zoom in on this thing?
[48:36] yeah, let's do it.
[48:37] I'm going to do it a little bit more here.
[48:41] no, this is actually more of a problem.
[48:44] here we are.
[48:46] I don't think I can be
filled on in here today.
[48:50] so I'm going to move my
mouse here, and the mouse is--
[48:54] so I don't really care for the
way that the software breaks
[49:00] down speeds in a different
category is slower than 15.
[49:04] I'm between 15 and 40
isn't particularly helpful.
[49:07] and I'm still learning
how to use some of this.
[49:10] but what is important
here is I can do on the
[49:13] left-hand side, there is
a path analysis over here.
[49:18] and then I can do a date selection.
[49:19] if you can see my tiny
little mouse cursor here,
[49:22] it's next to date selection,
which is august 10, august 26.
[49:31] and then I can click on any
street, and click on any street,
[49:40] and I can see for--
[49:42] there's an example here.
[49:44] this is a street that we've
talked about in the past
[49:47] that the 85th percentile
of the sample of cars
[49:53] that have driven on
the street for the month
[49:56] between july 10 and
august 10 is 28 miles
[49:59] per hour, based upon
collected vehicle data.
[50:02] and I can do that for
any street in the city
[50:06] for most date ranges
going back a couple years.
[50:10] and I can even break it down by
days of the week and time of day.
[50:16] and so, theoretically,
here's alicia parkway
[50:20] going southbound
in front of the carl's jr.
[50:24] and in front of marshalls,
the 85th percentile is 42.
[50:31] 25 miles per hour.
[50:37] here's 42.72 miles per hour.
[50:41] and then over here, people
are picking up the speed
[50:43] and past gusto and the 85th
percentile is 52 miles per hour.
[50:50] no, I would ignore that.
[50:53] that they would have gotten
that data from some other source.
[50:58] and then as you can see
here, I eat a 5th percentile.
[51:06] this is accurate here, 45 miles an hour.
[51:09] 51 miles an hour on this
westbound laguna hills drive.
[51:17] and most-- not all streets
as you get down to the--
[51:22] as you get down to a cul-de-sac,
you're not going to find
[51:24] data because there's not
enough sample of vehicles driving.
[51:28] but we could go over
here 22 miles per hour.
[51:33] we can go to this street here.
[51:41] here is mustang over
here, 31 32 miles per hour.
[51:49] over here, 28 miles an
hour, 27 miles an hour.
[51:52] house of parkway would
expect to be a fast roadway,
[51:54] which it is, 85th percentile
is 57 miles an hour.
[51:57] let's see.
[52:09] west and east 38 and 41 miles
an hour on this to the a-ho there.
[52:14] but then when they're approaching
the newly implemented stop sign,
[52:18] we're at 30 on that segment on average.
[52:22] [inaudible]
[52:29] yeah, I haven't gotten to this yet.
[52:31] so what this is here,
so if I can get the
[52:35] cursor to work, these
are spots on the program.
[52:42] can I click on it?
[52:43] oh, I can just scroll my mouse.
[52:45] it's great.
[52:47] these are g-force, and I
haven't played with this a lot.
[52:52] but this is our points on the map
[52:56] where the program believes people are
[53:00] experiencing hard breaking or hard turning.
[53:05] and it could be for-- it doesn't
tell you why it's occurring.
[53:08] it just shows you where it's occurring.
[53:10] it could be because
people are, in this case,
[53:14] maybe they're driving pretty
fast approaching a red light
[53:17] and they are stopping too fast.
[53:19] or they-- this is a point
where maybe someone
[53:21] was about ready to
rear in someone else.
[53:25] or maybe they made a hard turn.
[53:26] or something happened over here.
[53:28] but I don't have-- I still have
to play with this program.
[53:31] not surprisingly, there's
a lot of points of g-force
[53:35] acceleration and stopping on
a near-free ways for that reason.
[53:40] sometimes you've got some
unexpected backups on southbound 5
[53:46] and it's sitting at osaparkway.
[53:47] and you're approaching stop
vehicles and you're making a hard stop.
[53:56] again, there's a lot of those
kinds of spots in near-free ways.
[53:59] but then there's also a few spots here
that are shown on our trail highways.
[54:16] and not surprisingly, we have slow speeds
within the future village at laguna hills.
[54:26] and then we can also see--
as a point of comparison,
[54:27] what's going on in
our neighboring cities
[54:30] to draw conclusions on
what maybe draw conclusions
[54:33] on what similar
neighborhoods are experiencing,
[54:36] which is also helpful, right?
[54:40] and then we have-- also, here's mill creek.
[54:45] this is southbound 34 miles an
hour and northbound 35 miles
[54:50] an hour, 85th percentile.
[54:51] [inaudible]
[55:02] so this is, no, 37 miles per hour here.
[55:08] so this is-- this legend is
different than this part here.
[55:14] so-- oh, there you go.
[55:22] so the data appears to be correct.
[55:24] I am still learning how to do
a variety of different things.
[55:28] but what we can do with
this-- this is pretty cool.
[55:31] let's see if I can do this.
[55:33] sam's better at this than I am.
[55:37] unfortunately, she
couldn't be here tonight.
[55:38] let's see here.
[55:42] are we still in laguna hills?
[55:47] I think that's laguna woods.
[55:48] now we are.
[55:48] we're getting back to laguna hills.
[55:51] so one of the things that
we were working on over here
[55:55] is how many people go from
here to here, as cut through.
[56:01] so I'm going to go and
see if I can make this work.
[56:04] so I think if I do this, I draw a wow.
[56:22] and I want to say--
and now this is the path.
[56:36] oops.
[56:49] you can see the speed-- the 85th
percentile is really interested here.
[56:53] you can see-- you see the car on
the screen on the left-hand side?
[56:57] there's a little pink car I'm moving.
[56:59] so if I move my cursor here,
this shows what the speed is
[57:04] on the specific path as you
go around the-- as you traverse.
[57:09] and there was a stop sign back, I believe.
[57:11] this was when I dipped low.
[57:13] and then they go around the corner.
[57:14] so on any sample path that you choose,
[57:18] you can see where the 85th percentile is,
[57:21] and how that changes as
you go around the corner.
[57:26] and obviously, this is
connected to vehicle status.
[57:29] there's a few gaps here.
[57:33] you can see how that changes
as the car speeds up and goes
[57:36] around the corner for the
vehicle data that it did collect.
[57:40] and then what I wanted to show you, though,
[57:48] was the g4s, it's near misses.
[57:57] so there's a near miss thing
where the g4s was a near miss,
[58:01] but another motor vehicle.
[58:18] [inaudible]
[58:27] when you do the view results, is it like
you scroll down and you can see further?
[58:39] oh, thank you.
[58:45] yes, g4s, trajectory
analysis, travel times.
[58:48] but I wanted to show you was there's
[58:52] a way on here of what percentage of
vehicles are going through on that route.
[59:00] and you can do that with this.
[59:02] and I did it before.
[59:04] and I'm a little bit
lost in how to do that.
[59:06] but just take my word
for it that it does work.
[59:08] as long as there's enough
connected vehicle data.
[59:12] so I wanted to demonstrate this to you.
[59:14] right now, I don't know how long we're
[59:18] going to have this information for.
[59:21] it's something occ is currently--
[59:24] orange county transportation
authority is currently
[59:25] providing the cities this on
a trial basis of that charge.
[59:31] eventually, they're
going to stop doing that.
[59:33] and they're going to ask
cities to individually pay
[59:37] for the program if they find it desirable.
[59:40] I still would like to
play with it some more.
[59:43] I think there's a value in the program.
[59:47] I see the promise, at least
with some program like this,
[59:49] there are other ones where
maybe we can get away
[59:53] from using tubes in our decision-making
process about what's valid, what's not valid,
[1:00:01] where are the hot spots,
what's not, some like this may.
[1:00:05] in a meeting, just like this tonight,
[1:00:08] where you can sit here and in real time
[1:00:08] bring something up and decide if something
[1:00:12] is warrants for their analysis or not.
[1:00:16] so I think that's what I want
to get across with this thing.
[1:00:19] it's not a perfect
software, but it is available.
[1:00:22] can you download some of the results?
[1:00:24] I believe I can.
[1:00:26] there are-- there's an export
data, but I've never done that.
[1:00:34] but it's over there.
[1:00:35] so I guess if we know that
the trial period is expiring,
[1:00:39] you can always pick some of
your hot spots like that data.
[1:00:43] I could do that.
[1:00:44] I've already looked at a
few places that have come up
[1:00:47] a time and time again, and the information
[1:00:50] is interestingly no different
than the tube counts were.
[1:00:52] well, within about a mile of an hour,
that was my focus here, was this area here
[1:01:01] to see if the information
was any different.
[1:01:03] I didn't find really
any information that
[1:01:05] was different than
what has been presented.
[1:01:08] that's how I kind of
validated the model, I suppose,
[1:01:12] was we did this survey multiple times,
[1:01:15] and the information is basically the same.
[1:01:18] so that's what gave me some confidence.
[1:01:22] thank you for asking the
question about whether
[1:01:24] or not this was validated
and useful or not.
[1:01:35] so after you cover this part,
we're going to be covering the 350.
[1:01:39] so while we're here
with the application open,
[1:01:44] I'm going to ask if
commissioners have any questions
[1:01:47] specifically about the application.
[1:01:49] mr. [inaudible] I think yes.
[1:01:52] I have a few.
[1:01:54] it's pulling off the vehicle information
of being a connected vehicle.
[1:01:59] is it also able to pull off
the owner information
[1:02:03] and is the security
features behind that as well?
[1:02:05] no, I can't do that.
[1:02:07] the only information I can see
is the one here on the screen.
[1:02:10] so this is a view-only program.
[1:02:15] so I don't have any
access to any data behind it.
[1:02:19] I am informed that this is anonymized data.
[1:02:23] so I'm not capable of getting
down to the granular level
[1:02:27] of making model of vehicles
that provided the data.
[1:02:32] if that was your question.
[1:02:34] yeah, I mean, it said that it
does show that different vehicles.
[1:02:38] but looking at it for several
different reasons, obviously,
[1:02:43] if we see a repetitive
pattern of a certain vehicle,
[1:02:49] the owner, it's repetitive for speeding,
[1:02:52] repetitive of where they park.
[1:02:54] it could be helpful service if
this was adaptable or tweakable
[1:02:58] in the program that we
can see repetitive cars
[1:03:01] where they're parking on
streets to help us with data
[1:03:05] that we can say, hey,
this is a hotspot area
[1:03:08] where they are continuing to be non-mobile.
[1:03:09] they're parking here
and do they live there?
[1:03:10] do they live in the apartment complexes?
[1:03:13] that would be something
that if it's tweakable,
[1:03:16] I think it would be a
great opportunity for us,
[1:03:18] also seeing that with
police services as well.
[1:03:23] you also noted that this
is a cause of a program.
[1:03:27] is it going to be a
licensing-based program?
[1:03:28] or do we know how that will line up?
[1:03:37] right now, occa held occa gave compass,
[1:03:44] the director of public works
contact information for every city.
[1:03:48] and then compass, in turn,
contacted me a few months ago
[1:03:53] and offered to give a presentation, and
I honestly didn't even know what it was.
[1:03:56] I just, I got an email and I thought it
was on a sales pitch and it kind of was.
[1:04:01] except they said, wait a
second, wait a second, this is truly
[1:04:03] free and I'm like, not, I
can't be free, you know, right?
[1:04:06] you know, like, no, no,
somebody else paid for this.
[1:04:08] I'm like, oh, okay.
[1:04:09] so I took the call and
then had the appointment
[1:04:13] and sam and I met with them and they said,
[1:04:18] what would you, you know, we can give you
[1:04:19] only city staff and give
you, you know, a couple of
[1:04:23] licenses which is just your
username and password.
[1:04:27] and so as of right now, I
don't know what the licensing
[1:04:31] even looks like 'cause
right now it's complimentary.
[1:04:34] so when it does kind of
time to actually adopt this
[1:04:39] into usage, assuming there
will become a licensing fee for us.
[1:04:41] assuming at some point in
time, look at the cost value
[1:04:44] of what the current traditional surveys cost
for the tubing in relation to unlimited,
[1:04:50] multiple opportunities
to be live and a meeting
[1:04:54] and be able to see
what's happening in the
[1:04:56] opportunity is something
that we need to consider.
[1:04:58] - I think I won't call it priceless.
[1:05:00] this sounds like a master card commercial
but I mean it sounds priceless to me.
[1:05:04] - thank you.
[1:05:05] - agreed.
[1:05:06] - thank you, that's all I have.
[1:05:07] - okay.
[1:05:08] - are you stupid or nothing?
[1:05:09] - yeah.
[1:05:12] - not on this.
[1:05:14] just a few things.
[1:05:16] so currently right now, the
cities have access to this data.
[1:05:23] it just seems like such a
wonderful wealth of information.
[1:05:31] I'm just amazed, it's a lot of folks
[1:05:36] they're concerned about
us putting cameras out there
[1:05:44] to collect data and
then I look at all this data
[1:05:46] and they don't even realize
their car is transmitting data.
[1:05:51] currently, does our police
services take advantage
[1:05:58] of any of this data to find
hotspots or anything like that?
[1:06:04] - I have not had an opportunity to sit down
[1:06:09] with the motor deputies or with our police
chief to go through this, that's on me.
[1:06:15] I'm still learning a
little bit how to use it,
[1:06:17] sort of like train the
trainer kind of program.
[1:06:20] so I wanted to go
through and actually learn a
[1:06:23] little bit more how to use
this and again, do some,
[1:06:27] again, comparisons with some
of our past traffic engineering
[1:06:30] reports and really
verify the validity of that.
[1:06:34] I think part of what I wanted
to get out of the traffic
[1:06:36] emissions tonight when
it sounds like you already
[1:06:38] have a lot of interest in
it is how much of a tool
[1:06:41] do you see this to be
and how much, you know,
[1:06:44] what kind of effort should
we put into this and this
[1:06:45] sounds like we should
put a lot of effort into it?
[1:06:48] - real quickly from our police chief, sir.
[1:06:52] - yes, hello, just wanted to comment.
[1:06:55] no, we do not use this software
to find speeders at this time.
[1:06:59] we base our enforcement
on where collisions occur
[1:07:03] in the city and we try to do our enforcement
in that area to curb those collisions.
[1:07:09] so, just wanted to-- thank you.
[1:07:12] I appreciate this.
[1:07:14] it sounds like from the
commission unless I'm getting
[1:07:18] this wrong that there's a
lot of interest in this tool.
[1:07:24] it's an amazing amount
of data that we're
[1:07:27] getting here and depending
on how you analyze it.
[1:07:32] I mean, even the tool that you showed
where you draw the line down one street
[1:07:36] and then another street and you can see
if there's any cross-through traffic going
[1:07:42] in that neighborhood and you can analyze
that is a wonderful tool and the fact
[1:07:52] that cars that are 2018 and older or newer
[1:07:57] are putting out this kind of data,
[1:08:01] which is very significant,
very significant.
[1:08:06] - did you have something, neil?
[1:08:08] - just had a quick question.
[1:08:10] so, it was the concern
from our police services
[1:08:14] that is it technically using
this kind of real time data
[1:08:18] or data from after the fact
considered like speed trap
[1:08:22] where you're trying to monitor traffic?
[1:08:25] - no sir, there's no
concern from us at this point
[1:08:29] as far as I know I haven't
contacted legal or anything,
[1:08:32] but just speaking from
myself from what I know
[1:08:34] on using this type of software, in fact,
[1:08:37] it may be something that we could look at
[1:08:40] in the future and see where
the trends of speeding are.
[1:08:43] like we would have no problem with that,
[1:08:46] but it's not a sheriff's
department data system,
[1:08:51] so it's before using it, it's
something that we would look into
[1:08:54] whether it's appropriate to use for
enforcement purposes, you know what I mean?
[1:09:00] but it looks like it looks
very interesting to me.
[1:09:04] I can see where the
speeders are and things
[1:09:05] like that might be
some places to hang out,
[1:09:07] and I can almost guarantee
that some of those places
[1:09:09] are where our collisions are occurring,
you know, at the speeding areas.
[1:09:17] - and then mr. Ames, just a quick question.
[1:09:19] so, is this even able to kind of detect
[1:09:22] if like a signal like a stoplight is
mistimed, causing like backup?
[1:09:28] no, okay.
[1:09:29] - no, it doesn't do anything.
[1:09:31] it doesn't monitor queuing,
unfortunately, that I'm aware of.
[1:09:34] it doesn't monitor
queuing that I'm aware of.
[1:09:36] - okay.
[1:09:40] are you seeking direction from the
commission to recommend to the city council
[1:09:45] to pursue a subscription
to this type of data?
[1:09:49] - no, I wasn't looking at that.
[1:09:51] I think where I wanted to go with
this was the reason why this came up
[1:09:56] at the april 30th
meeting, it was in context
[1:10:01] with the residential
streets management policy.
[1:10:06] and so the answer is maybe,
[1:10:08] but the larger context
that I wanted to give
[1:10:11] was we currently, in our residential
[1:10:15] streets management policy,
have this iterative process.
[1:10:18] and part of the iterative process
is the data collection effort.
[1:10:21] - yeah.
[1:10:22] - I guess I would like to
see, if for my two cents,
[1:10:27] I would like to be able
to use a tool like this
[1:10:29] so that whether or not that data collection
effort should even be done to start with
[1:10:35] as sort of a screening tool.
[1:10:37] - so you would like to
hear from the commission
[1:10:39] if there is interest in
pursuing this application.
[1:10:44] so I don't know if we
need to take a vote on that,
[1:10:47] but I think I'm hearing a positive response
[1:10:50] from all the commissioners
[1:10:52] that we would like to
pursue this application.
[1:10:56] - okay, I think we'll just take it at that
because when and if the freebie stops
[1:11:04] we'll have to then
budget it in our it budget,
[1:11:08] like every other software
we normally subscribe to.
[1:11:11] so I'll just take that for what it is.
[1:11:13] and then I would next
like to talk about the
[1:11:17] actual policy 350 because
there was ambits swing
[1:11:21] getting to the commissioner's
thoughts on edits.
[1:11:24] there was an interim question about
what is this 32 to 34 mile an hour thing?
[1:11:28] - right, right.
[1:11:29] - so I kind of wanted to
go, my binder's over there,
[1:11:31] so I'm gonna go back over there and then
I'm gonna try to explain what that was.
[1:11:36] - do you have something
else on the software?
[1:11:38] - more like the 350, you know,
[1:11:41] could we just easily add in a
section g under data collection?
[1:11:44] - so we're gonna get to the edits.
[1:11:45] - yeah.
[1:11:46] - we're gonna get to the edits.
[1:11:48] - yeah.
[1:11:49] - yes.
[1:11:52] - I haven't heard the word
fill down a hue like in forever,
[1:11:56] but I know exactly who he is.
[1:12:01] - you might have had an area to do.
[1:12:02] (laughing)
[1:12:06] - so, policy 350.
[1:12:13] so there was a lot of
conversation about the paragraph.
[1:12:21] where is 32 to 34 miles
an hour come in as an
[1:12:25] acceptable range of
speeds on a 25 mile an hour,
[1:12:32] either posted roadway
or a de facto speed limit
[1:12:35] on a residential street?
[1:12:37] and so the answer
is actually within the
[1:12:40] paragraph and you have
to read it a few times.
[1:12:43] it's a kind of get what
it's trying to say to you.
[1:12:46] so I'm gonna read it to you
and then I'm gonna tell you
[1:12:49] really what that means.
[1:12:51] - from an engineering perspective.
[1:12:52] - page page 32, 36 of your agenda packet.
[1:12:55] page four of the city
council policy number 350.
[1:13:00] - okay.
[1:13:05] so, I will read it to you.
[1:13:09] so through numerous
studies of traffic speeds
[1:13:12] on residential streets in the city, it has
been found that the typical prevailing
[1:13:18] traffic speed range is between
32 and 34 miles per hour.
[1:13:23] now, we just clicked on
some streets on compass
[1:13:28] and I am seeing 85th
percentile's at 28 miles an hour,
[1:13:32] 27 miles an hour on some of the streets
[1:13:34] and we've also been looking at
[1:13:39] some streets where the 85th
percentile is, 31, 33 miles per hour.
[1:13:46] so keep that in mind.
[1:13:49] and so the prevailing
speed is the speed at
[1:13:51] which 85% of the
motorists drive at or below.
[1:13:55] and the next sentence is,
if motorists are driving on a
[1:13:58] residential street in that
32 to 34 mile an hour range,
[1:14:03] because the author at the time of writing
this said that based upon the traffic,
[1:14:09] the studies conducted around that time
[1:14:14] that the results of the residential request
[1:14:19] for, you know, redoing speeds,
[1:14:22] the 85th percentile
came back a lot of times
[1:14:25] as 32 to 34 miles an hour.
[1:14:27] that's what the author is trying to say.
[1:14:29] and the author is saying
that if they are doing so safely
[1:14:33] as evidenced by the lack of documented
speed-related traffic collisions.
[1:14:39] so we first have to accept
that the speed studies
[1:14:42] coming back should the
85th percentile on a residential
[1:14:47] street has been coming back
by the city's own traffic studies
[1:14:51] of 32 to 34 miles per hour.
[1:14:54] and the study found
that there were not any
[1:14:56] traffic collisions reported
in a five-year period.
[1:15:02] and a field review of the
location, and that reveal any
[1:15:03] unusual conditions raising
other concerns for traffic safety.
[1:15:09] then that speed range
will not automatically trigger
[1:15:12] implementation as policy.
[1:15:15] so what the author is,
I believe, trying to say
[1:15:19] is that if the majority of your speeds
[1:15:22] being reported on a residential street,
[1:15:26] 85th percentile, or 32 to 34 miles an hour,
[1:15:29] and those studies have found that
there are no documented collisions,
[1:15:34] and there are no other
extenuating circumstances,
[1:15:38] then it's something that
doesn't need to be addressed.
[1:15:41] that's-- that's-- unless
you've got a ticket.
[1:15:48] what's that?
[1:15:49] unless you've got a ticket.
[1:15:50] unless you've got a ticket.
[1:15:52] accordingly, actions to
address speeding issues
[1:15:55] on residential streets
will only be recommended
[1:15:58] when the prevailing
speed of traffic on the street
[1:16:00] has been then found to be
greater than 32 to 34 miles per hour,
[1:16:04] or other unusual conditions
exist on the roadway
[1:16:07] that raise traffic safety concerns
[1:16:10] as determined by the traffic engineer.
[1:16:13] so without having had the
benefit of the compass data,
[1:16:18] but after having done many, many studies
[1:16:22] based upon many complaints
of speeding in neighborhoods,
[1:16:28] the author has found that none of the--
[1:16:33] but even though it was
above 25 miles per hour,
[1:16:38] based upon the lack of
documented traffic collisions
[1:16:42] or other things that would
indicate there's a problem,
[1:16:45] there doesn't need to be any
further work or physical devices
[1:16:49] or any further consideration made because
that is the 85th percentile on the roadway.
[1:16:54] that is the 85th percentile
that I wish everybody else.
[1:16:57] it's a network-wide speed.
[1:17:02] and so therefore, you need to
draw a line somewhere of what
[1:17:05] is acceptable and what is not acceptable.
[1:17:07] the author has written that this--
[1:17:10] and then it was later
adopted by the city council
[1:17:13] that this line is the 32
to 34 mile an hour line.
[1:17:18] I guess I would submit-- I don't have any--
[1:17:21] so that's just my
interpretation of what this is.
[1:17:25] but I would submit that
the next part of the question
[1:17:28] from april 30th was, does that line
need to be moved up, down, or left alone?
[1:17:35] and I would say that up until now
we've never had a software like compass
[1:17:41] to tell us if we move the line
up or down as a line of concern,
[1:17:47] how many more or less streets
would then be of concern in this policy,
[1:17:55] which would warrant action?
[1:17:57] so that's the data I don't have for you
because I just don't have the data yet.
[1:18:02] ok.
[1:18:03] I have a question.
[1:18:05] yes.
[1:18:06] so on that-- so the basis
for the 305 is not about
[1:18:09] speeding or breaking
the law, the speed limit.
[1:18:15] it is purely about whether we
need to regulate the speed of travel
[1:18:19] on that for a very safe passage.
[1:18:22] the purpose of 350 is about
the threshold at which you
[1:18:29] install additional traffic control
devices to affect the-- yes.
[1:18:37] I think we're in an agreement.
[1:18:38] that's fine.
[1:18:38] I'm going to clear up this on my
past comment about getting a ticket.
[1:18:41] yeah.
[1:18:42] so this is about traffic control
devices and when is it appropriate
[1:18:48] or recommended to start installing traffic
control devices because there's an outlier.
[1:18:54] the roadway is an outlier and the otherwise
network of roads and laguna hills.
[1:19:00] ok.
[1:19:01] thank you for the clarification.
[1:19:02] yeah.
[1:19:03] let me do this real quick.
[1:19:04] so we can stay to the
format and just touch
[1:19:06] all the bases before
we get to the discussion.
[1:19:09] so does that conclude
the staff report at this time?
[1:19:14] yes, it does.
[1:19:15] ok.
[1:19:16] all right.
[1:19:18] ok.
[1:19:21] so at this point, we're
going to go to commissioner
[1:19:25] questions for staff
on any of these items.
[1:19:29] and then we'll also ask for public
comment on this agenda item.
[1:19:35] so are there any questions
for staff at this point based
[1:19:39] on the items that we've
covered during the staff report?
[1:19:43] yeah, the question.
[1:19:46] why is it at 85 percentile?
[1:19:50] it's just like the 32, 34.
[1:19:52] why do we pick?
[1:19:57] because if you increase your decrease it,
[1:20:01] you know, it have pretty significant
ramifications on where you put.
[1:20:13] I'm just asking why
the 85th percentile is
[1:20:17] the traffic engineering
world also state law,
[1:20:21] based on what you establish
speed limits on other roadways.
[1:20:25] so the presumption is rightly or wrong,
[1:20:29] that 85% of the drivers
on the roadway are driving.
[1:20:36] samely, I suppose, and 15%
are driving maybe not as well.
[1:20:44] and so I have to do a
literature review on that.
[1:20:47] but the 85th percentile is the
line at which you decide where
[1:20:50] the threshold should be for
establishment of a speed limit,
[1:20:55] which is the reason why we
do our speed limit surveys every
[1:20:59] seven years for establishing
speed limits on roadways.
[1:21:04] and we actually have to go through on
arterial highways and collector roadways,
[1:21:08] and actually do the sample of the
hundred cars that I talked about earlier,
[1:21:12] and then that in turn informs and
recommends where speed limits should be set.
[1:21:19] so it's that same sort of
idea that the acceptable
[1:21:23] speed at which people
drive is that 85th percentile,
[1:21:27] because it's just
been practice, and it's
[1:21:30] been that practice for
long before I was here.
[1:21:34] so that's my answer right now,
but I'm happy to get back to you
[1:21:37] with more information on why
the benefit of the sample is set.
[1:21:45] I was curious, it's things come into
practice and never kind of get looked at.
[1:21:50] so I'm happy to provide more
information and some traffic commission.
[1:21:54] and I'm sure it's a state.
[1:21:56] it is.
[1:21:57] so 85th percentile number is a
state thing for setting speed limits.
[1:22:01] why 85th percentile came in a practice?
[1:22:04] I would need to do a little chance of that.
[1:22:06] some study.
[1:22:08] so many came up with the numbers.
[1:22:10] I'm going to happen in
1970 and several of it now.
[1:22:13] sure.
[1:22:14] [inaudible]
[1:22:17] yeah, just, it was a question.
[1:22:19] so any other specific questions,
we're going to go through
[1:22:22] the questions then we're
going to ask for, you know,
[1:22:25] the formal public comment, and
then we'll come back to discussion.
[1:22:31] that's pretty much
where we're going to do a
[1:22:32] lot of the heavy lifting
on this agenda item,
[1:22:34] including the edits
and all those things.
[1:22:37] so any other more specific
questions on this item?
[1:22:41] okay.
[1:22:42] clerk, are there any public
comments on this agenda item?
[1:22:47] no, they're not.
[1:22:48] and there are no electronic comments.
[1:22:50] okay.
[1:22:51] thank you so much.
[1:22:52] okay. We're going to bring it back to
the commission for discussion and edits.
[1:22:59] and I had just, just
as an overview, just
[1:23:03] actually speaking to
what you just said was,
[1:23:07] I just had something I wanted to say
as we go into the discussion and edits.
[1:23:13] and that is, so the policy was
created in '95 and the last refresh on it.
[1:23:21] was august 28th, 2018.
[1:23:25] so since then, many
changes have taken place.
[1:23:30] we have more population.
[1:23:33] we have permit parking impacts.
[1:23:36] we now have e-bikes.
[1:23:38] we have new developments
that are coming into the city.
[1:23:42] we have a lot more behavior
that's connected with parking.
[1:23:46] even the way that we maintain
our streets has been impacted
[1:23:50] with the cycle of how
we're maintaining our streets.
[1:23:56] because of the fiber install
that we did here in the city, a lot
[1:24:00] of our streets look very
interesting right now as a patchwork.
[1:24:04] and so, as was just mentioned, the
policy was created in that timestamp.
[1:24:12] 2018 was the refresh on that.
[1:24:16] so obviously, we're here to look at,
you know, what would the edits be?
[1:24:21] how can we make this policy better?
[1:24:24] even looking at the
software tonight is a major
[1:24:28] addition to how the
policy could be treated.
[1:24:37] so, all that being said,
it's been eight years
[1:24:41] since the city council
has touched this policy.
[1:24:45] so, they're probably not even
aware that this policy needs updates.
[1:24:51] so, all that being said, we're
going to go ahead and bring
[1:24:55] it back to the commissioners
for discussion and for edits.
[1:24:59] would you like to, should
we just start with the edits?
[1:25:03] and we can start creating a list of those.
[1:25:08] I think that would be helpful.
[1:25:11] I think it would also be helpful
to discuss why you're making edits.
[1:25:16] why, okay.
[1:25:19] with the recommendations
that you would be making, I'd
[1:25:23] like to know the why so
that way I can provide context.
[1:25:27] okay. And I also wanted to state,
you know, this was on our last agenda.
[1:25:32] and mr. Caputo, he couldn't
make it to that meeting.
[1:25:36] and it was unanimous.
[1:25:38] we didn't want to do this without you.
[1:25:41] yeah.
[1:25:42] yeah.
[1:25:44] it was important because we
realized that you were putting work
[1:25:48] into this and into what, into
what those edits would look like.
[1:25:52] so, why don't we start with you,
with your edits, and if you'd like.
[1:25:57] and staff is asking for the
edit and the reason for the edit.
[1:26:02] I can't, I can't ask about it.
[1:26:04] oh.
[1:26:05] okay.
[1:26:06] you're, you're, you're.
[1:26:08] I don't think that's, he's
got some great things there.
[1:26:11] okay, great.
[1:26:12] wonderful.
[1:26:13] neil, would you like to start?
[1:26:14] yeah, I can start.
[1:26:15] I kind of had just two things really.
[1:26:23] so, regarding section
three data collection,
[1:26:25] I wanted to add a
separate section g, stating
[1:26:27] that if available the
data collection may be
[1:26:29] conducted using a
third party data source.
[1:26:31] if it available by city staff to conduct,
you know, sections d through f.
[1:26:42] and then the second one, kind of,
I don't think I can really regarding
[1:26:46] section four approach the speeding
issues that mr. Ames pointed out.
[1:26:50] I think for me, I'd like to see data on
whether that threshold really makes sense.
[1:26:56] given different.
[1:26:58] not the 85, but the actual 32 to the 34.
[1:27:02] whether that makes sense in
every part of this community.
[1:27:05] and so, I was wondering if there
would be support from the rest of our
[1:27:08] commission to see if we could
split this city into three kind of zones.
[1:27:12] north laguna hills, central laguna
hills, which is defined north of la paz.
[1:27:16] and then kind of molten, molten flash.
[1:27:21] the, uh, meligale neighborhoods
where you have south of la paz.
[1:27:26] to see if those 85 percentile is based
on those three zones very significantly,
[1:27:30] just because the neighborhoods are very
different, the development is different.
[1:27:35] and the expected development is going
to be different between those three areas.
[1:27:39] and so, for me, that kind
of made sense regarding
[1:27:41] what we saw with the
compass data tonight.
[1:27:44] so, not really an action item on
that second piece, but, you know, a
[1:27:48] continuation is I think what I'd
like to see after we get more data.
[1:27:52] okay, does the staff
understand that statement?
[1:27:57] I think it's an excellent suggestion.
[1:28:00] okay. Do you need a y for that?
[1:28:05] okay, all right.
[1:28:07] okay.
[1:28:08] all right, wonderful.
[1:28:09] were those your edits?
[1:28:11] yep.
[1:28:12] okay, mr. Jones, would you
like to present your edits?
[1:28:15] first one is initiating an
evaluation page one page one.
[1:28:28] and, uh, the second sentence
for the bottom, it's, uh, going
[1:28:30] back to the 18-month period
that's been previously evaluated.
[1:28:45] you know, over time, we've seen,
you know, we would file a report and
[1:28:48] then maybe two meetings later,
you get a pile of pile of people in.
[1:28:50] so, I think the 18-month
is, you know, is, is long.
[1:29:01] now, you do have, um, a
page two that, that's a traffic
[1:29:03] engineer comes, you know,
override the 18-months.
[1:29:15] but, I just, I just
think it's just, it seems
[1:29:16] to me a long period
of time because these
[1:29:17] things, if it's an issue in one meeting,
it's generally going to keep, keep coming up.
[1:29:19] and, if you're saying, you're not
going to do anything 18-months.
[1:29:25] what's your recommendation
on what the time period should be?
[1:29:32] um, I actually think it should be
knocked out and just have, you know,
[1:29:36] have a, you know, at the discretion
of the commission and the traffic.
[1:29:41] so, remove that complete.
[1:29:52] it's going to come up multiple
times at a commission meeting,
[1:29:55] or if you're getting, or if
mr. Ames is getting phone calls and,
[1:30:08] it's kind of a moot point, if it
asks me. Okay, just, just my opinion.
[1:30:11] okay, does, uh, the staff understand
that recommendation and the reason why?
[1:30:17] I do understand the recommendation and
the reason why, um, I guess, my, I guess
[1:30:21] my concern is then, what, what does
the, what does the feedback look like?
[1:30:34] I mean, how does, if there's no time limit
on that, um, I guess, so if I took the,
[1:30:38] that, um, commission at the cell, made on
g, and then I remove the time limit on here.
[1:30:46] I guess, then, if those two recommendations
were put into implementation, or we remove
[1:30:50] the time limit, but
then I have a new tool
[1:30:52] that allows me to see
if anything's changed.
[1:30:56] would that, and then I declare that it's
nothing's changed, does that, does that take
[1:31:00] care of the problem, or does it need to
be brought back to the traffic commission?
[1:31:30] my only worry is then loading up the
traffic commission agenda with, with items.
[1:31:33] I guess that's what I'm
trying to get more clarification.
[1:31:39] that we have to put an
18 months, you know, it's
[1:31:41] going to continue to
come up. It's just, I think it's
[1:31:43] kind of a redundant
because it's, but just, you
[1:31:45] know, in my opinion,
you're going to clarify that.
[1:31:48] so when you mean strike out, like
strike out if the identified issue blah,
[1:31:51] blah, blah, and then even that second
sentence after that no further evaluation.
[1:31:59] yeah. Yeah. So it currently
the way the policy is
[1:32:03] written, and correct, staff
correct me if I'm wrong.
[1:32:16] even though it does say 18
months, the, the city engineer
[1:32:18] has a lot of, if you look
through the whole policy, and
[1:32:20] I know that we all have,
there's a lot of discretion for
[1:32:23] the city engineer to step up
and say something's changed.
[1:32:28] we have new data,
there's new input, and that
[1:32:31] basically wipes out that
18 month timeline anyways.
[1:32:44] but, but I understand
what you're saying. And,
[1:32:46] and so, and so what,
so what you'd like to see
[1:32:48] is, is specifically, you
want to see from the word
[1:32:50] if, and that entire
sentence all the way down.
[1:32:53] so directs. And, and then,
and then on the next page
[1:32:57] getting rid of no further
evaluation will be performed.
[1:33:03] so in other words, we're
removing all of those words. Exactly.
[1:33:07] okay. Does, does staff
understand that recommendation?
[1:33:11] I understand the recommendation,
but I, I don't agree with it.
[1:33:15] okay. Okay. All
right. That's okay.
[1:33:19] that's okay. And then next is
number two evaluation process. Okay.
[1:33:38] if fair first sentence, when
a resident raises traffic
[1:33:40] safety concern, then,
I'd like to add, you know,
[1:33:42] total volume of traffic
amount of pass through
[1:33:43] traffic, and then add to
that, both parking and noise.
[1:33:45] okay. So, say, say that again.
What sentence is that?
[1:33:49] um, the first, first sentence.
The first paragraph.
[1:33:52] yeah. It has a, a
number of criteria. Okay.
[1:33:55] and you want to ask the,
uh, collision events, pedestrian
[1:33:59] access issues, then add
to that parking and noise.
[1:34:03] so, comma, parking and noise. Okay.
Does staff understand that recommendation?
[1:34:11] can we add, um, you
know, street sweeping or
[1:34:15] like a road maintenance?
Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
[1:34:19] uh, like a behavioral aspect with like
the trash or something like that. Yeah.
[1:34:27] does, does staff need a,
a why for that? Yes, please.
[1:34:30] yeah. I think, you know, we
had two or three meetings ago.
[1:34:42] an issue from laguna woods on, you know,
what's concerning is you're getting, um, you
[1:34:45] know, the street
takeovers, the intersection
[1:34:47] takeovers, which is a
noise issue, obviously.
[1:34:56] and then if, you know, we're seeing a
legal parking to have, to have people
[1:35:00] have, have, uh, citizens come up and,
you know, address that with us also.
[1:35:10] and then, um, possibly it's street
sweeping because I personally,
[1:35:13] when street sweeping initially
came up, I was kind of pro brewing it.
[1:35:24] I think it's a big tool
that we should be using
[1:35:26] more to make sure that
cars are staying put for one.
[1:35:32] they're not being moved like, like I'm,
like I'm the old most right, for example.
[1:35:36] so I, yeah, I think street
sweeping is a big, is an issue.
[1:35:46] okay. So, so you
added your words, um,
[1:35:47] mr. Patel, you added the
street sweeping and then
[1:35:50] could I change the second to adverse on
social behavior, adverse on social behavior.
[1:35:57] so, yeah, because, because, yeah, we
saw, we saw it. But how do we, how do we
[1:36:00] define that, though? Because we're
being very specific with the other words.
[1:36:06] you know, we're talking about, that's
very specific street sweeping, we're,
[1:36:10] we're talking about very specific
things. How do we define that term?
[1:36:19] I think, you know, adverse
on social behavior, such as
[1:36:22] littering, you know, drug use,
yeah, sexual, yeah, something.
[1:36:27] so in other words, you would
have to add that statement
[1:36:30] and then you would have to
put some examples, such as,
[1:36:40] when people are seeing,
you know, right, needles.
[1:36:42] well, we've had a lot
of public speakers. I
[1:36:43] mean, it can also include
things like, you know,
[1:36:46] drag racing, donuts,
you know, things like that.
[1:36:48] okay. But that would have
to be defined, though, right?
[1:36:51] okay. Staff has some
comments on this.
[1:36:58] yeah, I do. Sorry. Yeah, no, no. Yeah,
we can see the body language. We're
[1:37:01] throwing things out there. No, I appreciate
that, actually. So, a few comments.
[1:37:08] so, this is a residential streets
traffic management policy.
[1:37:11] so, it's not meant to be applied to arterial
highways or even collector roadways.
[1:37:18] and the end result of this
residential streets management
[1:37:22] policy at the back is about
traffic control devices. Okay.
[1:37:26] so, I'm, I'm appreciate that
all of those are concerns.
[1:37:30] we've heard all those
concerns. I'm just not sure.
[1:37:39] we're stuck there applicable
to this policy because I can't,
[1:37:41] I can't measure noise and I
wouldn't know how to put up a sign
[1:37:43] to address noise or put in a
speed hump to address noise or
[1:37:45] street maintenance or trash
or anything else related to that.
[1:37:47] okay. This is a,
that's a good point.
[1:37:49] yeah, this is a, a speeding,
this is relating to speeding.
[1:37:52] okay. Yeah. So, I, I think
if, if we want to address
[1:37:55] those other items, that
would be in a different place.
[1:38:04] so, how do these
recommendations then, what's been
[1:38:06] presented by mr. Jones
in regards to moving the
[1:38:08] timeline and those
things, those, those are
[1:38:10] applicable to the, you
know, obviously to the policy.
[1:38:14] but in regards to the other, other
items that were just presented,
[1:38:18] what portion of that is acceptable
to the policy or is there nothing?
[1:38:25] I, I, I wouldn't call, I wouldn't couches
acceptable or not acceptable. I would
[1:38:29] more couch it is, whether or not it's
within the realm of what the policy is.
[1:38:37] so, I wouldn't say noises, trash,
street sweeping, street maintenance,
[1:38:41] I mean adverse, the donuts on
the roadways, unless they occur.
[1:38:47] and in the middle of a
residential street, most of the
[1:38:49] donuts are occurring on
white or arterial highways. I don't
[1:38:51] think, I think it's pretty
hard to do a donut on
[1:38:53] intersection of two small
residential streets, but maybe not.
[1:38:58] great route in victoria, that's
the end of victoria. Those are not
[1:39:00] residential streets, those sort
of arterial highway in a, okay.
[1:39:03] in the collector roadway, so I
guess I'm just trying to illustrate
[1:39:06] that I think those things
belong in a different discussion.
[1:39:09] okay, somewhere else
outside of this policy.
[1:39:12] so that's fine. Are
you good on that?
[1:39:15] okay, absolutely.
Okay, that's good.
[1:39:18] all right, you can continue
with your edits, please.
[1:39:46] I remember five, you know,
one of the things that we get hit
[1:39:49] with on a lot of the streets is
they're relatively low volume.
[1:39:53] so we're talking about, you
know, 1,500 and number five.
[1:39:57] which page are you on? I know.
It's approach to volume issues.
[1:40:13] okay, got it. All these
streets are relatively
[1:40:15] low volume, and
so if we, it's difficult,
[1:40:17] you know, to get to the volumes, to put
in, you know, some of the speed controls.
[1:40:31] is, is the amount of volume
necessary is the 1500,
[1:40:33] a adjustable, or is it
something that, again,
[1:40:39] and the reason I ask is just,
we hit it and you're going, well, it
[1:40:42] doesn't make any sense to put it
because the volumes are so small.
[1:40:48] and, so it's kind of a
more of a question than.
[1:40:51] so you don't like the way the volumes are
presented, or it, or it doesn't make sense.
[1:40:58] why do we use, if volumes, like that? Yeah.
[1:41:02] okay, so for some.
[1:41:03] so this requires a little bit
of, I think, historical context.
[1:41:16] so this, this part here is,
it's related to speeding, it's
[1:41:19] related to residential streets,
but there was a point in time.
[1:41:23] when the city was a newer city
that there was a lot of concerns,
[1:41:27] more concerns there are
today about cut through traffic.
[1:41:32] yeah. Hi, and I'm a
little bit surmising here,
[1:41:36] but I, I, but I also used
to work here years ago.
[1:41:40] so I, I think I know
what this is trying to say.
[1:41:45] this is, this paragraph is
trying to talk about what an
[1:41:48] acceptable level of number of
vehicles should be on a street.
[1:41:53] and I think what it's, it's the
volume of pass through traffic.
[1:41:58] so what it's trying to get at is
the notion that there needs to be.
[1:42:06] gates or hard stops in the middle of a
block to redirect traffic to another street.
[1:42:17] and I, I believe what this is trying to get
at is what are the acceptable thresholds
[1:42:20] for vehicles going
down a residential streets,
[1:42:23] the point where it
becomes of a concern.
[1:42:25] case in point, we're aware
of in some neighborhoods,
[1:42:28] the neighborhood that
we're talking about right now.
[1:42:31] beck and ham street,
cammerwell, wilkes, they have the
[1:42:35] double gates over there to
separate out the motorists.
[1:42:44] on beck and ham from being
able to turn on cammerwell
[1:42:46] to turn on wilkes, you had
previously heard from prior
[1:42:48] speakers that have history
in the area about why those
[1:42:50] were put up, and why they
were maybe put up after the fact.
[1:42:52] and I think that's what
this is meant to address.
[1:42:55] it's kind of a, it's a, it's an adjoining
but not direct topic with speeding.
[1:43:03] it's meant to address that if there's
a lot of cars on the roadway and
[1:43:07] they're all speeding, you know, we
should be talking about volume as well.
[1:43:12] and so this is just slightly, slightly
different thing than the rest of it.
[1:43:17] the only time that it talks
about speeding is when we finally
[1:43:21] get down to roman numeral
6, which is physical devices.
[1:43:31] and basically the 5000
vehicles is meant to really try
[1:43:33] to capture, are you getting
your bang for the buck,
[1:43:35] after you've spent money
installing something, is it
[1:43:37] really affecting that many
people, and that many motorists.
[1:43:42] but this, this section right here,
the redistribution of motor vehicles
[1:43:46] is a little bit of an outlier almost
in the rest of this, this policy.
[1:43:50] I think it was meant to address the
very specific other topic of concern.
[1:43:54] okay.
[1:43:55] is that, yeah.
[1:43:58] yeah.
[1:43:59] is that good?
[1:44:00] yeah.
[1:44:08] I'm just concerned that, you know, we
keep bumping up against the volumes and
[1:44:12] it, to me, it doesn't make a lot of sense
if, you know, it's like this to the ao.
[1:44:16] I don't think, I don't think you have 1500.
[1:44:28] in fact, most of these, 25 mile an
hour streets, I think, I doubt if you have,
[1:44:31] through the 85% that most of them don't
have more than a few hundred I would guess.
[1:44:36] I think that's what the
authors trying to indicate is that
[1:44:40] a lot of these streets don't
even meet these thresholds.
[1:44:44] so trying to reroute
traffic, for instance, it
[1:44:47] shouldn't be above
paramount concern, I guess.
[1:44:50] is the best way I could couch that.
[1:44:54] all right.
[1:44:55] that's it.
[1:44:56] you're good?
[1:44:57] yeah.
[1:44:58] good.
[1:44:59] okay.
[1:45:00] real quickly, before we end
your edits, I just wanted to make
[1:45:03] sure I'm, it's page number two
of the policy packet page 30 of 36.
[1:45:12] we're commissioner jones
asked for where it says at the
[1:45:15] end there on the first paragraph
under evaluation process.
[1:45:21] at the end where it says
pedestrian access issues,
[1:45:24] comma, did we leave in the
streets we've been named.
[1:45:29] and so I was concerned because we kind
of got caught up in a conversation there.
[1:45:35] and I wanted to make sure because
you had mentioned street sweeping.
[1:45:39] yeah, I think we've got it.
[1:45:41] it's, this isn't where we put.
[1:45:45] because because I know
in the past we've tried
[1:45:48] to talk about a policy
for street sweeping.
[1:45:52] I didn't give we do want to
talk about street sweeping.
[1:45:57] one of the things I do want to do
tonight is for that meeting next meeting
[1:46:00] when we do talk about parking, we
should bring up the 1994 ordinance.
[1:46:04] on the parking permit program.
[1:46:07] because I think that is
where we can add street
[1:46:08] sweeping because I don't
think it wasn't that one.
[1:46:11] okay.
[1:46:12] yeah.
[1:46:13] yeah.
[1:46:14] I think it's just doesn't apply to
street sweeping and noise and that.
[1:46:17] okay.
[1:46:18] yeah.
[1:46:19] because it's, it's gotta fit somewhere.
[1:46:20] it's really speed.
[1:46:23] but it just, it just doesn't fit in
this, in this policy because again,
[1:46:27] whether it's e-bikes or any of these
other issues, it's got to fit in a policy.
[1:46:31] yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Right.
Okay. Are you done?
[1:46:34] I'm done.
[1:46:35] okay. Good, good, good.
[1:46:36] okay. Let's move our to your mystery.
[1:46:38] we don't.
[1:46:39] thank you very much.
[1:46:42] you know, noting that in your, in
chair miller's opening statements
[1:46:46] that the, you know, this policy was
created in 1995 and revised 2018.
[1:46:50] you know, just in that amount of
time how much things have changed.
[1:46:53] you know, the kind of cars
we're doing looking at technology
[1:46:56] that's, that's really changed
how we're doing it changes fast.
[1:46:59] really fast.
[1:47:05] so looking at what we
have in our current overall
[1:47:07] view, which is kind of why
I wanted, you know, make
[1:47:09] sure that we're all interested
in the clarity of, you know, what
[1:47:11] was, was discussed on, on page
four, page three, two, three, six.
[1:47:15] you know, that the floors
are driving an essential lack of
[1:47:17] documented speeds and a
three, two, three, four percent tiles.
[1:47:20] that this was not for speeding.
[1:47:24] it was for traffic control devices.
[1:47:26] and that's really what
this whole thing is about.
[1:47:30] we were shown a fantastic, you
know, current live compass program.
[1:47:39] we really don't have it worth stated that
our technology is about to step into this.
[1:47:44] so looking at the data collection, adding
in not necessarily compass as the word,
[1:47:48] but adding in a section, the wording I
don't have with me today, but, you know,
[1:48:01] that we're able to, to take, you
know, the available data information
[1:48:03] available to us, because it doesn't
really state, you know, it's, it's
[1:48:05] showing that we have available,
you know, but we're doing it the old
[1:48:07] school way, and taking this
information and then using it correctly.
[1:48:09] and because if we, if we
add that kind of information
[1:48:12] into the data collection,
it makes things real time.
[1:48:18] and then it changes our 18 month concern,
then it changes our 60 day concern, then
[1:48:22] it changes everything else that it folds
backwards into our, our other statements.
[1:48:37] so by changing one
statement or adding in that
[1:48:38] a ability to use
technology for evaluating
[1:48:40] item 350 and number 350, it changes our
guidelines to how we approach those items.
[1:48:42] so I'd like to get
something in the, in the
[1:48:44] verbiage of that where
we put it, I'm not 100% sure,
[1:48:46] but I think it's, it's
something to definitely
[1:48:48] look at as how we place
that into our current.
[1:49:02] so under approach to
speeding issues, you would
[1:49:04] like a paragraph that
specifically talks about
[1:49:06] using our current
tools to collect data in
[1:49:07] regards to how we
approach the speeding issues.
[1:49:15] so this whole article is not about, it's
not about speeding, it's about controlling.
[1:49:20] and this is how to, how
do we control the overall
[1:49:22] flow and how it's doing
and what's acceptable.
[1:49:28] but by taking the control
devices, which is all this
[1:49:30] everything it's right been
put in place, then it goes
[1:49:32] back to, you know, page
five where it's saying, okay,
[1:49:34] now these are the devices
we currently have to us to use.
[1:49:36] so it's all pressing up to page five.
[1:49:42] so without establishing what we're, you
know, how we get the information over doing
[1:49:46] up to this point, you know, we're not, it's
all about how do we slow down the speed.
[1:49:51] and adding in the, the current
warning signs and downhill speed signs
[1:49:54] and repainting streets, I mean,
that is how it reduce the speed.
[1:50:00] but the reasons why we're doing
it is because of there is they, you
[1:50:03] know, 32 mile an hour, 85% tiles,
you know, three evaluation of it.
[1:50:12] we have technology
that we don't have to go
[1:50:13] through those channels
anymore to do that and just
[1:50:15] kind of bringing us to
the current, you know, the
[1:50:18] current available
technology that we have to us.
[1:50:24] so finding how to get
to there, that's really
[1:50:26] what we want to do
because even, even some of
[1:50:27] these switches, you know,
we've, we've also wanted
[1:50:29] to look at what modern
devices are there now.
[1:50:31] we've got some ideas here, but,
you know, these are all old ideas.
[1:50:35] there's got to be new ideas
out there that we can adapt.
[1:50:56] and a good example would be
like a modern speed trailer that
[1:50:58] not only tells the driver what
their speed is, but maybe takes a
[1:51:01] picture of their license plate
sends them a friendly coat postcard
[1:51:03] mail and says, hey, just to,
well, friendly is, is it can be.
[1:51:06] that says, hey, you, please
slow down on this street, you
[1:51:08] know, so, you know, I'm sure
there's all kinds of technology
[1:51:10] as, as you're saying, that's
available that, I mean, we
[1:51:12] got a little taste of it
tonight, which is really good.
[1:51:14] to staff understand what type of a
paragraph is being requested to be added.
[1:51:41] I think I do, but I also, I think maybe
part of it was addressed already by
[1:51:43] commissioner patel
[1:51:43] with the point g, adding in from an afternoon
roman numeral three data collection,
[1:51:45] where you have
[1:51:45] a little bit of an off ramp there where
if available data collection could be
[1:51:47] collected by a third
[1:51:47] party source, and I'd put a hyphen in
there or comma such as collect, collect a
[1:51:48] vehicle data.
[1:51:49] so, to collect data for items d
and f kind of thing is what I heard.
[1:52:10] the other part about it, I heard, I
thought I heard was about going back to the
[1:52:13] 32 to 34 miles per hour in the approach
to speeding issues, and I wasn't quite
[1:52:16] sure if you were indicating that there
needed to be, wasn't sure what you were
[1:52:19] indicating in terms of what needed to be
added specifically to roman numeral four.
[1:52:29] I think it's just clarity that the
speeding issues are not, because we
[1:52:31] have the 32 and 34 mile an
hour range, it's not, it's still illegal.
[1:52:41] it's 25 hours opposed to speed
limit, because that's the range
[1:52:44] that is to determine on whether
we use a speed controlled device.
[1:52:47] can you say it one more time?
[1:53:03] just because the average
85% tile is the 32 to 34 miles
[1:53:04] per hour, or that they're up,
that it's not that you're not
[1:53:05] breaking the law, you're
still speeding, but it's a
[1:53:06] recommendation, whether we need
to add in speed controlled devices.
[1:53:07] I think that's an excellent point.
[1:53:12] ok, I fully understand that it helps
them when they go to court, and they
[1:53:15] say, well, I'm within safe, it says
here I can be safe, I'm driving safe.
[1:53:19] it's not that, whether
you're driving safe, that's
[1:53:21] for a speed controlled
device, not for truly speeding.
[1:53:32] the clarification of this
policy is for speed controlled
[1:53:36] devices that this range
is only for that purpose.
[1:53:51] that one, compass does,
I don't know if we need,
[1:53:53] there's a very open on
page eight, it does say other
[1:53:55] issues with the traffic
engineering will be considered
[1:53:57] as a team to program
by city traffic engineer.
[1:54:07] is that really an overall statement
that anything is in this particular
[1:54:11] number 350 can be altered at the
discretion of the city traffic engineer?
[1:54:15] is that a kind of a catch all?
[1:54:38] it is, so I would, so the
item, roman imeral 6 physical
[1:54:40] devices is concentrated
on speed humps, and I think g
[1:54:42] is a catch all as it relates
only to speed humps, and
[1:54:44] then the list above it, a
through f is meant to document.
[1:54:54] it's meant to document
examples or requirements of when
[1:54:57] speed humps can be implemented
or should not be implemented.
[1:55:06] and I think that the, I would think of
the author put that in there because
[1:55:10] there are things that may not have been
contemplated that should be considered.
[1:55:35] in that analysis, and I guess I would say
that even if g exists, there would, if you
[1:55:37] got to roman imeral 6 and are implementing
a physical device, that doesn't preempt the
[1:55:40] city traffic engineer would still need to
create the traffic commission agenda report
[1:55:42] and the city council agenda report and
justify the whole list of reasons why or why
[1:55:45] not.
[1:55:45] and that thing is required or not required.
[1:55:50] so I'm not really sure, so I'm
not sure that it adds a lot of value,
[1:55:54] but at the same time I don't
think it will result in surprise.
[1:55:59] the traffic engineer
came up with some new
[1:56:01] criteria that you've
never heard of and that
[1:56:03] you're never going to see in that there was
a unilateral decision not to do something.
[1:56:08] I think this is just meant to be a
catch all because the author didn't think
[1:56:12] of all the things that could affect
the installation of the speed humps.
[1:56:21] and so my thought on that was maybe
adding a safety net to that is traffic
[1:56:25] engineer and recommendation or
recommendation from traffic commission.
[1:56:30] if it is a catch all, then it
allows us to check and balance.
[1:56:37] so define that last sentence
of what you'd like to see there.
[1:56:43] the verbiage is fine by the city
engineer and the traffic commission.
[1:56:53] so it's a recommendation that is still
going to go back to the city council.
[1:57:01] for the reasons why I explain I don't
necessarily see a problem with that.
[1:57:10] just the checks and
balance so that it's not all the
[1:57:13] pressures on the city engineer
to have the full onus of it.
[1:57:18] so staff understands that recommendation.
[1:57:22] that's all I have.
[1:57:25] okay, you're good.
[1:57:27] all right, so mine are,
you all covered a lot of it.
[1:57:33] which is why we get a later.
[1:57:35] yeah, I'll cover it a lot of it.
[1:57:37] my first edit, let's see here.
[1:57:42] let me go to page one.
[1:57:46] let me find it here.
[1:57:52] these issues will be
documented addressed through
[1:57:55] the use of available traffic
engineering standards.
[1:57:58] place important.
[1:58:00] so it was just a suggestion that
it's the first paragraph and I'll read it.
[1:58:06] it's the middle sentence.
[1:58:14] these issues will be documented
and addressed through the use of
[1:58:17] available traffic engineering
standards and police enforcement tools.
[1:58:24] I was actually going to
stop with a comma there,
[1:58:27] police enforcement comma
traffic controlling tools.
[1:58:32] does that make sense?
[1:58:36] I know it's just
wordsmithing at this point.
[1:58:42] well, the standard
is the standard which
[1:58:45] defines how we're
going to do things, right?
[1:58:52] but the tools in this point,
I was trying to say traffic
[1:58:55] controlling tools would be the
things we've already talked about.
[1:59:01] are we putting in speed humps or
whatever, stop signs or whatever?
[1:59:10] yeah.
[1:59:11] the next item below that,
it's in initiating and evaluation.
[1:59:16] it's really just paragraphs a and b.
[1:59:20] they both start out with a resident has.
[1:59:31] and it seems to me that you
could actually take the words from
[1:59:35] a and b and you could actually
combine them into one paragraph.
[1:59:39] because basically we're
saying, okay, a resident
[1:59:43] has contacted city staff
by letter by an email.
[1:59:51] when really, it could be as simple
as a resident has contacted the city in
[1:59:55] any form, whether it's city staff, city
council, by electronic communication.
[1:59:59] it doesn't matter,
they've contacted the city.
[2:00:07] so, and what I mean by
all of that is that we don't
[2:00:11] have to spell out by
telephone, by letter, by email.
[2:00:15] because they could contact us anyway.
[2:00:23] I mean, they might, you know, a resident
may see you at a coffee shop and say, mr.
[2:00:28] jones, we got this, you know,
and so, so in other words,
[2:00:35] instead of defining all these
different pathways for contacting us, I
[2:00:38] think those two paragraphs a and b
could be very simple and just combined.
[2:00:41] and it's just a wordsmithing
thing, you know, just to add
[2:00:45] to that, the, you know, I
think it's contact to the city.
[2:00:49] you know, me personally, if someone goes up
to me and wants to have a complaint to me.
[2:00:54] I don't want that responsibility
to me that that's the day I
[2:00:57] saw mike and he said, I told
him and he didn't push the city.
[2:01:01] I think keeping the verbiage that
they need to connect with the city is.
[2:01:05] and in official, what
you're saying is in an official.
[2:01:11] correct.
[2:01:12] yeah.
[2:01:14] because by coming to us, then we
take on the onus of their complaint
[2:01:18] if we take that part out of
it, then we are the onus of it.
[2:01:22] okay.
[2:01:23] contact the city.
[2:01:24] no, no, no.
[2:01:25] I like you contact it.
[2:01:26] you can fax, you know,
pigeon, whatever it has to be,
[2:01:28] but I mean, they still need
to contact the city for that.
[2:01:31] and that would be my, if
someone asked me, I would say,
[2:01:34] please, you know, file,
file this issue with the city.
[2:01:37] because I don't, I don't want
to have that come back on me.
[2:01:41] but I want to make sure that
if we're taking out those items,
[2:01:44] it's just make sure it states
that it's back to the city.
[2:01:47] and yeah.
[2:01:48] so we're defining it
as an official contact,
[2:01:52] official, whatever
those are defined as.
[2:02:08] yeah, I think I would agree with you that
there's probably some stream landing that
[2:02:10] can be done here, but I think the underlying
message between a and b is the fact that
[2:02:12] they either the city staff was either
directly contacted or the city staff was here
[2:02:14] as in the fact that the traffic commission
meeting heard the complaint kind of thing.
[2:02:16] and we have a record of it that way.
[2:02:18] okay.
[2:02:19] good.
[2:02:24] um, the other items, and
again, we're, we're in this
[2:02:28] process of figuring out
where all this new stuff fits.
[2:02:37] you know, like take for instance, and I
just wrote these down as notes, not more
[2:02:41] of of edits because I think we've
done all the edits, but just in regards of.
[2:02:45] e bike policy, you know, put.
[2:02:58] when developers come to
our city and they're going
[2:03:00] to build a new apartment
building and having that in
[2:03:02] place where, you know,
the state may say, oh, well,
[2:03:04] you can build an apartment
with only 1.5 parking spots.
[2:03:11] but the city of lagoon hills is asking
for two parking spots, you know, and
[2:03:15] again, that's it's not within this policy,
but, but it's it's the whole idea of.
[2:03:21] what I mean, we had that other
discussion about do we need to
[2:03:25] create an entire policy just for
street sweeping when when really.
[2:03:29] and the only reason why
I'm bringing these up is
[2:03:32] because this policy hasn't
been touched in eight years.
[2:03:40] and, um, I think I think a lot of
times we're playing whack a mole with
[2:03:44] a lot of these ideas because the
policy hasn't been touched in a while.
[2:04:01] but I don't I don't have any
outside of that. I don't have
[2:04:03] any other edits. I mean, it's
we we've covered pretty much
[2:04:06] everything. And I think from
this point forward, I'm assuming
[2:04:08] and staff can tell me the
process now or tell us the process.
[2:04:16] are we going to bring
this back at the november
[2:04:18] meeting with all of
the edits for us to
[2:04:20] go through this process
again and like kind
[2:04:22] of ratify the edits or
how we can handle that.
[2:04:31] I thought that far ahead. But
now that you mentioned that
[2:04:33] the november meeting that
seems like a really long ways
[2:04:36] away. Right. But we have our
special meeting, which is for
[2:04:38] a specific thing, which
isn't about this. So I suppose.
[2:04:47] yeah, that's true. We
did. I didn't mention that
[2:04:49] I wanted some time to go
through the the compass
[2:04:51] regarding the 3234 so I
guess the short answer
[2:04:53] is yes, I guess this would
come back in november.
[2:05:09] I think what I will do, though,
if I can, and time allows. I
[2:05:12] think what I'll do is that most
edits are there other than this
[2:05:14] research component here on
number four thing that what I could
[2:05:17] do is just send out a red line
and then bcc and then you could.
[2:05:22] if anybody wants to provide
me any feedback before november,
[2:05:24] you can tell me if I got it wrong.
And then that way we're not
[2:05:27] looking at it for the first
time, you know, right beforehand
[2:05:29] kind of thing. I think that
would be helpful to me at least.
[2:05:44] yeah, I mean, we do this
with the recommended edits. I
[2:05:46] mean, eventually, eventually,
even after all this is done,
[2:05:49] it still have to go to for
off a beaten path and by
[2:05:51] continue to talk about it. We
can't, you know, so if we can.
[2:05:56] I'm not, I mean, your
edits are, are not that many.
[2:05:59] so, but I, if I see any
red flags, I'll do that.
[2:06:17] okay, perfect. So, is, is that an acceptable
timeline to, to, so basically then within
[2:06:20] the next, I don't know, maybe by october
you're sending us out the edited document.
[2:06:23] and then you're bringing that back to
us in november. And pretty much at that
[2:06:27] point, we've all looked at it and
we've all said, yes, this is good to go.
[2:06:32] yeah, that's right, that's right,
collect a recommendation.
[2:06:34] right, and then we make our
recommendations. Yeah, okay.
[2:06:36] is that sound good to the information?
Okay, wonderful.
[2:06:44] oh, I just staff understand all
the direction on, on this item.
[2:06:47] yeah, I think so.
Okay, great. Thank you.
[2:06:53] alrighty, so that, that takes care of,
do we need to take a vote on that?
[2:07:07] on the recommendations.
I'm not even sure how we
[2:07:09] would, I suppose if you
want to take a vote on it,
[2:07:11] your, your, if I can, so
I'll repeat what I think
[2:07:13] would be a good recommendation
based upon all of this.
[2:07:26] I would say that the recommendation
of the traffic commission
[2:07:28] is for city staff to receive
the proposed edits and to do a
[2:07:31] red line document for presentation
of the traffic commission
[2:07:33] at the next available meeting
which is likely to be november.
[2:07:47] and then the second item
that I heard you say earlier
[2:07:49] was, is that you're
recommending city staff, pursue
[2:07:52] the technology, collective
vehicle data technology,
[2:07:54] if and when that the,
the, it stops becoming free.
[2:07:57] does everybody understand the recommendations?
I'll first that recommendation
[2:08:01] if you want to be needed for
georgia. Julie was that as he put it.
[2:08:08] yeah, this is some smiles over
here. I mean, that we got it on
[2:08:10] video. We got on recording. So I
think we got it. We'll find a way
[2:08:12] to clean up a little bit as long
as they give us a little bit of
[2:08:14] leeway on the language exactly,
but I think we got that right.
[2:08:16] okay, so we're good. Yeah, so if you want
to take a vote on that. Okay, everybody
[2:08:20] understands the recommendation. I'll make
a motion to accept staff's recommendations.
[2:08:24] I'll second, and we have a second on clerk.
You can take the.
[2:08:31] vice chair patel. Aye. Chair miller.
Aye. Commissioner jones. Aye.
[2:08:37] commissioner caputo. Aye.
[2:08:40] motion passes unanimously.
Thank you. Thank you. Okay.
[2:08:52] that moves us forward to our informational
items. And at this time, we're
[2:08:55] going to have our police chief provide
our sheriff's department verbal report.
[2:08:59] sir.
[2:09:01] sir, as I have nothing to report
tonight since, since last meeting.
[2:09:07] well, I will say that you put together
a wonderful national night out.
[2:09:11] it was a wonderful event out
at the park. It was well attended.
[2:09:16] they had all of their
special forces out there,
[2:09:20] including all your
drone technology, which
[2:09:22] is amazing. So thank you so much for putting
together a wonderful event for the city.
[2:09:28] it was very well done. Very well done.
[2:09:33] yes, that moves us
forward to agenda item 4.2.
[2:09:38] and this is our city
engineer's verbal report.
[2:09:41] I have no report to provide tonight.
Okay, thank you. That brings us forward
[2:09:47] to our commissioner comments, and
we can start down here with mr. Caputo.
[2:09:52] no comments. No comment.
[2:09:55] just a quick request for city
staff. So during the meeting
[2:10:00] next month, I was wondering
if we could bring just for
[2:10:04] purposes of discussion, the
1994 parking ordinance to set
[2:10:08] up the permit parking for
everyone to review any prior
[2:10:14] parking agendas, maybe
just like even the staff
[2:10:17] reports, not necessarily
all the addendum behind
[2:10:21] it. So at least, you
know, some of the various
[2:10:24] issues are at top of
mind or even a list, maybe.
[2:10:32] so there's usually, we have 14 permit parking, are you talking about the permit parking district ones
[2:10:39] specifically or the the parking permit
district specifically, but also, you know,
[2:10:45] situations like los alisos
[2:10:47] and some of the other ones
that we've kind of discussed, just so that,
[2:10:50] you know at least everyone has
[2:10:52] it top of mind that, you know, over the years we've
[2:10:55] discussed x y z
[2:10:58] through all the greek alphabet letters almost. Yeah.
[2:11:00] I will do my best. I'm anticipating that's a lot of pages.
[2:11:04] but I'll do my best to
find, I think I know where I
[2:11:11] think I know where you're
going with this to find a
[2:11:13] good cross section of the
release to those those topics.
[2:11:16] and, you know, our arterial highways and
collector streets and residential streets and
[2:11:22] residential street parking, all those
things of parking being that was brought up.
[2:11:26] yeah, the street
sweeping thing needs to be
[2:11:28] brought up. It's going
to be an interesting
[2:11:32] report. I had envisioned writing a dart
board of a report and letting everybody.
[2:11:36] tell me what they think of it
kind of thing, you know, yeah,
[2:11:46] okay, I do have a housekeeping
question. Yes, not a comment.
[2:11:49] yes, for next next month's meeting, what's
the format of that obviously it's going
[2:11:54] to be a full house with us and city council.
Is it going to be a workshop type table?
[2:11:59] is it going to be at the chamber
here or how are we actually
[2:12:02] going to, you know, what we
prepared for what we're working on?
[2:12:06] it's going to be a, well,
we haven't done this before.
[2:12:11] let's put it that way. Like on their seats that's why I was aking.
[2:12:15] we are making history.
We are making history.
[2:12:20] we are anticipating
this will be on the dais.
[2:12:24] it is a city council meeting. So
with implementation of senate bill
[2:12:30] 707, which came july 1st, it needs
to be the full suite of technology.
[2:12:38] so we need to, we need to
video it. We need to audio cast it
[2:12:44] and we need to allow comments remote comments from the public to
[2:12:47] telephone in. So the best position
that we're going to be able to
[2:12:52] do that is going to be with the
technology that's here on the dais.
[2:12:55] so right now off the top of my head,
I think it's going to be on the dais.
[2:13:00] otherwise, doing it off the dais would
require a significant amount of work.
[2:13:05] to your point though, there
are a limited number of chairs.
[2:13:08] the good news is we
have chairs inside city hall.
[2:13:13] so I think we're probably going to have
to share some monitors, some microphones.
[2:13:17] those are just my thoughts
right off the top of my head.
[2:13:22] and if we have done this joint meeting before
[2:13:23] I'm just unaware of it. In my time here we haven't done it, so.
[2:13:27] I'm excited for it. It's going to be interesting.
[2:13:30] thank you. Any other? That was it. Okay.
[2:13:34] so we're going to adjourn our
meeting tonight with our next meeting
[2:13:40] that it sounds like it's a city council
meeting and we are their guests.
[2:13:48] okay. Okay. That that that works.
And yeah. So september 16 at what time?
[2:13:59] so our regularly scheduled traffic commission time.
[2:14:01] so it'll be september 16
at six o'clock at six o'clock.
[2:14:05] okay. Well, thank you. Wonderful meeting
tonight. Thanks for all the good work.
[2:14:10] we got it done. And
this meeting is adjourned.