Aye.

Thank you.

Commissioner Moore?

Present.

Vice Chair Bobadia.

Commissioner Bansky.

Hi.

Commissioner McLean.

And Chair Conway present.

So we do have a quorum and we are all present.

Seven total.

All right.

We begin with visitor comments.

There are again there are two times when you can speak this evening.

You need a yellow card if you are a visitor and would like to make a comment for something that is not on the agenda.

Now is the time to do so.

I believe there's one person on the phone.

Okay, and we are good to go.

All right, thank you.

Next up would be staff comments for this evening.

Uh Mr.

Casho.

Thank you.

Before you, there is additional written testimony that was received after we mailed the report to you.

Also, this hearing will be focusing on the traffic management management plan or the traffic calming plan.

We will not be getting into the previous land use process.

As it was dealt with before, and this is this traffic management plan is result of the land use plan.

Perfect.

Thank you very much.

Next up the consent agenda.

Um these would be the minutes from the last time we met, which was June 2nd, 2026.

Uh Commissioner McLean.

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes of June 2nd, 2026 as written.

Excellent.

There's a motion, second.

Second.

Uh second is uh Commissioner McUh Moore.

Uh roll call then for this.

Uh Commissioner Miranda.

Aye.

Uh thank you.

Commissioner Friedler.

Aye.

Uh Commissioner Moore.

Aye.

Vice Chair Bob of the Aye.

Uh Commissioner Banski.

Aye.

And Commissioner McLean.

Aye.

And uh Chair Conwitz, aye.

Motion passes 7-0.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up is the public hearing we have this evening.

We will open with the chair's comments on this.

Uh the traffic commission will now hold a hearing on TC8.

Uh apologies here.

Let me get this right.

Make it official.

Uh all right.

The traffic commission will now hold a hearing on TC 873 Dover Lane and Dover Street Man Traffic Management Plan.

The hearing will begin with a report from the City Traffic Engineer, followed by testimony for the person who submitted the proposal.

City traffic engineers report will list the applicable substantive criteria and the reasons behind the recommendation.

We will then hear testimony from interested parties.

Again, if you wish to testify, please complete one of the yellow cards available at the entrance of the room and hand the record to our recorder.

Evidence and testimony must be directed to the criteria in section 6.02.060, determined to be applicable by the city traffic engineer or other criteria.

Current city, Metro, TriMet state or federal laws or policies which you believe apply to our decision.

After the hearing is closed, the commission will deliberate on evidence received and make an oral decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny the proposal.

The decision will not be final until a final written order is signed by the chairperson.

All persons testify this evening will receive a written notice of the final decision of this commission.

Decisions, traffic commissioner recommendations, city council become effective after approval by council.

Typically, traffic commission recommendations appear in consent agenda of the council and are approved by the council without discussion.

City Council ordinarily does not conduct a public hearing on such recommendations.

So thank you for that.

We will now begin with uh comments from staff on the background of uh the motion.

An important feature of the approved plan is the extension of the internal street network to an existing street stub to Dover Lane.

This connection has been part of the long-range transportation network for the area and is intended to improve circulation, provide secondary access, and support emergency response.

Conditions of approval were imposed on the development to submit a traffic management plan or also a traffic calming plan to address the requirement of the City of Beaverton Development Codes, Section 60.55.151, and to mitigate the impacts of the development.

Conditions of approval also states that the city of Beaverton will handle any required coordination with nearby neighborhoods as outlined in phase three of the neighborhood traffic calming program.

A traffic management plan is shown as exhibit A in the report was submitted by the applicant to the city for review, and for the city to advance the plan through the process of the neighborhood traffic calming program.

Proposed plan included the following traffic calming measures or traffic control measures.

Stephanie, could you please so the new connection that's Dover Lane and the future Dover Terrace?

It shows here in the middle of the screen.

Yeah, this intersection will have an always stop, and that's to address the side distance at that future intersection.

Also included four speed cushions.

Let's start from the south side where Dover Lane meets Olison Road.

There is two green lines, that's where the speed two of the speed cushions will go.

If you continue north on Dover Lane, there is one shown in yellow past that new intersection.

And then on Dover Street to the left, there is one.

That's those are the traffic control and traffic calming measures that they were proposed.

A copy of this plan was mailed with a response card to all the neighbors in the neighborhood as per the traffic calming program.

Although the survey showed that 52% of the neighborhood agreed agreed with this plan, many of the neighbors contacted the city opposing the plan and said the plan did not address their concern and it needs some refinement.

During the meeting, residents agreed that they need additional meeting to refine the plan and to ensure it aligns with the neighborhood traffic calming program.

On April 16, 2026, city staff met with the residents and developed a new plan.

This plan also included an always stop at that new intersection as it was shown before.

It also included five speed cushions.

Four of them are actually six speed cushions.

Four of them are on Dover Lane.

So if you start from Dover Lane at Olison and continue north, there is one where that two.

And one north of that new connection, and then one just before you get to the intersection of Dover Lane and Dover Street.

A couple of them are on Dover Streets, one closer to Olison, and the other one is kind of midway between Dover Lane.

The plan also included curb extensions.

Those were not shown on the previous plan.

Curb extensions at the intersection of Dover Lane and Dover Street.

And also curb extensions mid-block at the Dover Loop.

So the curb extensions and the additional speed cushions are the difference between this plan and the previous plan.

A copy of this plan and a survey card were mailed also to all the neighbors within the neighborhood.

The survey showed that 64% of the neighbors agreed with this plan.

So we're asking the commission tonight to approve this plan as it is recommended by the neighborhood.

I'm here to answer any questions you are there any questions, Mr.

F.

Uh, Commissioner McLean.

Yes, thank you.

A couple of questions.

I just want to make sure I understand the timeline correctly.

So the first survey was sent out in January of this year.

And then in April, there was a subsequent discussion with the Hemp Street Heights neighborhood.

The revised plan was created, and then on April 24th, the second survey cards were sent out, and you got a total of six seventy um two cards back.

So I just want to make sure I understand the timeline.

Okay, thank you.

That's correct.

Other questions.

All right.

Uh with that in mind.

Oh, sorry, uh, Commissioner Moore.

Yes, I just wanted to clarify in the notation that we have not discussed up yet from Holt, they seem to have the understanding that they are to incur the additional cost for the traffic calming, were that to go into effect based on what has been prescribed by the neighborhood as opposed to what they initially approved.

Is that accurate?

Yes.

And is that normally with traffic calming, it's being done after a development is already in place, and we're going back with traffic calming, and that's why I was a little bit concerned because typically that's not something that a development is already there, and then we're trying to accommodate what the neighborhood wants after the fact.

This is wonderful that we can get it in place before, but I'm seeing that there's a lot of pushback because Holt seems to think that they had already met the criterion.

Yes, they they provided the plan, but the plan failed to address some areas within the streets that it's steep grades where you couldn't install speed cushions on.

So when we met with the neighborhood, we added those curb extensions, which is an additional treatment to slow down traffic.

Which in which basically says you have to work with the neighborhood on the plan.

And that was part of the conditions of approval.

Yes, I was also going to follow up with another question, if I may, because to clarify, this would not typically have been before us, but because it's Portland that is neighboring Beaverton, and because of the stipulations that Portland put into place that caused this particular issue to come before the Traffic Commission, which Holt is also saying we should not have any jurisdiction over.

Typically, the traffic calming plans that we bring before the commission are funded by the city through the our program.

But the development code requires a traffic management plan if the development increased traffic by 20 vehicles per within one hour within 24 hours.

So that's why they're on the hook to provide a traffic calming plan or a traffic management plan.

Thank you for that clarification.

So when I look at the um exhibit B, there is a street on the top where you put a proposed curb extension and always stop.

That street extends then into this um rally crest subdivision.

Yes.

But that's not visible on exhibit A.

Did I understand that right?

Yeah, it's it's shown on exhibit A.

It shows four-way stop control on it.

Yeah, I just don't see how it goes into that neighborhood.

And to that um Crest subdivision.

Yeah, it continues to the east.

Then it shows that white area where the Oh I see this is a big no.

Yeah.

Okay.

Currently there is an existing stub.

That's where they're connecting to to that existing stub there.

Somehow.

Okay.

Thank you.

And then uh Commissioner Biansky.

Um just my own clarification here.

So the developer developer is not necessarily against these modifications, it's just they're objecting to the fact that these were added on after they originally had the plan and they weren't consulted about these additions, and so they feel the city should be paying for these extra two extra speed cushions and the curb extensions, and they're quite happy to pay for the four original ones.

Is that correct?

And if so, why are we involved if that's just uh financial decision between the lawyers at the city and Holt?

We're just here to approve or disapprove the actual plan, right?

Uh correct, yes.

Okay, thank you.

And also there is a process if they wish to appeal the traffic commission recommendation, they can appeal appeal it to the city council.

But they would be appealing because they don't agree with the plan or they don't agree to pay for the extensions and the other two sleep um cushions.

It's it's up to them to decide what their appeal is based on, you know.

Is it the change in plan or it's the funding of the plan?

I can't tell you this.

But our role here is simply whether we approve this plan, whether we think this is as you pointed out, increased safety, et cetera, et cetera.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh I have one um uh uh two questions, I think, or two clarifications.

All of the street extend or the curb extensions are at intersections except for the one closest to photo C in Exhibit B.

That one is uh in the it is a mid-block curb extension, correct?

Yes.

Okay, the other one which are separate than the four uh speed cushions which are at no intersections.

Yeah.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

Is there another question?

Yeah, I did uh commit uh Vice Chair Bobadia.

My first question is that there was uh comments in the report that there had been a lot of phone calls, and that's why the city then took it upon itself to basically move forward and do a second survey.

Did I get that right?

Yes.

So because you felt the city felt that there was more feedback than just a postcards, it wanted to take the additional step.

Let me preface it that I'm asking that because it seems to be that um the developer isn't happy that there's cars or something there, and the city took additional steps, but uh you guys had an obligation to write, given what you had.

Yeah, the city took this step further because of the complaints and concerns the neighborhood had.

Uh and that's why we came up with the second plan.

Okay.

When that happens, is there an encouragement by the city that tells the individuals that they're calling in, hey, the best way is you should put it on the record and submit something in writing.

Nothing, just asking the question.

Uh we take uh the there was a few emails that we received, you know.

There was a few emails that we received, you know.

Okay, that's good.

It wasn't just four codes.

Thank you.

That also a deleting.

I mean, that we had close to 70 people objecting on the plan.

That thank you.

That helps a lot.

And then from my summary interpretation of the plan is the developer provided a particular plan with some calming devices, right?

And what the city is doing basically is taking that plan and expanding it and adding more calming devices to it.

Is that like a fair small interpretation of that?

Yes.

Okay.

And that's the address of the neighborhood concerns.

And basically the developer is making this um broader interpretation that because of these new additional calming devices that are being put in this very specific area only, that itself is making it.

It's a new plan.

Did I get that interpretation correct for my reading?

Yes.

Thank you.

All right, other questions?

All right, perfect.

Uh uh, Commissioner Bansky.

Um, was there any consideration of approving the original plan with the full cushions?

And once the new development is fully functional, re-evaluating the situation and then deciding whether you need those two extra cushions and curb extensions or whether the full original ones are sufficient, because that way nobody would have to pay, or the city would have to pay, but at least the developer wouldn't.

I'm sure they would be happy with that.

I'm sure I'm sure they would, but the new neighborhood will not because the neighborhood also thought uh this is the plan or nothing to do the first one, and that's why the plan received that 52% because they thought they didn't have any other option, but there is an option.

Okay, thanks.

Excellent, thank you.

All right.

Uh I know the questions in.

We'll begin the uh public hearing portion and uh take the cards and know where they are.

We do have a timer this evening, and we have three minutes to be a discussion here.

Uh what we'll do is take these in order that they were received.

I want to make a couple of clarifications though to help everyone.

Um and again, as Mr.

Cashau noted, uh the motion before traffic commission this evening is specifically about adopting the traffic calming portion of the traffic management program.

So we are discussing tonight the traffic calming issues.

We're not discussing anything about the streets, um, the connections, um other issues in that regard.

So I just want to make that clear.

When you come forward, there'll be a green card on there.

We'll ask that you sit down, make sure that the red light is on with the microphone.

We'll help you with that.

And then uh there are a couple of questions to follow on there, and then please be clear whether you're supporting whether you represent yourself or other people and whether you are for or against this motion.

Uh and then once we begin, um, if you want to add anything new, please do so.

If you want to say something that everyone else has said and say I totally agree with what's been said, that carries the same uh the same weight as uh repeating it again.

So uh a couple of couple of comments on that.

With that, then we'll begin.

Um I have Francine.

Thank you so much.

And again, we want to thank everybody for taking part in the process and for taking part in the community effort.

The one with the green light is on there for you.

Thank you so much.

Ready?

Yep.

Uh my name is Francine Grew.

Um I'm representing myself.

I'm a neighbor.

My address is on Dover Street, 6660, Southwest Over Street.

And um I'm in favor of this.

I reached out to you more than five years ago, I think, through the neighborhood association and told you of my concerns.

So this is um this is such a relief that we've gotten this far.

It's not as much as I had hoped for, but I am in support of this, and I appreciate all the work that we've put together to get this far.

Hope we can approve this.

Thank you.

Question?

All right.

Uh next up we have uh Jennifer Manson.

Um my name's Jennifer Madsen.

Um representing myself.

I live at 5380 Southwest Dover Lane.

Um corner of where the new road will come into the neighborhood.

Um I am in favor of the revised plan that we did together.

I do have a few things that I would like to say as far as some of the questions that were asked and about phone calls and such.

Several years ago, there was a neighborhood meeting with the city of Beaverton.

They came out, they told us here's the people we would like you to share your concerns with.

We did that.

We did that through email, through voicemails, and we got a letter saying stop calling us.

We are not going to discuss this anymore without ever hearing back from them.

So when this plan came out and we got the cards, we were under the impression, and what we understood was well, we either accept this, that first plan, or nothing, and we get nothing, um, which was frustrating.

And then the traffic commission had that meeting, and quite frankly, almost the whole neighborhood showed up angry because we felt like we hadn't been heard at the beginning.

Um, and they were gracious enough to meet with us and work together, but so the reason the city of Beaverton got so many calls after the cards was because we had tried to do that like we were told to by City of Beaverton, and we were shut down.

Um my specific concerns is that in the original um approof that Beaverton did saying yes, you can connect to this neighborhood and we will do this.

They Beaverton did not take into account that part of that new road is actually in your jurisdiction, and so the original plan that they approve did not include any kind of traffic calming for that road.

That is my specific concern with this, is that we can't ask for anything there because Beaverton didn't include it in the first place, and it is Beaverton property.

So I'm still in favor of this plan, even if there's nothing else we can do about Beaverton Terror or Dover Terrace.

Uh thank you, I appreciate it.

So I will say one um I will say one thing though, in regards to that is that the traffic calming specific to this is a decision that can be done, but as we've seen in the past for other issues, um parking, no parking, stop lights, stop signs.

Um there's always further discussion, and so the purview right now as far as the traffic calming is different if you feel that you need additional locations.

I think that's a discussion that can always come up later on, so you shouldn't feel that this is the end because again the motion tonight is to approve the traffic calming that was approved by the neighborhood.

Um, and if you want to expand upon that, or there are other issues or uh other items come up after um after the subdivision is um it begins to be populated, then there are always uh return visits and questions that can come up.

So please don't feel this is the only part.

Uh Commissioner Moore.

If I may clarify, I did hear you saying that you met with the traffic commission.

We are the traffic commission.

I think you met with the traffic engineers team that was there.

Because I I knew I was not involved in any of that.

I wanted to clarify that we had not previously heard or been aware of the situation.

Thank you for so much for all your efforts.

Yep, I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Uh, next up then, uh Ken.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair Conway and member uh fellow commissioners.

Uh Ken Zatterin, 5435, Southwest Dover Loop, and I'm representing myself.

Um we respectfully ask that you approve the traffic management plan for our neighborhood.

Uh this plan was developed collaboratively between the Beaverton staff and concerned neighbors, and we think it's the minimum we need to protect our neighborhood's livability.

Uh we want to acknowledge the work that Jobber and Tim have done uh to how much they've invested in this plan to get it to where we are tonight.

So we acknowledge and appreciate their contributions.

And as was mentioned, we would like to remain in contact with staff as development occurs and the housing units are occupied to monitor the the amount of traffic and traffic speeds in our neighborhood.

So thank you for your time, your attention, and for helping make Beaverton a better place.

Thank you.

Excellent questions.

Thank you.

Appreciate it, Ken.

Thank you so much.

Next up, then uh Kirk Edwards.

Um hello, uh my name's Kirk Edwards.

I live at uh 5145 Southwest Dover Lane.

Um I am in favor of exhibit B talk to you all and show my support.

Oh thank you.

Uh and then uh next up I have uh uh Kellen Edwards Kelly.

Kelly.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Kelly Edwards.

Um I uh am representing myself.

I live at 5145 Southwest Dover Lane.

I'm in favor of this um plan and agree it is uh the best coordination that we can have in the minimum.

Um and I hope to keep working with everyone in the future to make sure, thank you.

Again, uh are there any other cards or there's some I think there were people on the phone?

Do we need to double check that?

All right, perfect.

So with that in said, then no other cards, we will close the public hearing portion uh of this and move to follow-up staff comments.

Anything, Mr.

Goshell.

Uh no comments from staff.

Okay, uh, I do have one question as a follow-up just to uh answer a question that was there.

The official the official sign off of uh I think the question from um uh uh Mr.

Zetieron was that um they wanted to do a follow-up make sure that everything got done.

How how for the record, I guess, how is that how is the official this is all done, everything's been met, and it's good to go.

The connection will not be open until the plan is constructed.

Sorry, I meant the the curb extensions, the the speed bumps, um, all of the work, uh, all of the pieces.

Is there an official sign-off process for that?

That somebody somebody signs a line and says that all of the traffic calming for this is complete check mark, and then you hand it off.

Basically, after city council approve the traffic commission recommendation, we advise the city of Portland that the plan is approved and it needs to be constructed.

Okay.

Uh Commissioner Moore.

Some of the traffic calming projects that are currently been approved have temporary trial traffic pieces.

The I forget what they're called, but they're not the actual installation, they're temporary ones.

Will this particular project have those temporary ones and then move to the permanent ones as those are set up to do?

This this plan was under the previous traffic calming program.

Not under the new one.

The new program was adopted after this development was approved.

Thank you.

I was uh concerning because I wasn't seeing that particular protocol, and it was a bit confusing for me.

I appreciate your clarification.

I did see that it was a 2021 actual traffic calming reference in some of the documentation there.

So that does reference that prior program.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Uh other questions?

Uh Vice Chair Bobadia.

So the permanent calming devices will be installed before the road is open.

Is that correct?

Yes.

That's how it may be the community comfort, is access to the connection will not happen until the city has protocols have took place, right?

Yes.

Okay, uh, Commissioner Urbansky.

I think a bigger problem will be the construction traffic when they're building all these houses.

How are they gonna have access to the new neighborhood?

Are they gonna be going through all these streets over these speed bumps?

Uh we'll probably keep the street closed until construction is completed.

That could take years, right?

They they will have access through shut up.

Oh, so they won't be cutting through this neighborhood.

Okay.

No.

We we heard this concern from the neighborhood when we had the meeting with them.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Moran.

So I know this is um kind of like we what happens.

So if the the installation will be installed, whether the money is in place or not, or are we gonna wait till the money is there?

And if it's not there, I mean if it doesn't come or whatever happens, those things will not be installed and the street will never open.

So still we have to continue the process.

And yes, we have to work with the developer to make sure they will accept this could be between attorneys to decide on this and how we get there.

Uh but first city council needs to approve the plan, so it will move forward, and then we'll see what will happen after that.

Uh, but our goal is to make sure that they will bear the cost of this traffic management plan.

Right, but I mean you don't install if the cost is not covered by that organization, and therefore the street wouldn't be opened.

Uh yeah, if it's not in the street will not be open, basically.

There we go.

Other questions.

Uh Vice Chair Bob Dean.

I just opened on the record that our decision, whatever it is here today, it still goes to the city council, right?

Correct.

So it doesn't end here anyways.

One more level, city council then basically they have the decision.

They get to make a decision.

Still doesn't really end there.

The affective parties still have a right.

If they're not happy, they can appeal, right?

Yes.

Um just one just for the record clarify, especially because there's been a lot of questions about costs and people that are not here and throughout the material.

This is a unique circumstance where the city, it's not going to be the burden on the city to come up with the money to fund these traffic homing devices, right?

Yes.

This is why it's uh even like if the developer agrees to it, then sorry.

If the developer agrees to it, then this will be funded by the developer.

Yes.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh, one clarification on that as well that um the traffic uh traffic commission recommendations go to city council's consent agenda items, so they are not discussed at city council unless they're pulled from consent agenda.

So clarification on that that they're only approving our recommendation.

So all right, with that in mind then, are there any other questions, Mr.

Gascio?

Okay, in that case, we'll close the public hearing portion and go to um commission deliberations.

Uh Commissioner McLean.

Yes, I'll start.

Thanks everyone for coming out tonight.

I think based on the written testimony, the public testimony, there's majority overwhelming support, even though there were five response cards with with no, there were 65 response cards, yes, to abstain.

So I would be in favor of approving TC 873 as written.

Um obviously the the new development requires um additional um measures from the original plan that the neighborhood has communicated with the city staff.

So I think it's a great uh start.

And again, after you know, all development, maybe three or five years from now, you know, these things are are never said it and we're good for 20 years, so we all know.

Um hopefully, you know, this is a good start, and we can evaluate in the future.

But definitely we need this traffic calming if that subdivision goes in.

So I'm in favor.

Thank you.

Um I uh I will say one thing before we move on with that part, and that was in regards to what Mr.

Casho had noted that this is um this was done at and Commissioner Moore uh good catch.

That this was done under the previous traffic calming program that the city had, which has since been redone.

So there is now a new program.

I do applaud all the work that the city did, especially with the neighborhood, because I know that the cards and the count were uh uh in some cases extremely difficult to navigate, and so I appreciate that this one seems to have gone through my opinion exactly the way it was supposed to work.

So I appreciate the city's work on that with the community because going from 50 52 percent to 65 shows that there was a a great deal of work on both sides.

So I appreciate that.

Uh I I think I agree.

I think um in favor of proving that.

Other comments, motion, anything commission uh sorry, uh Vice Chair Bobadia and then Commissioner Umda.

I'll just say that it's growth is painful.

Um the plan is good, it's a great it's exciting to see that there was a lot of community involvement.

Whatever the decision, the outcome happens.

Remember that as we grow as a population is going to impact the community, it's inevitable.

But that whatever it is, it's not the final.

You get a comb.

Come back, speak with the city.

There's options.

This isn't gonna make it perfect, but it's great that it's happening before, not later.

We normally get brought in later, and it makes it a lot harder.

So it's an opportunity.

I commend you all in hearing that um how much how many people from the community actually showed up.

It shows that you really care what's going on there.

But they again growth is inevitable.

Thank you for all the time that you put in and also for the city.

Thank you.

Other comments, all right.

Uh motion made by uh Commissioner Brandon.

I got a question.

Commissioner Banski.

Um, I'm in favor of the program as written.

My one concern is that there's a whole bunch of people that aren't gonna vote on this.

The people that are going to be moving into this new neighborhood, which probably be the majority of people in this whole neighborhood, they don't have any say in this matter.

And so it kind of bothers me a little bit that while I agree with the people here who are for this.

They may be against this, and they won't have a voice in the matter.

So while the majority are in favor now.

I just can't be certain that the people who are going to be moving into the new neighborhood will be for this program.

That's why initially I suggested maybe just go with the four speed cushions in the original plan, wait a year or two, and then decide whether you need any additional things.

More people who have a voice in that.

The only problem is the city would pick up the top for that.

Okay.

Sorry, sorry, I was clarifying.

Did you have a rebuttal to his because it seemed like you were was that a general if you want the.

Oh, I know I didn't know I was just directed because that was before she made the motion.

I was I was trying to get your attention.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Yeah.

So it's just a concern I have, but uh I am in favor of it as written.

It's just a concern at the back of my mind.

Okay, uh, Commissioner McLean.

I'll second the motion.

All right.

So motion has been made, motion's been seconded.

Uh final discussion on that.

Uh I will say, I guess before we do that in the final discussion part, uh, to Commissioner Banski's point um as a discussion point that uh the neighbors are moving in, so it is a projection and estimate of what's gonna happen.

So you've got a chicken and egg situation, it seems like, but they're also gonna move in with the understanding that this is what the situation is like.

So they are coming in with the option of saying yes or no, as opposed to they have to move in and that's done.

So I'll leave it at that.

Uh that in mind then is there other discussion?

Yeah, that I I totally agree with you.

It's they see what is happening, and they either choose that or they don't, right?

So they don't have a say in the matter right now, but they have a say in the matter of buying a house there.

So it's clear, and there's nothing missed.

I just really want to say that.

We are not missing anything with this uh proposal right now.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

So motion made, seconded, final discussion.

Any other comment?

Roll call then?

Uh Commissioner Miranda?

Aye.

Uh uh Commissioner Friedler.

Aye.

Commissioner Moore.

Aye.

Uh Vice Chair Bogadia?

Aye.

Uh Commissioner Banski.

Uh Commissioner McLean.

Aye.

Uh Chair Conway is an aye.

That motion passes 70.

Thank you.

And again, uh the scope of this was only for the traffic calling portion of it.

The next piece now will go to the traffic management program and then back, and we'll let that to the city and to uh our fine city attorney Robin and uh public works engineer Tim.

So thank you.

We'll let that move on its due course.

Uh next up, I have uh line item for a presentation, but there is no information under the presentation.

Okay, very good then.

Uh next up would be new business.

Is there any new business to discuss?

Thank you.

And was there any old business reports, Mr.

Casho?

Uh no, we don't have any.

Okay.

Uh will there be a meeting next month?

Do we know?

Uh we no, we will not.

We'll have a meeting in September.

Okay, very good.

Thank you.

Uh that in mind, then the comments, then uh we are adjourned.

Thank you so much.

And again, we appreciate everybody coming out and doing uh their part and taking part.

So