In the city's website in accordance with the requirements of RSA 91-A semicolon two, room rule number two.

What a clock, please call the role.

Yes, sir.

Chairman Michael B.

O'Brien Sr.

Present.

Alderman Richard A.

Dowd, present.

And Alderman John Sullivan is present as well.

Okay.

Members not in attendance is Altaman Clay.

She is excused and Alderman Chris Tibetal, the same.

Also in attendance is via Zoom, Mr.

Tim Cummings, Administrative Service Director, Liz Hanum, Economic Development Director.

I also have Andrew Hill.

Andrew Hill from Desmond Design Management.

And then Mr.

Matt Downing from the Nashua City Parking Department.

Mr.

Dan Hudson, City Engineer.

Mr.

Tim Lemere from GPI.

Ms.

Amy DeRoche for Nashua City Facilities.

And Mr.

Mark Saunders, Deputy City Engineer.

And we are good to go, sir.

Okay.

Excuse me.

Okay.

Now open up to public comment.

Anybody would like uh discuss any items that uh on the agenda.

Okay, seeing none, moving on to discussions and presentations.

We do have three.

Uh Director Cummings.

I'll recognize you for the presentations.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I do apologize for not being there in person this evening.

Uh for the record, Tim Cummings, Director of Administrative Services.

And I asked for some agenda time this evening to provide the committee uh a general update on some various projects that are going on in in the city.

So uh first we have um I believe a general construction progress update with uh the owner's project manager Tim Lemaire relative to the Elm and High Street garages, and then we have some of the engineering team uh with us this evening to talk about some of the various transportation and infrastructure projects that they have going on and exactly provide and hopefully to provide you all exactly where they are in in their process and provide a status update on those projects.

And I'm sure we'll go through them one by one uh in the next next few minutes, but I want to tease out and call particular attention to uh West Pearl Street because uh one of the issues I'd like to bring forward this evening for conversation purposes is the idea of moving the West Pearl Street project forward.

Um I had heard very uh clearly from uh the Board of Alderman in previous meetings that there might not be an appetite to appropriate additional funds or bond monies for this project uh when there is the quote unquote school street TIFF monies available.

And so uh that is an avenue we could pursue, and I wanted to kind of when the time comes, get into a little bit of a conversation on that uh uh after um uh city engineer Hudson gives uh gives an update and overview.

Uh with that being said, Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to hand it off to uh Mr.

Lemere at this time Mr.

Lamair, great thank you, Mr.

Chairman, and as Director Cummings mentioned, I'm Tim Lemir, the OPM for the Elm Street and High Street parking garage projects.

So I'll just do a uh a brief uh status update of this project.

So um currently this is um the current project phasing as is uh been presented uh previously.

We we had an emergency repairs project last year, and that current status is 100% complete, and we will be closing that contract out this this winter.

Phase one is the structural uh repairs for both Elm and High Street garages, and that is currently about 30 percent complete at the moment.

And uh anyone can see the the staging moving around the garages as they make their repairs.

Phase two is the Elm Street office renovation uh and that is currently at the schematic design phase of our architectural design, and we are currently um going through a cost uh estimating exercise for that phase.

Uh phase three is the uh building facade and way finding project of both garages, Elm and High Street, and that uh is currently at the uh building assessment phase.

And that uh is currently at the uh building assessment phase.

So we've had our consultant come in and they are in the process of providing us an assessment of what is necessary on both structures.

Um the project budget that we have currently is uh uh fortunately is unchanged.

We we have the emergency repairs is now a final contract number, and that's not that was not funded out of the $15 million bond.

Uh just phases one, two, and three are accounted for in the bond.

Um and right now uh the funding amounts uh budgeted for each phase, phase one, 11.1 million, phase two, 2.8 million, and phase three 1.1 million uh accounting for soft costs included.

And current uh project progress for each phase, uh phase one, um as you'll see as anyone could observe in the garages, the shoring moves as the contractor moves along and makes the necessary concrete repairs.

The entrance work uh has begun on both garages.

Uh the lighting and stairwell work will begin.

Um stairwell will begin this week.

Lighting will begin um within the month.

And um the the drain lines are about um sixty percent complete um more so on high street than Elm Street, but they're making really excellent progress on that.

Um here are some just examples of the new uh uh the new drain line you'll see on the right, which is uh a nice bright red uh drain line, so they they stand out and look look pretty good, and on the left is a um a concrete repair that uh the contractor had to make.

I I brought this example because it's a fairly challenging repair up and over existing good concrete.

So we're making a lot of good progress.

Uh the current progress for phase two, like I said, we're at schematic design, so this is just an example of what we're um looking at for uh uh a design potential for the new uh renovated parking office.

Um we can we can keep going.

And uh for phase three, uh again we're um not quite through the assessment phase.

So our consultant is coming in and looking at both structures and giving us some wayfinding and lighting and facade options that that the city will consider as part of this project.

Yeah.

And I believe that was uh my last slide for the end of it.

Presentations okay.

I'll open up to questions.

Any command uh questions from committee members?

Alderman Sullivan.

Well, I'm gonna try to uh you know put it on a piece of paper, would it work better?

Oh boy.

No.

Uh okay.

Well, my question was um uh in regards to the parking garages.

Was there is there a plan to to gate those?

Is that uh is that's correct.

Um a gating system is included in the scope for both garages, and it's um as the entrance work has begun the the conduits and uh gating systems have started their underground work and um the contractor has procured the hardware as well, so we are so the answer is yes, and it's it's in progress.

Okay.

Okay, I do have one.

Uh it's the big one.

Currently we're on the budget, correct?

That's that's correct.

We are currently um on budget.

Okay.

And my greatest fear for the city, it's still out there to threaten doing something and cutting back on the tax base, which these two garages are prime example of neglect.

Will your organization give us help to remind us when we should do inspections and you know, because I imagine this repair has a lifetime to it, perhaps maybe 30 years.

Uh we can expect the use of those garages.

So is it annual inspections?

And Mr.

Chairman, if I may.

Yes.

Thank you.

Actually, uh great question.

And actually the reason why I am chiming in is uh is we would be looking to Andy Hill, our other consultant who hears this evening from Desmond to help with that uh as as necessary as time time goes on.

Okay, I'm satisfied with that.

It's only because I don't want it to slip through the cracks.

I'm not using cracks as a pun.

But I am sure a lot of this could have been avoided if we did some due diligence.

Yep.

So you don't save money in the long run with this.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Okay.

Seeing none, we'll move to communications.

Uh no, we don't we have two other presentations.

Uh yeah, we do.

Oh, who's up next?

Oh, okay.

That's the engineering photo.

Do you have uh we do have a presentation?

I believe it was on the desktop.

Hopefully, you have it.

Yeah, there it is.

Yep, thank you.

Um it's uh it's a pleasure to be here tonight.

Dan Hudson City Engineer with me is uh Mark Saunders, deputy city engineer.

Um the slide says uh we're coming for transportation projects update.

Transportation in this case is uh vehicular, but as well as pedestrian bicycle and uh other modes of travel.

Um we uh there's two three projects noted on the agenda.

We uh we've snuck in a couple of additionals.

Hopefully that's okay.

Um but uh we we thought it'd be a good time just to come in.

Um we're gonna go through these fairly quickly, give fairly broad overviews, but we're welcome to uh answer any questions you have along the way um on any of them or dig into more detail as as uh helpful to you.

Um so next next slide, please.

So the first project I'll address is the Walnut Street Oval Project.

Um current status is that we're in final design.

Um we are targeting project advertisement for construction uh about a year from now, January 27.

Um this project aims to improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists uh while maintaining the uh traffic flow uh for vehicles.

Um you may recall discussion that the city received some uh congressional directed spending funds, which kind of accelerated uh the time that we needed to obligate some of those funds.

They had a deadline of them, which was uh they need to be obligated at the end of the state's fiscal year, which was in September.

So we did that.

We use some of the money for design, but then also we we uh we broke off a child project, so to speak.

Um this child project is currently out to bid um with bids due in January.

Uh the child project is just a small portion of the overall project.

What it involves is reversing West Pearl Street and removing some of the island there at the walnut and West Pearl intersection, such that uh vehicles will be able to go straight from Central Street on West Pearl Street to Main Street, which uh we talked about for a number of years with uh circulation patterns downtown via previous study.

Um so that child project will accomplish that.

Um we'll also make factory street two-way, and of course, we're gonna need some uh ordinances to that effect.

So we'll be back uh when the new board gets seeded early next year to accomplish some of those things uh in the ordinances.

Um but it makes factory street two-way um because obviously if you can go on one way towards Main Street on uh on what uh West Pearl, then you need a reverse couple it uh so we need we need we need a direction on factory street.

But we are just giving traffic flows.

We're a little concerned about making everybody go to Main Street to make that left-hand turn and say you want to go across the Main Street Bridge.

So we believe it's probably still necessary to have an eastbound direction on Factory Street as well.

That's why we're suggesting and proposing that uh factory street be two-way.

Um then uh uh the the changes in traffic patterns or directions on those streets require some traffic signal modifications on Main Street at Westboro and factory street intersections.

So that's the trial project.

As I noted that's out to bid.

Um hopefully we get uh some bids and we'll be looking to award that project.

We'll be with back uh with the resolution in January also just uh update some of the the project agreement with DOT.

Every project we have to enter in agreements to kind of update some of the funding and that sort of thing.

Um so the next slide is just kind of a blow up.

I can highlight some of the aspects of the plan if we go to the next slide.

The mouse went to sleep again.

Yes.

Everything's sleeping.

It's not behaving.

Uh I'll start speaking to it.

Hopefully, we can get the blow up up eventually.

But um this figure, as you can see, kind of a smaller version on the screen, but um on this figure north is to the right side of the figure, so um factory streets off the on the uh bottom right of the figure, central streets on the upper left.

As you come in via Central Street into this oval area, we plan for a small roundabout.

This roundabout will have a flush island, kind of like the one that over on Cherrywood that was modified when they uh did some of the the new middle school over there.

Um that'll kind of help to provide the movements there, uh, but also control and slow some of the traffic coming into this area.

Then we have the connection over to West Pearl Street.

I mentioned that before.

The rest of the oval, the pattern stays the same.

It's still gonna be the same circulatory pattern, uh, but we're gonna reduce from two lanes to one lane around the oval.

Um that'll help calm traffic, provide some additional space for for parking and bikes and peds on on this figure.

You can see purple those sidewalks.

We kind of envision a uh a track, not really a running track or anything, but uh a circular track within the oval.

So if people want to go, you know, on their lunch break and walk the oval, you know, take a couple laps, get some steps in, uh that'll be available, but also it'll provide all the connections to all the points around the oval.

Um, and then I'll I meant I mentioned uh the the connection to factory street.

So we're still making all the same uh street connections, all the movements are the same.

We're just trying to control slow traffic, make it uh more pedestrian uh friendly environment, a safer environment for for everybody in that area.

Um can I ask a question while we're still on the getting ready to go on to the next one?

Have you although today it's questionable where Myrtle Street comes into it, but it does in a way.

I see by your concept, I don't see any allowance for Myrtle Street.

And I'm wondering because Myrtle Street's getting somewhat important because of the uh uh development that we made at the end of it towards the Pine Street going to the bridge.

So your points on that.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh so Myrtle Street, uh, I believe I don't believe you can drive all the way through.

I think there's a fence there.

Could I could be wrong, but certainly the public street does does end.

It's a hammerhead there, um, so you can't drive all the way through.

You can't drive.

So you cannot drive through the street.

You can drive through.

We would we would like uh to be you know for pedestrians to be able to get through there, but I think there may be a fence prohibiting that if I recall correctly.

Um so right now the and that public right-of-way ends, uh unfortunately that was discontinued previously, so there is no connection all the way through to the oval.

Uh but we're providing uh you know driveway connections.

What showed on this figure, and we've been discussing with uh abutter some of these factors, and these may change, but uh we show consolidating their two drives into one driveway, uh reconfiguring the parking a little bit there where to make some movements uh better and and uh parking a little more orderly there.

Um but yeah, that's that's what I that's what I have on that.

I'd be happy to address any other questions on the oval project.

Um what's the status on Water Street and when you change factory to two-way, how does that affect Water Street?

Uh great great question.

So um uh as you recall uh and uh all the McDowell's alluding to there we have an ordinance already approved to make Water Street one way from Main Street to Factory Street.

Um it is our intention to do that.

We were waiting for some riverfront uh project uh work to be completed.

Um we also at some point need to rehabilitate the water street bridge.

Um, and then we're looking at some sewer work in that area as well.

But though those projects will come forward and speak with you in more detail another time.

Uh the site distance is a little challenging coming off of Water Street.

Um and so the plan at that intersection is to make it an all-way stop.

Currently, you you you uh you folks have already approved making Water Street a stop condition.

Um but we because there's a building on the corner and it's a little hard site distance-wise, you wouldn't be able to see somebody coming on factory street uh at speed if you're on water street.

There's not quite enough site distance.

So we're proposing to make that all way stop intersection.

Um given that most of the traffic flow, probably we'll be going down West Pearl Street because we'll be able to go there and make the turn on Main Street, there'll be less traffic over on Factory Street.

So we think that's gonna work uh perfectly fine.

Um our consultants have modeled it, but that is that is the plan for the water street factory street intersection.

Follow up follow up.

And uh when we make factory street two way, how do we lose parking on either side?

So we we don't because it's two there's two lanes there today.

It's kind of uh you come you come off of uh you come off the oval, uh there's a two-way pattern, then you get to factory street, and there's kind of two two lanes of width there.

Um so uh it's envisioned that that parking would stay largely the same, you know, parallel parking on the side of the street.

Um I know there have there have been visions of adding additional parking on factory street.

This two-way pattern um, you know, maybe isn't conducive as conducive to that, unfortunately, but um we'll just have to see like when we open this, we'll have to see how much traffic backs up on West Pearl Street versus Factory Street, kind of reassess.

Can we go to that full one-way uh street couplets, you know, where factory street can just be um from Main Street towards the oval.

And if that if that can be made that way sometime, um then maybe that would open up some additional opportunities to add parking there.

All right, the next project uh as Tim alluded to is West Pearl Street Streetscape.

So this is a project that uh is fully designed.

Um we had completed the design, we had advertised it for construction.

Um we received uh one bid, and the bid was much higher than we had for available funding.

So we weren't able to award it or proceed to construction.

Um but we still have the designs on the shelf.

We can we we we're we're investigating options to try to build uh build the whole thing or portions of it uh in conjunction with other projects.

So what the project is is it it reconstructs and widened sidewalks uh along uh West Pearl Street, provides landscaping and pedestrian scale lighting.

Um but but we do need some additional funding.

Uh Tim Tim can speak in more detail, but there may be an opportunity to again uh or repurpose some of those TIFF funds towards this uh project, which would be beneficial.

We're probably still gonna need to find ways to uh build portions of the work under other projects.

Um part of the work involved repaving the street, resetting some curb, that may be work that we could do through the paving program.

Um so we're gonna have to uh come up with uh ideas on how to bring this to fruition.

But if you want to go to the next slide, we can kind of just step through.

I have again, these are just for blow ups, it's still a little hard to see.

But this is down at the uh walnut street end.

Um this is kind of one third of the project, but um it it uh bumps some curb curb out there, provide retains the on-street parking, provides some uh planters.

Uh unfortunately this is not a nice color plan.

We'll work on that for future presentations, but um, and then provides the lighting, you know, some benches, uh trees with tree wells, all those sorts of things.

Um being skipped to the next slide.

This is kind of the next slide is kind of mid-block um where the Elm Street intersection uh comes in.

Um when the when this when this design was done, um this design was set up so it could work with any traffic pattern we had, whether it was remain the current configuration westbound or reversed uh to eastbound, um, because though the lanes can be used in either direction while not uh impacting the the parking or the other landscape features that are proposed.

Uh the final slide just shows the end uh as it approaches Main Street.

Um if we reverse traffic, then at Main Street, we're gonna need uh we're gonna need um those two lanes divvied up into turn lanes.

Um so there'll be a left turn lane and uh we'll we'll work on the configuration, whether that's uh a second left and a right lane or just a right lane.

Um that that will that will figure out and and uh establish.

But that's kind of the West Street uh West Pearl Street Streetscape project.

I'd be happy to address any questions about that.

Uh seeing none, I'll skip to the next project, which is the East Halls Bridge Street intersection.

Um also uh referred to as yep.

If I could I'm sorry, I'm sorry, uh Mr.

Chairman.

If I could, I don't know if you want to have the the particular conversation I was looking to have now, or if you'd like to wait till the end.

Um, let's have it now.

Okay, okay, Mr.

Chairman.

So the the particular issue uh at hand here is uh as uh engineer Hudson had mentioned.

We are fully designed, we have some money set aside through a prior resolution.

Um, but it wasn't enough to do the project.

And we had come before the Board of Alderman previously um seeking some additional funds, and there was some commentary at that time that um there wasn't necessarily an appetite to supplementally appropriate additional funds uh for this project uh when there was school street TIFF funds available, and it is an eligible project through the school street tip.

I've drafted the legislation.

I'm inclined to try to move forward uh with that legislation in January.

It would not be a supplemental appropriation, it would be just an acknowledgement or recognition that this West Pearl Street street skipping project was a project uh that that the city would be looking to do utilizing uh some of the proceeds from the school street TIFF.

There's just about 400,000 in the TIFF that is money's uh readily available.

Um and so we could we could look to use uh some of that money um right right now to help move the project forward.

As noted by Engineer Hudson, they're getting ready to go out uh for construction for uh uh part of the walnut street uh uh project in a in a certain beginning phase.

It it would behoove us, and we could definitely achieve some efficiencies if we were to tag on to that construction effort.

I don't want to miss the opportunity to do that.

Um I believe he's gonna be looking to proceed in the spring with that.

I defer to him, I don't want to put words in his mouth, but if we wanted to move forward, we would need to take some set of sort of early legislative action so we could enter into a contract sometime in the in the mid to late springtime.

And uh Engineer Hudson can correct me if I got any of those details wrong.

No, that's all correct.

Okay, we do have a question from Alderman Dowd.

Yeah, since we just collected taxes the first of December, is that the fund gonna grow?

It will there uh if I may, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes.

Uh the there is an additional, I would say four to five hundred thousand on top of the four hundred thousand that I just referenced, uh, that would also be going into that into that part of funds as well.

So all in, you're looking at just under a million dollars in the school street tip.

Okay.

I do have one.

I think we said it in the past, but this uh West Pearl Street project is the beginning of what we hope to do in the future with other side streets offer Main Street.

Is that still correct?

Yes, yes, Mr.

Chairman.

And in my opinion, it'd be uh a great asset to many people uh on the side streets our own businesses, so it's uh enhancing the uh the economic structure of downtown.

So okay, thank you.

Any other questions?

Okay, moving on to the no nope, Mr.

Chairman.

So I just want to make sure I'm uh I'm not hearing any strong opposition, so should should I suggest that that this is uh a plausible pathway forward?

Uh yeah, I mean uh can't call for a rail boat, but a straw boat.

Am I correct?

Yeah, we have uh Alderman Sullivan.

Um I would uh director Cummings if I could I just appreciate maybe uh a memo, maybe a memo of understanding to kind of memorialize what what you put down there as far as what what the project originally had slated for funds and then what you'd be adding to it and then the total the total cost if if you wouldn't mind putting that that just down on paper, so we have it.

Happy to great.

Okay, and I'm in agreement, Mr.

Cummings, so I think you get your marching orders.

All right, well, thank thank you.

Uh Alderman Dow.

Yeah, I think you get three people here in favor of it, but that's three out of fifteen.

I think you probably need to put the whole plan together and address it to the new board.

Um, just so that everybody's um up to speed on what we're trying to do.

And to that end, uh, we would be filing the legislation in January.

Uh but one of the things I want to do before we file the legislation in January, and I'm glad to see that Alderman Lopez has joined us via uh Zoom, is I'd like to make sure we have a neighborhood and and and uh uh tight type meeting to to ensure that folks are aware of it because this project has gone a little dormant.

Um, and if we are gonna resurrect it, of course, I don't want to necessarily resurrect it if uh there isn't really an appetite.

So we'll we'll work through those various details over the next coming weeks, but uh certainly I'll be trying to move forward this project in in January.

Okay.

Next, Mr.

Hudson.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um so the next project we'll highlight is the East Hall Street Bridge Street Intersection Project.

Um as the Gateway Project.

This is just west of the bridges that connect us with Hudson over the Merrimack River, um, the gateway uh into Nashville from that port of part part of the city, so to speak.

Um the current status is that we're in final design.

We're also getting ready to enter in a right-away phase.

Um this project is uh funded largely with uh federal funds through the DOT LPA program.

Um and there's uh specific right-of-way process we need to follow as part of that via the Uniform Act.

So we'll be entering into that.

Most of what we need for right away is fairly minor, some uh very small easements and that sort of thing for some minor winding and things like that.

So we we hope that process will go well and we'll be able to achieve our target our project advertisement date, which is gonna be towards the end of summer 2026.

Um the project if you were were familiar with the project years ago, it looked a bit different.

Um it was kind of a a bit a circular pattern with uh uh a roadway cutting through it, almost like a do not enter sign or something like that.

Um but it's changed, and that was uh in large part because um it was discovered that there was asbestos uh in in a most of the area of the intersection, um, which was really gonna drive the cost of the project up.

Um this project um is a little unique.

Uh 3.6 million dollars of it is gonna be 100% funded by uh federal and state funds.

Normally these projects are 80-20, but that was uh that was uh really uh an arrangement we were able to make in establishing the project years ago.

Um our current estimate is above that, so we're gonna push into uh above the 100% funds into what the current agreement notes as an 80-20 uh relationship.

So we will need to obligate some city matching funds, but um it will be uh pendings on the dollar, so to speak, relative to the total cost versus what what the city share is.

Um the project as uh as re envisioned here, holds the same configuration.

You know, we have the the X pattern with the traffic signal in the middle.

Um as it turns out that is the most efficient way to process traffic at this intersection.

Um but we do accomplish some things uh such as improving bicycle pedestrian accommodations, we're gonna widen shoulders where we can.

We're gonna reconstruct all the sidewalks in the area, we're gonna uh provide ADA ramps where they don't exist, um, as well as uh safe pedestrian crossings.

Um there's a temporary signal that's been there a long time, but there's a temporary signal currently uh at D Street, and that was something that the um the housing development there was required to put up and bond uh for a permanent signal should this project not happen, uh but this project's gonna move forward.

So we're gonna we're gonna convert that temporary signal into a permanent signal.

And then uh we we envision uh creating some green space uh or or basically improving the green space that exists there on the west side of the X intersection, uh the E Street side, uh and we're envisioning that at some point that may cut become uh public space, public pub small public park or something of that nature.

Um so as part of this project, we're gonna provide some angled head and parking off of E Street, setting ourselves up for um for providing some parking space for people to be able to use that space uh when it gets developed in the future.

So that's kind of the project as it's envisioned.

Um again, the next slide's kind of a blow up.

I'd be happy to address any questions about this project.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Hudson, what uh when you look at this project, what do you see for traffic impact?

I mean, I know that that area going to Hudson uh from Nashville, etc.

etc.

can be a bit of a headache.

How do you see this?

Um flicking with that.

It's a great question, and especially as we're coming off of uh completing the bridge rehabilitation work.

That was fairly impactful to traffic.

We had to reduce to single lanes in each direction for a good portion of that work over the last couple of years.

So we appreciate everybody's patience as we did that work.

Um that that project is almost done.

We just need to replace the light poles, so you'll see some additional activity out there in the uh coming weeks, but but it's only to replace the light poles, which is the last aspect of that project.

Um given that we're gonna be on existing alignment largely.

We believe we can do the shoulder widening, we could shift people around a little bit, but the construction is not gonna be as impactful as it would have been with that previous alternate where we were trying to create um new routes and doing some major construction that that would have been I think more disruptive.

So every construction project is uh is somewhat disruptive, and this will be as well.

But we believe we can uh we can be able to we'll be able to manage traffic um and as we did with the bridge project, keep things flowing.

There will be some impacts, but um hopefully it won't be too significant.

Okay, thank you.

Um Mr.

Hudson was discussed of a potential kiddy pack.

Is that still discussable?

Yeah, I see that that green space uh that abuts E Street.

I think the you know we'll have to go through uh a process of deciding what what gets done there.

Uh, Kitty Park may be a very appropriate activity because of the size, it's not huge, but it is good size for for that.

Um as we uh clean up the asbestos, we're gonna create like a berm um again along the roadway and cap all that.

So you know it'll probably I mean what we envision is it'll create kind of a nice little semi-natural barrier there from the roadway traffic, hopefully make that feel like a more inviting space.

So there are lots of options there.

Given that this is DOT funding, they're not gonna build the key park for us, um, but we're pushing as far as we can with creating all pedestrian connections and adding that parking and uh setting ourselves up to do something like that in the future.

Yeah, because uh from when I first saw these plants to now, we have built several structures in the former main manufacturing area.

So kids must play.

So yeah, I agree.

That that area of the city is walkable.

Yes.

Yeah, that area of the city is is uh is due some uh space for activity for for everybody who lives in that area.

I agree.

Um, if there's no more questions, I'm gonna turn it over to uh Deputy Sydney Engineer Saunders to cover the remaining couple projects.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Uh for the record, Mark Sonic's Deputy City Engineer.

Uh the first project I have before you is uh much like the um the last one, it's it's in that uh final design right-of-way phase.

Uh, this is the heritage rail trail east.

This is an extension of the current rail trail.

It's gonna be uh west of Main Street.

Um, this is gonna extend that rail trail approximately three quarters of a mile from Main Street down to Denton Street with the last piece wrapping around the recently renovated Henry Hangar building.

Um it is it's it's proposed to be a 10-foot wide paved paved path to support multiple uses as a part of this project.

There'll be drainage upgrades, lighting, landscaping, trail crossing improvements, and upgrades to the commercial street bridge.

So as I just said before, the project is in final design, and we are underway with and we are underway with uh right-of-way effort with New Hampshire DOT.

Uh, this project is in 8020 split with the 20 20% being the local match.

Um, at this time, based on the current um estimate, uh the project is has funding set aside so we look like we can move forward once we uh once we once we go to bed.

And um, with that, uh the next slide is oh, if you guys have any questions, I'll happily answer it on on this project.

Not a member of the committee, sir.

Sorry.

Uh at the end of the meeting, there will be an additional public comment, and uh please come up and express at that time.

Thank you.

Any questions from members of the committee so far?

Okay, carry on.

So the next project before you is the lock walk street and whitney street bike pet project.

Uh, this project is not as far along in the um in the process as the previous two.

This is currently in the engineering study.

So about a year ago, we held a local concerns meeting to kick off this engineering study, and with that we heard from local residents within the area, and then we're trying to incorporate that into a design.

At this point, we believe the alterations are going to be to widen sidewalk on one side, make the other side ADA compliant, uh turn block street and windy street into a one-way couple and uh and add bike lanes and parking.

Uh addition to that, we do look to um to improve some crossings and and have some potential bump outs.

Um as I said, as I said before, this is still in that engineering study.

Uh we haven't come to a proposed action at this point.

Uh, we're hoping in the early early winter in the next couple months, we can have a proposed action meeting and have a more formal plan of how we would like to move forward with with this project.

Um I would like to go back to uh turning these into a one-way couple.

We are still working with um with local services to make sure there's no uh there's no diminishing service specifically, PD fire and transit.

Um as of right now, the the funding for the project, uh the DOT we have it programmed at 1.2 million dollars.

We do have the local match available, however, looking at the the scope of project, we believe it's going to come in a little higher.

That's why we went into that engineering study to get a better scope of of where we're gonna be at, and we we we would like to bring this to uh the New Hampshire DOT's estimate uh review committee to potentially uh increase the budget at that 80-20 split.

Um that is that is to uh to come at a later day once once the engineering study is complete.

Um at that time, I'll happily answer any questions that I can with this one, but it is still in its infancy.

Uh I'm just glad you're in communication, particularly with fire, because uh that's uh a going two point from the Amber Street station, you know.

So see what they have to say, you know.

It's kind of critical.

Usually with the fire time is of the essence.

Yes.

Uh so Mr.

Chair, those that's all we have for you tonight.

Um, but we appreciate the time and uh as we continue to progress these projects, we'll be back before you with additional specifics.

But um uh and we'll bring other projects as they evolve and uh for your information, but uh appreciate appreciate the time and uh for us to share these updates and um and we'll be back.

Are you uh staying to the end of the meeting?

Uh I wasn't planning to, but I'm happy to meet the gentleman in the hall.

Yeah, I I think what I'll extend the courtesy, you know, break a little bit of the rules.

We'll give it go on up, sir.

I'll give you three minutes.

Oh, fair enough.

Can you just state your name and address, even though I know who you are?

Thank you, Schaefer.

Uh 15E Street.

And I was wondering about the uh rail trail extension.

I know one of the issues was that uh I think the city didn't have the full right of way to everything at some point.

I was wondering whether that's been resolved.

Yeah, so we um we're going into that right-of-way phase as of right now.

Um there's 11 properties that either need a temporary or permanent easement, with that being uh full properties need that permanent easement.

Um we're going through fair market evaluations to to look and work with the um work with the property owners.

Uh with that being said, um, everything we're looking for.

It's it's very small and minor in nature, just to install a sign or install a rapid flashing beacon.

Thank you very much.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Schaefer.

Okay, thank you, gentlemen.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

Now we'll move to communications.

Communications have been received from Jill Stansfield parking manager introduct regarding introduction of technical memorandum on proposed amendment to zone one parking meter hours.

Communication received from Andrew S.

Hill, Senior Associate, Desmond Design Management regarding analysis regarding proposed changes to zone one enforcement hours, and one communication from Sam Durfee, AI CP planning manager regarding referral from the Board of Alderman on resolution R25221 relative to tax-deed property auction.

Okay, there being no objection, I'll accept the communications and place them on file.

Without objection, I'll suspend the rules to allow for a communication that was received after the agenda was prepared.

To the clerk.

We received uh communication from Liz Hanum, Economic Development Director, and Matt Sullivan, Community Development Director regarding portable restroom rental proposal.

Okay, very good.

There being no objection, I'll accept the communications and place them on file.

I'm finished business.

There is none.

New business resolutions.

I would like to make a motion to recommend final passage, please.

Okay.

Any discussion on the motion, Alderman Dowd.

Isn't this the one that we uh at the full board um indefinitely postpone, which would make this not even eligible to be on the agenda?

Uh Mr.

Cummings.

Uh if I may, Mr.

Chairman, I believe that was uh legislation sponsored by Mr.

Moran, Alderman Moran.

Yes, oh okay.

Yes, if I may.

All right, so uh I did receive a communication from Mr.

Moran to ask to indefinitely postpone.

So uh it was for 025-072.

72.

This is this is legislation sponsored by Mayor Donchess.

Yes.

Oh, all right.

So they're two different.

Okay, yes.

Yes, this one we're taking up.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

So we have my name, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes.

Let me know when you're ready.

Uh yeah, okay.

We're gonna go with the uh positive recommendation, a final passage.

Uh Director Cummings.

Yes, thank you.

There's a piece of property I want to call to the uh body's attention.

35-41 East Hall of Street, what is sometimes referred to as the quote unquote headlines building.

I would offer to this body that we amend the legislation to remove this property from uh from the legislation at this time.

We could always uh file another piece of legislation later on if the time is appropriate uh to to auction it or dispose of it however we'd like, which I would recommend be in RFP.

Thank you.

Okay, what is that uh street address again?

Uh yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Sorry, let me just pull it up here.

It's 35-41 East Holler Street.

Okay.

I can make that motion.

Okay.

Um Sullivan, do you want to Mr.

Chairman?

I'd like to make a motion to amend R2521 by removing the property 35-41 East Hollis Street from the list of uh tax determin property auctions, please.

Okay.

Any discussion on that?

Okay, seeing none, call for the vote.

All those in favor of the amendment say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, motion carries.

Uh now we'll need a new vote.

New motion on to recommend final passage of our 2521 as amended.

Do you have that?

Yes.

Uh I'd like to make a motion to approve.

Sorry, to recommend final passage of uh R 25221 as amended.

Okay.

Uh yes, Director Sullivan.

Uh good evening, Matt Sullivan, community development director.

Um I don't want to ask for an amendment per se, but I want to just take an opportunity to offer a brief comment on three properties on this piece of legislation.

The first being three to five Curtis Drive, the second being uh L Narrows, and the third being L Irene Street.

Uh well these land properties, if you will, are included on this list.

Uh it's my intent as part of the process that will take place subsequent to this resolution being passed by the Board of Alderman, uh, with really an eye towards conservation and land protection, uh, to instead seek that the city retain ownership of these properties.

So while this legislation gives the city the right to auction these properties off, uh it's my expectation that through further consultation with the Conservation Commission, uh legal counsel and the tax collection office that I am going to attempt uh to work to retain these properties based on their natural resource value.

So again, there's no issue with the legislation in front of you.

We have the right to auction should this legislation pass, uh, but my expectation is to try and work to secure these properties for long-term protection.

Thank you.

Okay, Alderman Sullivan.

So I understand the process properly, Director Sullivan.

Sure.

This uh this legislation takes all properties listed, X the one we just took out, but then that transfers ownership to the city, and at that point, because of back taxes, uh, as we've as we've mentioned in the legislation.

However, you mentioned that the next step typically in the process is we have the right to auction those off.

In the properties that you mentioned, we will forego that right.

If I could just add uh a couple clarifying comments.

So these properties in front of you have already been deeded by the city of Nashua.

Uh what the action that you're taking this evening is to basically authorize the city to then subsequently auction those properties off.

You're giving the right to auction.

Okay.

Uh we could, through internal conversation and further review of these properties based on either their you know, economic development strategic value, their conservation value, or some other public benefit reason.

We could ultimately choose not to proceed with auctioning the properties off.

You're simply giving the city the the ability to do that.

Okay.

Um and so it's it's still an important action.

I have no objection to those three properties being included, uh, but we do believe that there are limited development potentials of those two of those three properties, and therefore they might be a good fit for the conservation commission to hold on to or the city proper.

Subject to further confirmation, of course.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh so now we're back to the vote.

Uh on our 2521, which is uh to recommend final passage as amended.

Any disc further discussion?

Seeing none, call for the vote.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye opposed, motion carries.

I would like to make a motion to recommend final passage of 025083.

Okay, Alderman Lopez.

This is your can you introduce it.

Yep, sorry, I just had to get off a mute here.

Um so I have heard back from a lot of um the downtown residents and the uh businesses that changing the parking time from 7 to 9 p.m.

has adversely it impacted their business.

Um particularly restaurants that might be serving later, um, places that have uh events or activities like music um or um uh karaoke, that kind of stuff.

Um generally that happens later because during the five to seven period they're they're serving dinner um and they're deliberately providing amenities, activities, and um experiences for people later because the restaurants are open until one largest.

Um over the years, as Alderman I've heard repeatedly that it's a uh frustrating to the public when they go downtown and all the restaurants are closed and there isn't any activity going on.

And we've invested a lot economically in making sure that we have a vibrant downtown.

You know, we try to decorate storefronts, we put out Christmas lights, we uh sponsor or or fund special events like the holiday stroll to have that vibrant downtown.

But if most of the week year people are not participating downtown and businesses can't operate effectively or efficiently in the evening uh time frame, you you contribute to the consistent perception that there's nothing going on downtown, it's dead it's not exciting.

And what has been pointed out to me by a lot of the businesses and um residents is by raising the parking time, we've shifted the attention and the focus away from making downtown a vibrant you know location and more towards taxing people and charging them you know for uh parking.

You've created basically an imaginary timer in people's minds that okay, well now I'm paying for this space, you know, between seven and nine, and literally to go downtown to Nashville to spend money or to you know recreate or do things with you know my neighbors.

Uh there's a disincentive.

I might as well go to other places or other areas.

Um there are other area parts of down of Nashua that people can recreate, and you know, I've heard from a lot of the residents that they they're starting to go to those places instead because the parking isn't a problematic, it's not on their mind, they don't have to scan an app when they're going in, all those kind of things.

So we have clearly prioritized making the parking department more productive.

And you know, from a fiscal perspective, that makes sense because we have had issues maintaining the parking garages, and we need to make sure that we're paying for staff.

Um there's a desire potentially for more staff, so that needs to be funded.

So it's understood that increasing the available revenue is desirable, but I think we're paying for it a different way.

Um, residents, particularly, you know, who might use uh downtown parking, um, which per Desmond study is not for them.

It's for I guess the productive use of economic things, but not people who live there.

Um they find that they they can't park their car at all on any of the streets in any of zone one until later at night, you know, beyond the point where you come home from work, you're you're sitting down for the night, or whatever.

Not everybody wants to go out at nine and park their car.

Um they're not all necessarily gonna be there all night, but it does affect how their guests are, it does affect when they're inviting people, and I've heard from constituents that they're less likely to invite people downtown because they can't they'll have to pay for it, and then they'll have to go back out and you know fee the meter until nine, or at least that's the perception.

So I've heard from residents that live downtown that moving it to nine has adversely affected them.

I've heard from businesses that they're not getting as much business out of it.

We've also had as Alderman multiple outreaches from some of the businesses.

Um I think Pedler's daughter was one of the most vocal that their staff have to pay.

Um, and this is an area that specifically Desmond acknowledges, um, but is indifferent to, I think.

They don't look at staff working downtown to operate the businesses that we're relying on or to create the experiences or that as desirable.

They find it that they're exploiting parking by trying to park somewhere that's proximal to their business location that they'd be able to walk safely to later at night.

It's a priority for Desmond to have everybody park in the parking garages, regardless of how close the businesses are to that parking garage, what the road conditions are.

For example, right now, downtown the parking department and the street department in DBW done a great job of cleaning the street, but not the curb cuts, not the intersection parts.

There's a lot of snowbanks that will literally block you from crossing the road.

That's something that somebody working until one and then having to clean up has to navigate in the middle of the night when it's very cold.

So they don't really want to park five, six blocks away at the parking garage.

So while Desmond and the parking focus was on utilization and encouraging people to go use those garages, I don't think it necessarily, at least I'm not hearing from people considers the other people who are using the parking downtown, or the other priorities we need to acknowledge.

The last uh aspect that I wanted to point out was the ticketing providing a deterrent to people coming back.

When somebody gets ticketed, they feel unwelcome, they feel like now they have to do paperwork, now they've done something wrong, and they have to go to City Hall to straighten it out.

And it in even tonight's communication, it's been indicated that there's a lot of ticketing of like 24, 25 uh on a nightly basis.

And while that might be good for revenue generation, not good for our brand downtown as a place that's open for people to come to, a place that's welcoming.

And there's a lot of other factors that have been coming into play that downtown's struggling with, particularly uh the cost of uh food products uh going up, the cost of uh beverages, tariffs, all that kind of stuff, where their overhead is shrinking, and now we're reducing the people who regularly come in.

We're reducing the number of people that those regulars might invite because we're trying to generate revenue.

I think we need to look at a different form of revenue generation, particularly in the zones that we're that I've identified.

And I think we need to acknowledge that there needs to be more use and recognition of parking as an amenity rather than just an income source.

Okay, thank you, Alderman.

Uh Ms.

Hammond, Director Hammond.

Yeah.

Um so um I I think we have Desmond here to talk about exactly what the study was for.

Um, but we we were asked to provide a fiscal note for this legislation.

Um, and we wanted to understand we we don't quite have a year of data yet, um, but we reached back out to Andy Hill to look at utilization and um at turnover as well, um, because turnover is really important in keeping a vibrant community.

But um, I'll let Andy um kind of go through what he found and um what the recommendation is.

Mr.

Hill, welcome.

Thank you.

For the record, uh, I'm Andy Hill, I'm the director of consulting services for Desmond, and we are the folks who um authored the parking management plan that's being slowly but surely implemented out in the downtown.

One of the recommendations arising from that was to increase um both the rates for zone one as well as the hours of enforcement.

Um we had some very good data and some very good scientific reasons for doing that that um do not have any basis in vernacular and have all basis in reality.

When we were doing our initial analysis uh and checking baseline conditions across the downtown, uh particularly in the zone one meters, which are to be very clear, the curb site meters up and down Main Street and a handful of meters um around the corner from Main Street, where the vast majority of uh economic activity is occurring.

Um as far back as 2022 in the fall of 2022, we're noticing very high levels of utilization, uh, particularly on um Saturday, Saturday days and Saturday evenings, which was not necessarily significantly alarming to us at that point in time, but we were very much aware of three critical trends that were occurring up and down Main Street that were likely to change that dynamic.

The first of those was the ongoing construction of the arts center, which was going to bring a significant amount of tidal demand into the downtown later in the evening than the current regulations had the ability to address.

We were also aware of a significant number of both in-process and planned residential projects that were happening within the same area that were again going to increase the amount of demand for parking later and later into the evening and on the weekends as well.

Finally, we were also acutely aware of the general shift that we're starting to see in commercial space up and down the main street corridor, which was migrating away from traditional soft goods retail, which primarily experienced its largest demand during working business hours, and moreover to dining and entertainment, which again pushes that demand further and further into the evening.

In addition to all of this, we had also gone through a fairly extensive stakeholder process as we were looking at this data and putting context to this data.

And one of the things that we had heard multiple times was that it was very hard to secure a parking space up and down Main Street, even at that time, because enforcement ended early in the evening, and you had a lot of employees that were coming in working later in the evening that had no problem contributing a dollar or two to finish out the length of stay within the hours of enforcement without issue, and then have that parking space right at the front door available to them later into the evening.

We have no problem with folks parking at the front door.

We want to see that happen.

However, we also know from over 50 years of experience that uh parking the front door is something that everybody wants to do, and you can't accommodate everybody.

We know from experience in other downtowns that have failed that if you do not accommodate discretionary users, particularly patrons, visitors, folks who are coming to the area for the first time, and provide them that curbside spaces, not only will they perceive the street as being full and go somewhere else, but when they go home, they will tell their neighbors as well.

And you will see an erosion in the amount of repeat activity that you're seeing.

Inversely, well, we understand employees have significant concerns about both cost and safety.

Employees are also typically far more familiar with the area and because they are parking day by day in and out of the area, have far more capability to identify where those cheap or free open and available spaces are that are maybe a block or two off of the front door, and the ability to pilot between those spaces and their place of business.

So if we have to make a decision between who we're going to accommodate the front door, um, best practice and experience and conventional wisdom tell us we really want those spaces to be available to those patrons as they show up because they're the ones who will never come back.

Um addition, as I had mentioned in some of the stakeholder work that we had done, we had heard from multiple business owners and residents living in the area, uh, that they were significantly frustrated because they saw very little turnover, uh, especially later into the evening up and down Main Street when they were looking for available and open spaces, when their customers were looking for available in open spaces.

In order to test this and see how viable this was, uh we actually went out the weekend of Valentine's Day in 2023.

And we went out particularly that evening because the part the uh performing arts center had not opened yet, uh, the flats had not opened yet, so we were still dealing very much with a baseline set of conditions, but we also knew that this was one of the busiest weekends of the year for couples going out to dine out and celebrate Valentine's Day.

So if we wanted to see conditions when things were under duress, this was the proper weekend to go out.

Uh we went out and we not only did hourly counts through the course of the evening and the day, but we also went out and did license plate inventories so that we could go back and compare uh which vehicles were parked where and for what length of time going up and down Main Street as well, to see if there was any validity with this uh question of folks dwelling for long periods at the curb.

Um what we found was that there was some validity to folks dwelling for long periods at the curbs.

Vast majority of folks that we inventoried on that Saturday and Sunday tended to stay for just a couple of hours, those spaces turned over on a fairly regular basis.

Um it was very highly utilized through that area for the average individual who came driving into Main Street that afternoon or evening, uh, they were likely to perceive Main Street as being full uh on multiple block faces, even though uh there may have been a one or two available spaces because they were running at 85% or higher occupancy.

Uh and when we talk about the difference between perceptive capacity and actual capacity, it's nights like this that we focus on the perceptive capacity issue because if you go out there right now, you'll find a certain number of spaces that during high summer are available for use, have been taken out of circulation at this point because they've accumulated snow or ice.

Um, so you want that cushion somewhere in there.

And you have to be very concerned when under good conditions, summer conditions, if you will, um you're already running at 85 and 90 percent.

And what we saw was a lot of block faces, a lot of main street that was running at 85 and 90 percent.

We also saw somewhere between five and ten percent of the vehicles that were parked there were parked way in excess of two hours, four hours, six hours, eight hours.

Um, and they were occupying spaces that were in front of some of the same businesses that I'm sure are very concerned right now about availability and turnover in front of their businesses.

Um we were very aware of is these conditions were just going to continue to be exacerbated going forward.

So when we started talking about strategic recommendations, one of the strategic recommendations was let's change the length of stay from 90 minutes to two hours, because frankly that's what people are staying for right now, anyhow.

And it will be more business friendly and more friendly to people's actual habits at this point in time.

Um, but let's raise the rates just a little bit on these very in-demand spaces, hold the line on the spaces that are just a block or so off in other zone segments, um, so that there is some slightly more availability curbside parking in these areas that are in high demand, uh, and we've created uh a cost savings incentives for the folks who can park a little further and the folks who um are concerned about paying a little bit more to be at the front door.

We've now given them options to go to, and we had checked to make sure that there was capacity and there was significant capacity in some of those other side streets uh that were under under zones in the other lots and the other garages, etc.

Uh and then we said, well, performing arts center is coming, we know that that's going to push the demand curve later into the day.

We probably need to make sure that we're enforcing later into the day to make sure uh that we're not having this dwelling issue that exists right now when the parking gets cut off at six o'clock at night.

So we went forward with these.

Um we went forward with these uh um recommendations.

Um we wanted to definitely influence decision-making behavior up in Main Street.

We didn't want to displace anybody.

We wanted to make sure that folks who might be displaced had available parking within a block or so distance uh at a cheaper rate, but make those spaces available going forward, especially when there were events at the performing arts center once it opened.

When this issue came up, we were asked to take a look at this and examine this again.

Now that we had real hard data.

The flats were open, the performing arts center was up and open and operating.

And we went back into the field.

Now, if we had been wrong about our recommendations, what we had expected to find was as we went into field, utilization would have gone down.

We would have driven people away.

We set the rates too high, the enforcement was going too late in the evening, people were having bad experiences, they were going back and telling their neighbors about it, and they were not coming into the downtown anymore.

What we actually found through a series of observations, first test observations earlier in the September, early in November, and then longer observations the following weekend was utilization had grown explosively up and down the main street.

We were now seeing aggregate utilization rates in the zone one spaces here, not just above 85%, but up into 100% and 100 plus percent during certain hours and later and later into the evening.

These were numbers that we were seeing not at five or six o'clock, but at seven or eight o'clock at night on the Friday night on the Saturday night at night as well.

We had also seen utilization go up significantly in some of the off-street parking areas that were directly adjacent to zone one.

The good news is it had gone up in some cases as much as 20-25% over the last time we had done these types of counts, but there was still significant capacity available, 60 to 70 percent as far as that goes.

And again, at a lower price point.

So as we looked at all of this, the impression that we got when we came back is here is a downtown that did change as we expected it to do, and is being used uh very vibrantly, has a very high level of utilization that does not necessarily seem to be turning anybody away.

There is migration from some of those on-street areas into the off-street areas, which is shown by the growth as we look at the conditions pre this benchmark and and under this benchmark right now.

So, again, the system as we understand it is is working.

The numbers say people are coming, um, that folks are self-selecting, um, and uh and the observations that we made in terms of length of stay and turnover also seem to suggest that that was that was happening.

We had good compliance up and down zone one, people were staying as long as they were supposed to, but not overseeing.

Those spaces were opening up and becoming available to folks as they came in late to the show or late to dinner or something along those lines.

Uh, and people were being accommodated.

Um, as we looked at all of these recommendations, the first thought was there's balance within the parking system.

There are multiple options for multiple different users, each according to what their greatest needs are.

Um is everybody happy with this?

No.

I'm in the parking business.

Um, I'm not pizza, I don't make everybody happy.

There are always going to be people who wish they were closer to their destination, they had a better walking path, etc.

My job is to try and create enough options and alternatives for them out there that folks can find accommodation where they're looking for, um, and that they can still find a place to park.

It may not be right at the front door, it may be a block away in a garage or a lot, but there's still parking that's available, and all the data that we collected seemed to indicate that that was happening.

Um we looked at what happens if we reverse this and we start to look at rolling back these hours of enforcement.

Our anticipation is that what you're gonna see is you're going to see uh block faces that are already running in the high 80s to 90s to up to 100% on performance nights.

Um, now completely overparked.

The area would be in utter deadlock because there's no incentive at that point for turnover.

There's no incentive for folks to seek out cheaper parking in that area.

So everybody is coming competing just for those front-end spots.

And over time, the problem will solve itself because people will have a bad experience, they will stop coming down to patronize.

Utilization rates will fall for those curbside spaces because those businesses and those venues will be deprived of their patronage.

Um finally at what we thought the potential cost was, we took a look at actual utilization numbers and did some basic math to figure out how much money we're leaving on the table in terms of meters, how much money we're leaving on the table in terms of lost ticket revenues.

Um there was a considerable loss there that as I understand it, based on the methodology we used and calculated, was very similar to the numbers that the parking department used within their own methodology, which from a appraisal standpoint suggest a high level of confidence in both of those numbers when you're coming at it from two different ways and landing at the same place.

Having that money that could be used to continue to maintain that improved infrastructure or offset that derbist uh debt service now not in the circulation, uh, is is an issue because somewhere along the line somebody's still got to make payments on those bonds.

And my assumption is if parking revenue is not going toward that, then increased property taxes potentially is or some other source as far as it goes.

Um this is a concern, but the bigger concern that I have that Desmond has we're starting to see a downtown that is increasingly more and more utilized, more and more busy, more and more congested, and therefore requires more active management in order to make sure that all users are being accommodated.

And what we're hearing for is an appeal to actually take away from some of that regulation, which in our experience is just going to lead to chaos and eventually this very decline that's being rumored as occurring right now because of the policies that were put in place.

In my defense, again, you have an eight-page memo or nine-page memo in front of you that has hard data that backs up everything I'm saying, with all due respect to Alderman Lopez.

What I heard was a lot of vernacular and a lot of hearsay about what is occurring there, but I didn't hear a lot of hard evidence that businesses are failing, sales taxes and decline, anything along those lines.

This sounds like a lot of the same rumors and statements that we've heard in this community when we came in 2000 uh 21, that we've heard in other communities.

Um the bottom line is I have to go by what I can see, and what I can see is an area that has a lot of utilization right now and needs as much regulation as is appropriate in order to make sure that it's accommodating all the users in a fair and equitable manner.

And I believe that we have that here.

I believe if you repeal this, you're not going to achieve your objectives, and you're going to end up costing the city significant money in the short term and lost revenues associated with parking, significant money in the longer term, and lost patronage and lost businesses.

And that's the full summary of my position at this point in time.

Um I think we're just here for questions.

Um we may have one for you.

Okay.

Out of endowed.

Yeah, a couple things.

Uh first of all, after nine o'clock, they can park on Main Street for free.

Okay.

Because three people making a decision for 15 is still not what I like to see.

And the other thing is if this thing is passed tonight, it goes to the full board on the 23rd.

By the time it's implemented, we're into the next year's board, which is a possibly a whole bunch of different opinions on this.

So I I'd prefer it would have waited till after the 4th of January.

Um the other thing is I I think that there are two things were stated.

One was people living on Main Street, don't want to go out after nine o'clock to park their car.

Okay.

And the other thing was that restaurants is they or they wanted their employees to park in front.

No, they don't.

Um, some of the concerns I heard was, which I hope is by the what we had discussion earlier, was people when they get out at late at night are concerned about walking into the parking garages.

And I I hope with the increased lighting and perhaps even additional security, we can alleviate that concern.

But I think the people that live on Main Street, you know, perhaps we could give them a tag says, you know, they live on Main Street and they can park at seven, and the enforcement will not ticket them, you know.

Um so I think there are a little some nuances to help solve this problem without going a full repeal for the whole area.

Uh and I think that requires further discussion and and you know, I I hate to make changes here when you know we have significant other colleagues that will probably want to weigh in on this, so it's gonna go to the full board, and the only way it does that is we approve it.

So I'm inclined to approve it to get it to the full board so we can have a full discussion at that level.

Um I understand the revenue piece, yeah.

But you know, um I I think that if somebody lives on Main Street that we can accommodate them a little bit.

I don't think I don't know how many people live on Main Street and how many parking spaces are gonna take up.

I'll tell you this morning.

I went down at seven o'clock this morning and parked on Main Street.

There wasn't a car parked anywhere.

And and uh so I don't know how many people are parking overnight.

If they do, they leave awfully early.

I just think there is more to this that needs to be discussed.

If I can just clarify, yeah.

Um, so if this legislation does not get approved tonight, it still goes to the full board, it just says uh not recommended.

So it still has to be voted on at the full board level.

So it either way, it would it would be a discussion thing that something that could be brought up in the full board.

Um the other thing we have talked about a potential um employee discount kind of program.

Um, but we wanted a a year's worth of data to at least be able to to understand what that looks like, and um the managing that kind of program is going to be extremely um cumbersome on our enforcement staff.

Um, so we have to really uh come up with a good plan that that won't make it um won't make it incredibly hard for them to do their jobs as well.

So we we have plans to look into that um in the in the 26 2026.

Yeah, I would like to jump in here.

I'm under that impression too.

All committees make a recommendation to the full board, so that's why exactly it says in your initial to recommend final passage, which is the positive motion, which everything comes under the positive.

But if this committee does not recommend it, we could be the committee can be overruled by the full board.

Okay, Altaman Lopez.

Um, yeah, I just wanted to correct a couple of things because I know I kind of went on, so um, I didn't want to try pulling personal privilege when I can't literally stand up in the room.

But um, a couple of points to make is people can't park overnight downtown because there's an overnight parking ban.

Um, but people who are living downtown aren't all on Main Street, so you could be talking about somebody at Cotton Mill or Clock Tower who might be interested in going downtown, but not be interested in driving there and back and having to park their car after 9 p.m.

to do it for free.

So there are a lot of people in the adjacent neighborhoods who live downtown who use downtown as a location to invite people downtown.

Oh, I I live just a couple blocks away.

They're still gonna drive, especially on a night like tonight.

Um, the example that uh Desmond brought up, um you know, Valentine's Day 2023, this is seven degrees out, right?

So looking at basic context, you would understand that people are probably gonna stay in place a little bit longer on that kind of a night, but also be a little more inclined to keep driving if it's really cold out and they're not sure they want to go out and walk around and do all those kind of things.

So while data is useful to competently evaluate it, you do need to look at context.

And while, and that's why I think it's important to clarify that the population that I'm talking about isn't exactly on Main Street.

There's a lot of ancillary streets and a lot of people, for example, uh loss 34 or the um the flats that were mentioned um that could be patronizing downtown much more uh successfully, but just because they live four or five blocks from say um the performing art center, or doesn't mean that they actually want to walk there and back all the time.

There's definitely a benefit to doing it on a nice summer night or a night where you want to walk.

But particularly if you're going to invite friends, those friends aren't going to have additional parking.

They're going to need parking.

And so the concerns that I'm hearing is that people can't necessarily or have a disincentive for going out downtown, particularly, and just leave the downtown area and go to other places in the city.

And this is something Desmond is welcome to actually study because they did bring up that they went and collected more data to reinforce the position that they started with and the recommendations that they wrote that we approved.

But they I haven't heard anybody who's actually validated or verified.

Nobody surveyed the downtown businesses and said, is this working for you or is this not working for you?

I think the downtown businesses had to navigate the on street parking that was removed due to the outdoor dining to some extent and haven't really had a time to rebuild from that particular experience.

But a lot of the debate that was being referenced earlier as just anecdotal was hundreds of people living downtown and operating their businesses downtown, saying what their experiences were, whether we agreed with it or not.

And as the downtown alderman, I mean, I really don't always agree with what people say on one side or the other.

I think the truth is definitely in the middle.

But I don't discount it just because it doesn't fit my pre-existing model.

So where you have businesses that are saying this is affecting me, the least you could do if you're gonna argue that you have a firmer grasp on data and the experience of the people living downtown and operating businesses downtown elected to represent downtown, the least you could do is ask them or talk to them or evaluate them because you've we've heard a lot about data and and you know how what are facts, but you can't use qualitative data and quantitative data without you without accommodating both.

So if we've only been connecting or collecting quantitative data, and we're saying, well, we have the numbers, and that's the only reality that there is, and the numbers are collected entirely based on the premise that a lot of people downtown is a bad thing, and that we want these cars to be moved into the garages and not on Main Street, then the numbers will bear that out.

But if all of the numbers that are on Main Street and the cars that are utilizing it, the successful businesses aren't actually patronizing the businesses and their parking and they're willing to pay the the up until nine um charging because they're doing other things, then patronizing the restaurants, it's not gonna help the restaurants.

I don't think we're seeing a surge in um parking downtown because of the performing arts center running its shows, but we do have a system in place that was recommended by Desmond that encompasses all of zone one, and a large section of zone one is not proximate to the performing art center.

So, and and it's not even this legislation isn't even strictly targeting when they're showing shows or the times that they're showing shows.

It's effective on days when they're not showing shows.

So while I agree there's a lot of more work that can be done in more studies and more evaluations, I don't think necessarily that the decisions that we made at the board actually reflect a comprehensive and insightful study of this.

I think it was done before the performing arts center opened.

I think a lot of forecasting was done based on what people believed things would people would be doing, but if we're not really willing to test it and interview people and do the same kind of outreach that we did before to make sure it's working, then I for me that caused the question whether or not the premise was solid in the first place.

I do think that the performing art center and all of the additional buildings that we built have increased the population downtown overall, and I do think we need to manage the parking.

But there's a lot of areas that haven't really been addressed, and even the comments that were made previously.

It was mentioned that the flats were open and that people were now living in the flats.

It wasn't really commented on, and I'm not exactly sure what the impact is of the garage in the flats have been largely inaccessible for most of the time that we're looking at these trends, and the two garages that we have right now have been undergoing construction all summer and you know, as recently as a couple of weeks ago.

So public perception of are those available or they are they uh you know accessible to the average person going downtown, I don't think that's favorable.

I think a lot of people don't necessarily view the parking garages as an option.

And so if the parking garages aren't an option for them and they have to pay to use places, you know, straight downtown and nearby, then I think that's a disincentive.

And I think I've been borne out by the number of people who contacted me.

And I mean, I would point out for what it's worth to anybody here.

I do live downtown.

I do see these streets every single night.

Not the annual evaluation and the counting of cars, but you know, the experience that you would get if you were there and it represented them for 10 years and you know had close relationships with all of these places for what that's worth.

But that is again that's qualitative, not quantitative.

Um so there is some validity to saying that statistically speaking, I didn't go out and reproduce the data that the city of Nashville paid Desmond to do.

I would also point out that that's not my job.

That's his job, and he's paid to do it.

He's not doing it because he is deeply indebted to the city of Nashua or a local resident or anything like that.

It's a job he was paid to do, and the conclusions that he's reached are reinforcing the same conclusion.

I would be impressed if there are recommendations to change anything, and I will look forward to that as a testament to empirical data.

But I think I think the context matters.

And I think anybody who is active downtown or even drives to and from you know City Hall at night can plainly see that there's a change in the pattern.

And I think we're hearing from a lot of the operating at night businesses that this isn't a good thing.

Um the last point that I wanted to clarify, um, it was also mentioned that I had suggested, I think it was suggested that I had said that staff want to park right in front of their businesses.

I didn't say that.

I think Desmond might have suggested that or even mentioned it in their comments.

What I said is that staff want to work and be able to park in proximity to their businesses.

So if they're parked in front of, say, a bunch of um retail outlets that are c retail stores that are closed during the evening time and have open parking because they're not anywhere near a restaurant, then that's not occupying business space that's being used.

That's not somebody working at peddlers parking in front, so nobody can park there, and now peddler doesn't like that.

I think peddlers would be the first to say, hey, can you move your car?

We need people to actually come in here at the slow night.

On the other hand, if there's parking at in front of a bridge nearby, then that's not necessarily actively used or blocking parking or creating kind of negative um perception.

And that's not a perfect example because what I was trying to articulate is some of the people who are working at night that are complaining talk about having to walk three or four blocks, thousands of feet even to get to where their cars can park, and that they don't like, but that doesn't mean that they need to be parked in the front door, it just means there needs to be some kind of reasonable solution.

So I appreciate uh one of the previous speakers uh making note of people who live downtown and how this might be affecting them.

I have also spoken to uh Director Hannem about the possibility of using placer AI data or some other mechanisms that were discussed in the downtown improvement committee to figure out how we can actually accommodate people who do work downtown, because we need them too.

And as much as it could be one man's assumption, I guess, that a person isn't going to fail to return if they can't find parking if they work a place versus somebody who wants to have dinner and doesn't find available parking.

I would argue that a person who gets fired for being late probably won't come back downtown.

And a person that is constantly trying to move their car or manage it probably has a heavier toll of frustration with the downtown and might decide not to work downtown.

And that's where you start to see businesses downtown that can't find cooks or can't find wait staff or can't find people.

We need to make sure we're accommodating all these populations.

And while I'm sensitive to the fiscal aspect of this, that's money we didn't have before.

This was kind of billed as just a small change that was made from a dollar to a dollar and fifty.

And I think we heard the public comment that we really jacked the prices up as far as they were concerned because that's a 30% increase, not a small difference.

But going from zero dollars from to park from seven to eight to a dollar fifty is bigger than thirty percent.

I just don't know how to calculate percentages off of zero.

So I think context matters here, and while our consultants are helpful in providing information and data, as elected officials, we need to actually look at our communities and see what they're doing, and we need to be listening to our constituents and our business owners and our stakeholders.

And I don't think that's that's unscientific, and I don't think that's listening to rumors.

I think that's doing what we're supposed to be doing here.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Alderman Sullivan.

Oh, uh yes, I had a question about the uh the fiscal note.

Um did you take into account um the additional inventory we would pick up when the um parking garage is open if we were to make this change.

Okay.

So I can only assume that if there's additional inventory that's added back into the system that was not available when we were doing our accounts that would only increase either the number of available spaces to accommodate folks who have been displaced, most likely at a lower cost facility than zone one, um, but within a block or two of mainstream um or um that that uh if those spaces are suddenly filled, uh that vacuum is is absorbed, uh, that that does nothing but increase um projected losses if if you were to roll back uh this policy.

Yeah.

Okay.

I have a follow-up, please.

Follow up?

It's a procedural question.

If we were to if we were to table this, what happens with the new incoming board?

Does it just fade away and we gotta start all over again at the beginning of the year, or what what happens?

Yes, any legislation that's still on the active after January 4th, it's gone.

There is no legislation.

It all has to be brought up by the new board.

So anything that hasn't been passed is is gone.

Okay.

Yep.

All right, I just want to say a couple of things.

I think Ms.

Hannem, you could back me up, and Mr.

Hill, I think you've seen my presence at the parking commission meetings over the years.

We haven't seen every everybody else on the board there, but I have been there.

I'm not looking for the star on my forehead.

But I understand as we go along, we do things, particularly in this circumstances, looking past our nose, looking at the bigger picture, looking at the people that sponsored and uh this particular bill want overnight parking.

But how is that going to occur without a revenue source?

Right now, we don't have the manpower in the parking department to enforce it.

As a matter of fact, there are people, scoff laws that are parking in our neighborhood where they shouldn't be, and they're not being brought to what you want to say, justice or no repercussions, because we do not have the personnel.

Now let's also look at the two parking garages for many different reasons.

They went into the point of almost catastrophic disrepair.

And we had to take money from the general fund to do this, and we had to do it because it was radical.

These buildings were going to fall down.

Because no matter what every builder tries to fight against is gravity, and gravity was winning.

So where can we get the resource?

If you look at the definition, what is a parking meter?

And if you Google it, it says the intention of a parking meter is to get a flush.

And if I was owning a business, I wouldn't want somebody park their car for 10 hours in front of my business if I was open for 10 hours.

It's taken away from potential customers.

I would appreciate a flush.

So we're working along those particular lines and goals to achieve this.

Now, unfortunately, sometimes you gotta correct the behavioral aspect of it.

And kind of gets people's attention.

So we went up from a dollar to a dollar fifty.

But I that dollars are donuts.

It's cheaper than Boston and cheaper than Manchester.

But yet it's a corrective measure to help people get into their habit of properly parking.

And particularly a half a block away.

You go in into a different zone, and you'll find that the parking there is a little bit easier and cheaper.

So, and the other thing, this was just changed months ago.

It hasn't had a fair enough time to be properly evaluated.

It's an opinion that has come up against it.

And I'll tell you, I could talk to many people.

I like it or that, or I don't like this, you know.

But the thing is, particularly if you get a ticket, you may not like it.

And I did.

And I paid it.

Even though I have my automatic sticker, but I did pay the ticket.

It was the right thing to do.

So there are rules in everything that we do.

And we got to have rules for this.

And don't misassign the future.

And the future is to get possibly an enterprise fund, fund from the parking revenue to the parking department.

So we can have enforcement.

And so in the future, we can work to the goal of overnight parking in the city.

But we can't do it if we don't have it enforcing people.

It ain't got to work.

So I think we got to bow the army before we relinquish the battlefield.

You know.

So in that, and then the other thing is I go, Mr.

Hill, do you have a degree in this?

No, I don't believe they handout degrees in parking.

But you look at it with a scientific perspective.

We we look at it and we draw from disciplines of economics, of psychology, of human behavior, as well as traffic engineering, uh public policy.

So we're dipping in a lot of different wells as far as it goes.

Well, in this, I understand the advocacy to this, but I gotta go with the science.

You know, and looking at it.

So I will not be supportive of the Alderman Dowd.

I'm ready to vote.

Okay, ready to vote.

And uh keeping in mind how you vote.

This is a recommendation to the full board.

Okay.

And it can open up the discussion in the future of exactly how this committee feels.

Okay.

So without further discussion, I'll call for the vote, and I'll call it by roll call.

Uh you can call it by roll call.

Okay.

And uh that way it will be recorded.

Okay.

Thank you.

Chairman O'Brien.

No.

Uh Alderman Sullivan votes no.

Alderman Dowd.

No.

Motion fails.

Okay, the motion fails.

And such will be forwarded to the full committee.

All right.

Uh petitions?

There are none.

We have one item that was tabled, so table and committee, Alderman Sullivan.

I'd like to make a motion to remove from the table uh 025071 regarding open hours for the outdoor city hall public bathrooms.

Okay.

We have received a request by first, excuse me.

Um, we've got to take it off the table.

So all of them and Sullivan recommends it has taken off the table.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Oppose.

Okay.

It is taken off the table and now open for discussion.

Uh, just to give you an update, we did receive, I did receive a communication by the prime sponsor Alderman's Clemens that he wants this to be indefinitely postponed.

And it appears on the horizon, Mr.

Director Sullivan does have something that goes hand in hand with this.

And uh so why the author did ask for an indefinite postponement.

Director Sullivan, can you inform us on what's happening here?

Uh certainly.

Uh Matt Sullivan, community development director.

Um, and I also am, I think, joined in this discussion by Director Hanneman Director Cummings to an extent as well.

Ultimately, after the committee's discussion of the legislation, and specifically some emergent discussion about whether or not the transit center restrooms would potentially be an option for uh accommodating public restroom usage in the downtown.

I had a few conversations with Alderman Clemens, ultimately looped in Director Hanum and Director Cummings as well, certainly because the City Hall restrooms are administrative services asset.

And ultimately, in in speaking more directly with Alderman Clemens, the objective fundamentally is to provide public restroom access downtown in a quick but also affordable manner.

The options being presented or the option of this suggesting this legislation is the city hall set of restrooms.

Number one, those restrooms are not accessible.

And number two, I think you found through your committee discussion that uh it would be a somewhat challenging process to staff those restrooms to the level that I think the committee is was expecting or hoping.

And further, that the cost associated with do that associated with doing that would be albeit not extraordinary, but significant uh over the next remaining or the remaining fiscal year.

And so in working with Alderman Clemens, we did discuss the transit center restrooms.

Similar challenges exist there.

We recently existed uh invested significant funds in that facility.

Um there are challenges with supervising the transit center restrooms, although they may be ADA accessible.

And so ultimately we arrived at what the best solution I think is here, and that's what we've recommended uh in concert with Director Hanneman and Director Cummings, and that is to temporarily during the remainder of the fiscal year pilot uh ADA accessible restrooms in the downtown area.

You'll note we haven't specified a specific location, but we're going to work on identifying that location or locations over the coming weeks before the end of the calendar year.

Uh and to have those cleaned twice weekly to ensure that they are up to uh the standards that we find acceptable or certainly that you would find acceptable for use by all individuals and families in the downtown.

So we'll work to place those restrooms, get them under contract to have them placed as soon as possible, and hopefully test whether or not there isn't, in fact, increasing public restroom demand.

Um so we're gonna implement that as soon as possible, move more quickly, quickly than I think this legislation may have allowed us to, uh and therefore Alderman Clemens expressed that he was comfortable uh having this tabled for the time being.

But I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have.

Recognizing that tonight we don't have uh specific locations identified.

We're gonna work to find something that best meets the needs that we've seen and heard from the community.

Okay.

You may have a question, Alderman Dow.

No, I talked to uh Alderman Clemens this after this afternoon, and he asked me to put in a motion to indefinitely postpone this our 25071.

So that's my motion for indefinite postponement.

Okay.

That makes us quick and easy.

No need to further discuss that.

Yes, Director Sullivan.

I just want to make one note for the record, and it's a bit uh in the weeds or mechanical.

I just want to point out that when we do ultimately contract the service, we're gonna do this through uh one of the city hall departments, whether it be economic development, community development, uh, administrative services.

I'm not going to commit to any funding source at this point in time.

As you know, public works has a substantial uh contract for porta potties across the city, but we're going to work to contract this separately so that public works is not responsible for the burden of managing this contract, and instead we are uh within City Hall.

Thank you.

Okay, that's a pretty good point, which you just brought up.

I could see in June a part of party at the ballpark for the public convenience.

But I don't see it in January, you know.

Yeah.

The the uh uh Mr.

Chair, if I may, you know, the public works division and and Parks Marx certainly they have a very well-established program uh instead of locations where they implement public restrooms.

We're not attempting to interfere or cause any strain on that contract contract.

So these are really these would be completely separate contracts.

Public works will continue their services and we would provide okay.

Uh yeah, I understand.

I just wonder if we can nickel it down a little bit, you know what I mean?

I don't know what happens in January to the ballpark facility.

No, understood.

I think what's critical here though is that because of the fact that we're we're basing the the deployment of these restrooms on the downtown conversation.

I think uh Director Hannem, myself, Director Cummings may be uh perhaps better positioned to deploy these assets where they're needed.

That's not to suggest the director photo isn't, but Alderman uh you know what I'm saying.

Yeah, thank you.

And I'll I'll just supplement that.

That um the quotes that we did receive, um, there was no cost savings to add a second unit.

So um I think you were trying to kind of um get a a discount, a bulk discount with DPW.

That's my job.

Yes, yeah, and um what I found is that's that's not how these work.

needed that's not to sort of suggest the director photo isn't but Alderman uh I know what you mean yeah you know what I'm saying yeah thank you and I'll I'll just supplement that that um the quotes that we did receive um there was no cost savings to add a second unit so um I think you were trying to kind of um get a a discount a bulk discount with DPW that's my job yes yeah and um what I found is that's that's not how the these work so um I applaud the idea but um yeah don't shoot me for trying yeah exactly all right anybody else we're ready to vote motion through and definitely post yeah we have a motion by Alderman Dow to indefinitely postponed uh call for the vote uh all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed motion carries uh now we'll get into another one that is on the table has been on the table since 1022 um alderman Sullivan I'd like to make a motion to remove from the table 025072 regarding disposition of real property okay this like the other one we did have a request by Alderman Moran to the prime sponsor to indefinitely postpone yes alderman doubt did we not take action at the full board then definitely postpone which means this shouldn't even be on the agenda correct we did that last night uh and it passed that's it that's a separate different piece of legislation okay support this time yeah and even if it wasn't I was gonna say still move the vote to just to be doubly sure you know and then let legal argue it out you know okay so uh to uh the motion is without any other discussion to remove oh 2572 from the table all those in favor signify by saying aye aye okay fail uh oppose motion carries now looking for a motion to uh indefinitely postpone alderman Sullivan I'd like to make a motion to indefinitely postpone oh 25072 okay discussion on the motion okay seeing none I'll call for the vote all those in favor signify by saying aye aye pose motion carries okay uh let's see here catch up on the paperwork all right and I think that's it all that we wish the desire to remove from the table uh hold on for a second to me to catch up and okay at this point opening up for general discussion okay seeing none public comment nobody's here seeing none remarks by alderman uh yes alderman uh Lopez uh yeah I just wanted to thank everybody for your time I know at the end of the year and we're looking at you know the holiday so I appreciate the committee taking the time to at least evaluate this while I know could have just waited until next year um legislatively I want to make sure that we're taking people's concerns seriously because the nature of them if businesses are looking at the holiday seasons and they're not gonna be around next year then I want to make sure that at least they know that I did everything I could to to help them so I appreciate the committee's indulgence even if I didn't get what I was advocating for I appreciate the attention to that you alderman uh I would like to say I again I appreciate your advocacy I admire it for years of your work of ward four which includes this particular area but uh perhaps maybe in the future there was a lot of good ideas that were discussed tonight and I think Mr.

Hill we could take some of those ideas with the employee and stuff this is a fluid document and a very fluid process that we're going in so I say to all please come and when we have the meetings with Mr.

Hill and uh to discuss the concerns at that particular point and uh we'll assist us to hit the goals that we want.

So I thank you Alderman Lopez okay um anybody else okay Alderman Dowd the most favored motion in the world motion to adjourn motion to adjourn all those in favor signify by saying aye aye aye pose all right we're adjourned at 855 thank you thank you thank you

Thank you.

Thank you.