Well, we'll do it.

Meeting of the Transportation and Transit Committee.

We have one topic to hear today regarding the neighborhood traffic management program.

We'll get some uh insights about the program as it exists today, and then we're being asked to opine on some um policy updates.

So I will turn it over to Assistant City.

Oh, and Councilmember Lambert Melton is absent and excused.

I'll turn it over to Assistant City Manager Michael Moore to TS Up.

Earlier this month, uh we had Will Shoemaker who's at the podium today.

Come and share some information uh about the neighborhood traffic management program.

Specifically, we uh shared with you some of the results of last year and ask you to approve a set of projects.

But as part of that, uh there were some changes uh that we would like uh to consider in policy about how we actually administer the program and how we go about balloting and making that kind of come together.

This is part of our effort to sort of make sure that we're continually evolving the program to make it more applicable and easier for our community and for our uh to be able to um access the program and and for us to be able to deliver on projects in a timely way.

So with that, I'm gonna ask uh Will to go through the presentation.

We'll probably go through part of the presentation again, but go through that quickly just to kind of level set a little bit, and then we will jump right on into those policy uh choices that we're asking you to look at.

Thank you for that.

Again, Will Shoemaker with the transportation department uh to to go over the questions and additional data and additional information asked out of the uh May 5th council meeting.

So again, it's gonna be a quick recap of the three options.

Look at the the toolkit that we have, uh, look at the engagement informed design process to really make sure that you understand what these policy uh recommendations change and what they don't.

Uh, based on on that, there's some questions about the regulatory signage options that we wanted to bring forward for you to consider, and then lastly, some some uh partnership opportunities or ability to do more what was brought up, and we want to talk about next steps and things that we're actively working on that we're not necessarily doing right now, but we're taking steps to achieve in and hopefully the very near future.

So again, the option summary that that we presented to you earlier this month uh were were one would be no change.

The program largely works, but it is with the adoption of the safety action plan.

Uh it is traffic calming is a form of vision zero, and with that, that uh endorsement wanted to make sure that all downstream programs and policies are in alignment with that.

Uh so again, option one would be no change, keep the status quo as it is.

Option two would be a two-tiered approval process where you would set the criteria for what you believe is is excessive speeding and crash problems, and that would become an automatic project, and those that qualify but don't meet those those thresholds uh would still go through the balloting process.

And then lastly would be an automatic project uh process where again you would set what those minimum thresholds are, but but all projects that meet or exceed would then be offered a project.

And we we're changing the question with this last option from do you want a project to help us uh figure out how to best solve your your problem that we've identified.

Um, and I do want to highlight uh that anyone can request a project.

We receive over 300 unique requests uh on every year, but but it's only those that meet or exceed those qualifying thresholds that get offered a project, and we are truly a needs-based worst first program.

So, wanted to look at at the traffic calming toolkit.

So we've worked really hard with our our internal partners, street maintenance, the fire department, uh, you know, everyone to make sure that we have a tight toolkit of of devices that that do a really good job, but can be basically universally uh put down based on street context, uh, but that are surface mounted um and and relatively easy from an engineering perspective.

So the one of the benefits of the traffic calming program is that uh all of our projects are relatively low cost, uh very low cost compared to most traffic uh most other transportation related projects, and also we're we're pretty nimble, we're pretty fast, and that comes from really having a laser focus on this toolkit.

Um what you're seeing now are the vertical treatments.

Again, that these are all you're going up and over, but it they all serve a different niche uh of device.

Um, so with that, uh the next slide is gonna be the horizontal devices in our toolkit, but but really want to focus on how we choose treatments and why we choose it.

So because we're we're really a tactical, fast moving uh program, we don't move curb lines, we try not to impact stormwater flows.

We're not trying to really dig because that's where the time and the engineering and the cost really start to add up.

And so we really take what the street gives us.

So we look at uh street dimensions, what the problems are and try to make sure that we're matching the right tool with the right need.

So so big picture things as streets that are 31 feet and less, there's really not enough room to do any horizontal treatment.

So we have to do vertical, so it really limits it uh on those more narrow streets.

If your street is greater than 31 feet, there's enough room that you can do either.

So you have the full um uh toolkit available to you.

Um other obstacles that we have to look at are driveways.

You know, we can't put it in front of a driveway, and and uh oftentimes with more dense developments, you've got really close driveways that are random, so that really further limits where we can put that.

Uh noise pollution is pretty minimal, but it's not zero.

So we try to target property lines because we don't want to uh over overly uh impact any singular property, we want to get it far as far away from those as possible, and that comes really into um effect whenever you got uh uh houses that are really close to the right-of-way line.

We want to minimize that impact again.

It's it's pretty minimal, but it's not zero.

So we're trying to be good neighbors and good partners uh to not decrease quality of life as we're trying to increase safety and increase quality of life on another hand.

Um and then hills and curves.

Uh that's another thing that we have to design around, avoid or accommodate for.

So all of those things go into to how we choose and why we choose certain things.

Uh, but ultimately, because this is resident engaged informed uh designs, you know, staff definitely influences what treatments, uh, but but ultimately, if you as a neighborhood say we want this and it's a viable place and a viable treatment, we try to work that in.

So it really is if you as a neighborhood want something, we try to accommodate to the best of our ability.

Uh and so that's why sometimes you see a mixture of devices because that's what the neighborhood wants.

Sometimes uh you see only one device because that's what the neighborhood has told us.

So again, we we put the guardrails on uh the the device selection a lot and make sure that whatever we put forward is uh is sound from an engineering perspective and it's constructible, but it really is resident choice.

Um, yeah.

Can we do a better job communicating that out that the residents, those on the street, know play uh a major role in determining what's on it because I hear people say, Well, why do we do all of these treatments on one street or another street in particular or one side of town or another side of town?

But I think to really sharing that these treatments come out of a collaboration with the residents on that street.

I think sharing that information would be very helpful.

Absolutely, absolutely.

Um then we'll we'll go to this this next slide again.

These are the the horizontal treatments.

These are also in our toolkit, um, each serving different purposes, uh, a little bit where the curb bump outs and neighborhood traffic circles are really for intersections, whereas chicanes are the mid-block treatments.

Um, often we hear this is this is too many devices.

Can you do less?

Can you just like step into this?

Uh, and and the the answer is is it's no.

It it's really it creates new issues whenever you don't follow best practices.

Um a great example is is Brentwood Road.

That was a first pilot back in 2000, where we did uh harsher treatments at about a thousand foot intervals.

So we tried to slow people down more, but then have less devices.

Um what we found is that people felt unjustly slowed down, so they would uh harsh, like do aggressive braking to go over it, then aggressively speed back up.

We didn't see any real reduction in overall speed.

Uh we saw crashes actually increase because drivers got more aggressive.

So what we did is we created, you know, 200 feet of pretty safe street, and then you know, 800 foot of really aggressive street.

And so that's what you get whenever you space devices too far out, and best practices is you need something about 400 to 700 feet throughout the entirety of the street, or you create those pockets of aggressive driving.

And that's why we really recommend following those best practices and not baby stepping in by doing less treatments and adding in more and more because all the research and all of our past experiences been it just it just doesn't work.

You need to treat the problem that's there from the beginning to really be effective at traffic calming.

Um, and then when we looked at all projects, we do oh sorry.

I'm sorry, I just had a quick question.

The um best practices where you get that information, the experiences that you had, is that listed somewhere?

How do you communicate that to the community?

Because they're not necessarily gonna know what you know, and in your experience, what has been the best way to translate that information to residents?

Yeah, and I we can always do better.

I think that's that's the the upfront and easy answer.

Um we're we're gonna get into and walk you all through what a resident sees each step of the way, and so with that, you're not gonna see every single slide, but a lot of that is we teach, we put resources, we put links, we list the pros and cons.

So we want to be up front, and I think to council member branch, your point, I I hope we do a really good job with those that we're engaging with, but it's just it's once you get out of that, that's where we have not done a good enough job, and we can absolutely try to work to do more education, more awareness and all that stuff.

But with every project, we we do review them at six to nine months after completion, after conditions have kind of settled in, uh, to to make sure that the intended outcomes are there and we're not creating new issues.

Um, we encourage people to reach out, say, hey, I don't think this is working, um, or this isn't working right, or we think we created a problem.

We're gonna evaluate every single one.

Um, it's it's really hard to kind of parse out, well, not really hard.

We we have to work really hard to parse out is this just a function of the project making it a little bit more difficult to drive on your street, and that means that you're being a better drive and going slower, or is this truly a safety issue?

And that that's a line that we're always trying to find where we're trying to be on the a minor inconvenience over a safety issues because if it's a safety issue, we are going to react and we're gonna act.

Um, with that, we're trying devices, we're doing things, and we're getting feedback.

So, so as an example, uh, some of our horizontal devices, we we did less we did M U T C D compliant, but less uh extra, not not as much extra markings and visibility things.

So that's the feedback.

So we've been going back and trying to with all new projects, put in those additional lane markings as well as go back and retrofit old projects uh that that we did not do that on, regardless of whether whether or not we have a complaint.

So, so again, we're always learning, we're always trying to get better.

Um, again, following the guidebooks, but making sure that we're hearing people.

Um, and one thing that that I do not recommend, we're not recommending removing from the policy, is that anyone has the ability after projects been on the ground to request uh a new vote to remove the project.

So that is something that is available for every single project as long as it's been on the ground and completed for a minimum of three years.

Um my understanding it's been been done twice, uh, and in both times the neighborhoods have resently said no, we want to keep this.

So again, that is still an option.

We want to keep that as kind of an off-ramp, uh, regardless of whatever your decision is, is from these discussions.

Uh, but just wanted to make sure that you know that that is something that that is available to any resident um at any time after that three-year mark.

And at that council meeting, there was some discussion about circles versus stop signs.

Uh, these are great intersection tools, strong in some areas, weak in others, and they kind of they they really uh are complimentary in what they're strong and weak against, uh or I guess opposite of what what the their strengths are and weaknesses are.

So stop signs are really preferred for pedestrian uh higher pedestrian areas because it requires every approach to stop and you're gonna get better yield compliance.

Um, also it's redundancy in that you're requiring everyone to stop.

It requires takes two people making the same mistake at the same time to cause a crash.

But it's still a sign and it requires people to choose to stop and not roller blow through that.

And so where circles really shine is is that it is is a fixed, not a fixed object, it is uh uh object in the road that makes you yield uh and go around, so it's it's unrelenting, it doesn't really matter if you choose to do something, it's gonna be there and really encourage compliance.

So that's really the the pros and cons of what they are.

So in areas where uh we're seeing really poor compliance, uh circles are a great option, but but both are evaluated to see which is the best if there is a crash pattern or what the use patterns are, and we really wanted to share some of those those neighborhood traffic circles safety positive benefits.

So two of the the projects that we completed, uh Bart Street and then as a whole, and then specifically Oakwood at North Stout North State Street.

So Bart Street before we did anything.

There were 18 crashes on that street in the 10 years leading up to that.

Nine were intersection crashes, we saw run off the roads, head-ons, and rollovers.

Uh we worked with the community and found with that that high level of intersection crashes.

We we wanted to put stop signs.

So we put stop signs at every single one of the intersections that had a crash pattern.

That was in 2020, that was what circled there.

After that, we still saw five crashes along the street, four of those being intersection crashes.

So for whatever reason, driver behavior in this area was to disregard stop signs and continue to disregard stop signs.

So we had to take that a step further.

And in 2023, we installed circles at virtually every single intersection as part of a traffic calming project.

And since then it has reduced uh to only one crash along the street as a whole, and it was a run off the road in a straight section.

So it is it is dramatically safer than it was before.

And again, that's one of those that we stepped into the always stops, people did not comply, and we were still getting reports, we're still getting videos, we're still seeing crash reports of this happening.

But as soon as we put that next step, that physical circle in the intersection, we saw a dramatic decrease in all crashes.

And then secondarily, another great example is Oakwood uh Avenue at North South North State Street.

Before we saw 16 crashes at this intersection the 10 years leading up, since the circle's been in place, there have been zero reported crashes.

So again, I just want to highlight that that we we try to use the best tool for the need to address the best issue wherever that is.

Um the traffic calming program, we're we're we're here talking uh a lot about constant improvement, and I don't, and that's not just about the process, that's not just about uh uh treatment styles.

We're committed to increasing resident engagement as well.

Uh pre-COVID, we just did uh virtual, not virtual, in-person only, where we rent a room, be there for a couple hours, a couple evenings.

Um, and we saw an average of nine people show up.

Since COVID, we try transitioned, we started doing a uh basically virtual where we keep it open for nearly a month, a little over a month in some cases.

We put videos teaching what it is.

We do um we take phone calls, letters, emails, uh, we send people that say, hey, I have trouble with the internet.

So we'll send them a packet and with instruction to call us.

So we're really expanding the access as well as letting them review it on their time, review it a couple times, and then come to us with questions, as well as having an open chat box within uh our portal so that we can have uh real time interval, close to real-time interactions with people as well as let everyone see the global conversations that are happening.

With that, we've seen a 900% increase in awareness, and with that, uh uh about a hundred and eighteen percent increase in participation.

We're so now seeing more participants than we saw people showing up to the meetings when we did it before.

So we are extremely excited about that, but it's not good enough.

We can still do more.

So we looked at the data and we saw that the cadence that we did between the first, second, and third touch points, it was dropping off.

And so we've we we talked and figured out like what why is that happening?

And we we you know assumed it was just because you made your comments once, I'm done.

So we we ended up retooling how the cadence in which staff presents, so it's more of a continuous effort.

Um, we do a lot of behind uh hair on fire work to get make sure that it's done as fast as we can, but but with that, we've seen the average awareness, the average views go up another three percent, and average participation go up two percent.

So, not as drastic as that, but again, we've we've stopped the decrease and actually started to see a slight increase.

So, I just want to share that we are committed to making sure we continue to get the most engagement and the most awareness for all these projects as possible.

All right, so so before we walk through the process and really what the residents see and what staff does, I really wanted to highlight that the only thing we're talking about removing here is the neighborhood ballot.

And again, it's it's changing and reframing from do you want a safety project to you have a safety issue?

Help us figure out how you want to fix it.

And so the first step is to look at look at the street.

Um, so we evaluated it, we found that it meant warrants, now we're gonna develop the best project for that.

So this street uh we saw that there were four crashes, speed-related crashes, and then an additional it was a fatality.

Uh so we looked at those seeing how we can work to minimize and eliminate those crashes.

We found that the the um typical traffic flow was 12 miles an hour over the speed limit.

Um, and then there's only sidewalk on one side of the street.

So that really informed our first iteration design.

That's our best practice design that really gets the conversation going.

So, with that, we uh again, I didn't put that here, but in that there are multiple pages that people click through and can scroll through their videos, teaching about the process, teaching about the devices, sharing the toolkit with the pros and cons, and then justifying why we put forward what we did.

Um, and so with that, we identified that either speed hump or speed cushion would be our preferred option, and then down here, we recommended a circle from the fact that there was a uh uh intersection crash problem.

Uh, and we asked the question do you which traffic calming uh device do you prefer?

Opened it up to for that that feedback, asked, you know, answered questions, had facilitated that discussion, and from that in portal voting, most people said that they wanted speed humps.

Also, there was a lot of talk about biker safety.

This connects up to pool road.

We just the pool road widening with the multi-use path that connects out to the new river greenway.

So that felt like a really good opportunity with the street being as wide as it was.

We felt like we can narrow the street, that really enhanced traffic calming.

Um, and so what did the next design look like?

We removed the circle, we leaned into the speed humps, and then we added a cycle track to facilitate the biker interest uh conversations as well as remove that circle.

We were able to rework the design, uh, still feel like we could resolve the crash problem that was identified with a different device again.

Again, within that, we taught about it, pros and cons, asked the question, are you supportive of the cycle track with this project?

Had that open-ended uh dialogue.

Uh from that, the neighborhood said that they were not supportive of the cycle track.

Um, and but overall, they they like the the big picture um design, the project and everything.

So from there, we went to the neighborhood ballot, and this is kind of where we potentially would diverge.

We would always do this next step iteration, but it would be more informational if it moves to an active project where this is the neighborhood ballot.

We said, Okay, we heard you, we're just gonna do speed humps.

Here's where we're gonna place them, or we're recommending them placement.

Do you want this project designed?

Um, and based on the design iteration and our interactions with folks, uh this project voted 91% uh on street and about 75% in the greater neighborhood, and it's going to construction later this year.

So moving on to how changes to the policy would have have affected our output.

So the city has offered 168 projects since uh the program's inception in 2009, or the I guess the modern version of the NTMP.

Residents have approved allow 111 of them.

Uh US council have moved another 31 forward, taking special action, and then 26 have gone through a full engagement and no build.

So right now, for reference, we have 100 on the ground.

Um, so so there's opportunity that there would have been another 68 completed.

Um, and again, if you remember back earlier this month, um Anderson Drive, this is their third project offering.

Arnold Palmer Drive, this is their third project offering, and Hillburn, this is their second.

So we're seeing a lot of repeats.

So even with this, we probably could have done more projects as a quantity, and then with that, it is taking up uh more resources in that of all the failed projects.

38% are just out there, they haven't reached back out, but eight percent are under review, 46 are back on our list for future project offering, and eight percent have gone through the pro uh process at least one more time, actually have a complete project on the ground.

Um, so again, this is kind of the ending that that first uh discussion point that that one uh y'all's uh direction on is is the current policy is is really no change that that would be the option one.

It's about a three-year process from preliminary design to construction.

Uh, the second being that two-tier process with our recommended thresholds for what we would consider an excessive speed or crash problem, um, but then anything that qualifies what is under that limit would be a ballot because the fact that there's still the ballot, there's really no efficiency gains from a delivery perspective.

We're still at about a three-year timeline.

And then that last one would be the automatic project, is that you set the thresholds and anyone that exceeds meets or exceeds would receive a project, and we go and say, How how can we fix your problem?

Um, and that there is a lot of opportunity to to increase the uh delivery here.

Um, you know, because there would be more certainty we could advance designs along the way as opposed to we really don't advance designs past the really feasible preliminary design until after it's been approved by by you all as a body.

So there's opportunity to decrease it from a three-year to a two-year time span.

Um, I do want to set expectations that uh the mobility development group, we do all hands on deck and we help, but there really is only about two people dedicated to traffic calling full-time, and we're always working with up to 60 streets in varying stages.

So, so we have to see how we can get that churn out because we have a pretty good cadence right now.

Uh, but but definitely with more certainty, we can do more work along the way instead of a lot of just waiting until the project is done and then moving forward.

So, yes.

So, if I remember properly at the beginning, you said there's 300 petitions.

How many projects can you do per year?

Can you remind me that number?

With with current uh funding and current workloads, we can do up to 20.

Up to 20, but we're talking about that's a that's a big difference.

So we get 300 requests, um, and not all of those requests meet the warrants.

So you can just say, hey, I think my streets have a problem.

We're gonna take that seriously and do evaluation.

Um, but we've we've retooled and redialed the qualifying metrics so that it's an achievable expect uh expectations where we're not growing the list every year because past councils have told us that we want to see the list with about a two-year delivery.

So right now we're kind of digging ourselves out of that hole in the next couple years.

I expect us to get down below um 40 streets on the list, and then we can have the conversation about do we want to change what the qualifying metrics are to let more streets in.

But at one point, uh we had over 150 streets on the list because of uh uh the way that the process worked through.

We were doing one street every two years, so we had we had a 300-year-long list.

That's a terrible expectation to set to the community that we say, hey, you have a problem, but your you know great great great grandchildren may see the solution.

So it's really been setting expectations with what we can deliver.

And forgive me if you said the number and you have to repeat it, but if there's 300 requests, you very you verify them.

How many qualify and then turn, and then we know 20 is the ultimate number, but how many qualify?

It ebbs and flows, so the last two years have been really weird, and I don't really know why.

Whereas up until that, we were seeing about 8 to 12 on average qualifying, meeting the limits.

Last two years saw about 40 each year, so our our list really exploded.

Uh, but then this year we're back down.

So I I don't know what the real answer is.

It's it's we're trying to right size all the metrics that again we can set realistic expectations with folks.

Awesome.

Thank you.

So my first of all, how much how much longer is it?

It really is this this is this is the time for you guys to discuss.

This is perfect.

So my question was around the engagement with the community on the treatment type.

If we were to go, I like option two, but if we were to go to option three, how can you explain that engagement piece?

Because I want to use May Maywood as a great example of you know, you gave them options, loaded things, they said, well, we don't want this part, but we like the rest, and then they voted.

How would the automatic we're doing a project impact or would it not?

None of that.

We would go through the same iterative design process where residents get to influence and choose the the mix of projects or the mix of treatment styles.

The only thing that we're changing would be the the ballot.

So it would go through the exact same engagement process and the exact same design iteration.

And that's true for options one, two, and three.

So we're not gonna change our engagement unless you want us to do something different.

Yeah, well, um, perhaps you may also want to offer um of the 300 requests you get, we do a number of um installations for stop signs.

Yeah.

Now we typically don't do stop signs specifically for traffic calming, but in some cases, they're they're a good tool for us to do that.

We've done speed limit reductions as well.

Of the 300, about how many fall into that bucket where we can do like a speed limit reduction and no further action is required.

Yeah, so uh of that uh it's it's probably 150 traffic calm requests, 100 multiway stops, and and 50 speed limit uh reduction requests.

Big picture, we we've been going really really aggressive with the speed limit reductions, and and we are gonna talk about some potential option opportunities with the traffic schedule uh next.

Um where we were doing 300 plus a year, uh that that demand has kind of dropped off where there are 5,000 local streets, we've lowered the speed limit on uh a little over half, and we're finding that by just doing that, about 60 to 70 percent of the time drivers adjust their behavior and no further uh action is needed.

So that is a required first step, and thank you for that.

That is the required first step for every single street is to lower their speed limit, see how drivers react, and if that's not a good enough, that's it if they don't react well enough.

That is when we do the project.

But that is the first step that that every street takes, and again, 60 to 70% of the time, we're seeing that that's enough.

So I have a treatment question around stop signs.

I've noticed this in the role part of the state, um, as some intersections right before you get to the stop sign, I call it a road disturbance treatment where the road is like rough or right there right before you get to a stop sign.

Is that an option or is that just not maintainable?

It's an option, but they make noise 247, 365.

And in more suburban and urban environments, we're finding that that generates a lot more complaints.

And so, what we do instead is is in advance of all new stop signs, we put uh stop ahead warning signs a couple hundred feet out in front.

So we are trying to do that advanced warning, but if if you wish we can do that, but but I I think it's gonna be more negative from a quality life than the positives that we see.

Okay, and my last question is can you speak to some streets are which are state streets that may go through some communities that we may not necessarily be able to do speed limit reduction?

And so unfortunately, uh our past conversations with uh the North Carolina Department of Transportation has said that they don't allow uh vertical traffic calming or traffic calming on state owned streets.

Um, so certainly from regulatory signage, um, there's a lot of opportunity there.

Even with those, we do present them, present all of our findings, all the engineering evaluations, and make our recommendation, and they can either support or not.

So there's a concurrent codification that's required on that and that discussion.

Um, but but from a neighborhood traffic management, uh a physical traffic calming project, uh, that has not been something that that we've been able to do historically with them.

All right, you got a few more slides.

Well, that's that's the end.

I guess is there any direction that that you all can give for here again?

Wanted to kind of break it up so it's not a jumble of everything.

We do have members of the public here to speak, so I want to make sure we hear from them probably before we opine.

Um so if you'd rather us break it up, I can we can hear from the public now, discuss these policy changes, and then hear the rest of your absolutely that sounds great.

Okay, cool.

All right, um, all right.

If you are a member of the public and you'd like to speak, can you raise your hand?

Just one.

Okay.

All right.

Well, then take all the time you need.

I'm kidding.

I'm getting I'm kidding.

Um, I won't do that to you.

I have four minutes, right?

But I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Four minutes.

Um thank you for allowing me to speak.

My name is Mike Provosnik.

Um, the advocacy chair and vice president of Oaks and Spokes.

Thanks so much, Will, for the explanation of the neighborhood traffic management program.

We are big fans of the program.

We hope to see it expand.

Um personally, I am all for option three.

I think it's the city of Raleigh's responsibility to make sure everyone in the city is safe and they can use the public right-of-way to do that.

All these projects are built within the public right-of-way and don't affect private property.

I don't think we should put neighborhood concerns over private use of the public right-away ahead of safety of the citizens that use that street.

Um, it might be that a current balloting is allowing members on that street to opine about losing parking or it takes me longer to get out of my neighborhood, but they're not the only ones who use that public asset.

Um, we're all using it, we we all want to be safe on it.

Kids want to use it to get to school.

Um, people want alternative forms of transportation on that street.

So I think it's time we look beyond the residents, and and option three would be a great way to do that.

Oh, I do wish the traffic management program would add a little more options to their toolkit.

Uh, the city of Raleigh has a quick build toolkit kind of on their website, but it doesn't really go far into how that's used on transportation projects.

I think you have a citizenry who's really engaged in keeping our streets safe, especially with the adoption of vision zero.

And you can use those communities to to build cheaper projects while we wait on these um longer term construction projects and really get everyone involved.

Um, you know, people feel really connected to the safe streets when they're part of building it.

Uh, there's plenty of organizations like Oaks and Spokes who would be happy to lead quick build projects around the city of Raleigh.

Can you give an example?

Yes, for instance, um recently the NC State professor who was tragically struck by a car on Clark Avenue, neighborhood traffic management program responded very quickly, and that area I think you installed stop signs, correct, Will, stop signs and flexible ballards there.

Um, but the street is wide enough that horizontal elements can be added.

Um, so there could be uh curb bump out there at that intersection or intersections all along Clark Avenue, and they don't need to be uh concrete curbs right now.

I understand that's expensive, costly, it takes a long time, but you see it all throughout downtown with, I think it was the um phase two of the safety improvements, painted curb bump outs, um, even something like that just to draw attention, shorten that crossing gap, and you know, it's a relatively cheap option to get on the ground.

And another thing, uh, I guess maybe transportation could provide a little more context to this, but the horizontal elements aren't allowed on a street that's 31 feet wide or narrower.

And I just, you know, as a user of the streets, I think 31 feet is absurdly wide.

Um so I don't know if that's because parked cars are also allowed on that street, but you know, currently our local street typical section for Raleigh is 31 feet wide.

That's a 13-foot travel lane.

So right now we're building the streets today that will require tomorrow's traffic calming.

So I I would just like some more information about that.

But thank you to staff for the presentation, it was great.

I learned a lot about why um traffic circles are implemented instead of stop signs.

That was great information.

So thanks again.

All right, thank you.

Because with only one speaker, it's uh it's back over to us.

Um, further questions.

Okay.

Just to build on what our speaker just said under 31 feet, what are the options if these are not privy to that?

So so speed humps.

Well, so there's a little bit of of opportunity at 31 feet.

Um, and mainly they're not allowed mid-block, not because of the fear of loss of parking, that is, is a real thing, but there's just not enough space for the deflection to have an effect uh because you need six plus feet to really slow people down, and you have exactly six feet at 31 feet uh uh to to move people.

Um with that, there's opportunity for at intersections still to have curb bump outs, neck downs, uh things like that of that nature.

So I was generalizing a little bit, uh, and we do use uh certain things at intersections for intersection treatments, but but mainly for mid-block.

There's just not enough real estate uh to have an effective calming effect with with horizontal treatments.

Thank you.

Um I know our speakers spoke about temporary projects, and you all do do those from my understanding.

Um we are giving neighborhoods an example of what they could use.

Um so I'm sorry if my question was unclear.

I thought you were saying the community had ideas other than what we already were doing.

So I apologize if my question wasn't clear, but can you speak to the temporary installments and how those work?

Yeah, absolutely.

And so with that, the only real way we can get temporary install uh are using horizontal deflection.

There's there's no long-term or or even medium term solution for for vertical treatments.

We did pilot some uh vertical bolt down humps, and and we found that they started uh pulling up from the asphalt very, very quickly uh based on use.

So I would not recommend those, you know, that they're great in a pinch, uh, but but anything that's gonna be there longer than six months to a year, it it starts to become a real maintenance liability.

Um, but there is opportunity whenever there is this overly wide streets to kind of reserve the space through flexi posts and uh thermoplastic like edge markings to to do those uh medium-term um uh curb bump outs or chicanes or or whatever you say uh or whatever you would like to see.

Um I at the very end of the presentation, I am gonna touch on some of the things that we're actively doing with that to keep uh quick builds in alive, or keep the traffic calming building things quickly.

Um, but certainly we were already trying to use uh temporary devices as interim fixes as we look towards longer term solutions.

And I have a couple questions too.

Um so you kind of alluded to this, but peep we produce traffic calming measures in other ways outside of this program.

And so I think some folks sometimes have consternation around like a treatment they might see.

And we're we're specifically talking about policies related to this program, but what are some of the other ways traffic calming gets laid down on the road?

So humps and vertical uh devices really have been a sole tool of the NTMP in 2020, 2021.

Uh USC Council kind of release that ban from from doing that.

Uh we've gotten a couple instances where we partner with private development, so so we're seeing a little bit more uh of that uh but but really through our complete streets policies.

So every single project that we try to put forward uh tries to bake safety into it, tries to speak uh bake uh speed compliant driving behavior into the projects.

So, really, whether it's a bike project, whether it's a safe routes to school project, whether it's a major road um expansion, we're trying to put the multimodal and the design for vehicles into that from the beginning uh so that we have safe streets uh period.

Um helpful.

And then you kind of spoke to this, but um, we just ask you to repeat and draw out like some of the feedback we've we get from folks is like you did everything in the kitchen sink on this road.

You know, I hear about it on Harps Mill.

I think I've heard some similar feedback from folks about uh East Martin Street.

So can you talk about like what are the conditions under which you'd get multiple treatments and why multiple?

You kind of spoke to you can't just maybe step into it, that's not helpful, but if you could elaborate.

So again, this is really resident-led design.

Um with uh the the two examples that you you shared when we first did our our first iteration, a lot of people in the Northridge neighborhood came out and said we only want horizontal.

So we said okay, that's what we did, and we developed a plan to to implement a horizontal heavy uh traffic calming project.

Um, uh on East Martin Street, that is a really difficult uh corridor from the fact that you have a lot of houses really close and the driveways are very randomly staggered, and then going back to the noise pollution that if you you we couldn't fit humps for a lot of the street because of the way that it was built out, and so with that, and there's constant or consistent cross streets.

Uh, we leaned heavily into enhancing the stop signs that existed as well as doing the neighborhood traffic circles.

Um I I do want to take that a step further in that those are temporary.

Um, with every project, we reach out to all of our partners and all of our stakeholders uh with across the city to identify conflicts and overlaps.

Uh, with that, uh our our partners in Raleigh Water have a project that is uh in the about to go to design here, and then in the next two years it's gonna go to construction.

So instead of spending um you know 50, 70,000 to do permanent things to have them removed and torn up in the next two years just to have them replace whenever uh everything comes in and gets resurfaced, we we chose a more tactical option as an interim option.

So the intent on East Martin Street and really anywhere that you see from a macro traffic calming project, there is an intent to transition that from temporary to to concrete and permanent, but a lot of the time it's a cost decision based on what is the useful life before somebody digs up.

But we want to get the traffic calming project on the ground and not just say, you know, in the next couple years, because uh, you know, these five other dominoes have to fall first.

We want to get the relief and the safety benefits, but then you know, be very conscious of the tax dollars that we're spending.

Gotcha.

And did the Martin Street project come through this program?

Yes, it did.

It did, okay.

I didn't remember it, but so when I think of can you go back to the slide with all the options or between was there when with all the, or we can just go to option two.

We're gonna go back a long way.

Sorry.

There we go.

There you go.

Um, so I just to clarify if I'm misunderstanding, uh I understand that option three is one that removes the ballot.

So that removes the balloting part.

The part that I would need to understand to be able to explain that to residents is then how do you decide?

So if you're having the same amount of car you know conversation with residents and they're all talking and they all want something different, how do they know who you favor who how do you know who wins out in that without a ballot?

Well, I think the ballot really simplifies and it's just yes, no.

So there's there's no nuance in the ballot about if you say no but want something else there's there's not that option.

So so we we we do a we work really hard to to keep our finger on the pulse of what's saying, who's saying things, what the general sentiment is as an example we we do try to do some data collection um and and our online option allows us to ask questions and follow up questions that that traditional mailers don't as and as an example one of the streets for everyone that voted no we had a follow-up question that says if we would have changed the design what if you voted for it and we got a 99% saying that no they would not have voted for it regardless of what it looked like so what we're finding is a lot of times that people oppose a project just oppose the project no matter what the form is.

So again we're working really hard to listen to it you know even whenever we we quoted the the statistics even a high 80s there's still gonna be 10% of the people on street that aren't aren't happy with any project.

So we're always trying to make sure that we're balancing the needs not overburdening any street um and and making it livable for even those that are opposed to the project just in principle.

Right and I think me personally I I would be like oh option three sounds right it sounds like the fit however when I think about the neighbors who are going to ask me those questions I have to be able to say okay well during the process as you're doing the surveys is what I'm understanding you're gonna be showing those results those data that says this is what is and okay so that's something that I could say to them and say your your process means that you have to be involved.

You can't just be involved in a ballot at the end when you haven't participated you may not have participated in the in the conversation prior to so is that a is that how I could frame that that is a phenomenal way like active participation is the best way that anyone can get involved.

Absolutely okay thank you so much.

And will you like um to kind of pull on that thread a little bit further so you'll do you like index within those comments your your kind of cataloging 10 people said they like speed humps five people said they wanted curve bump outs and you that all of that is informing.

Yeah yeah so so we again big picture things we do a lot of it in portal balloting direct questions that are easy yes nos um with that we do keep track of all the like the general sentiments and themes and whatnot uh public input is a great tool you can see up votes so so a lot of those if somebody says one comment and then no one else affirms it you know we take note of that but maybe this isn't sentiment but then somebody says something else and 15 people said we like that so like we we we use all these tools we listen to everything but but absolutely we're we're indexing and then as each of the period closes uh my my my team gets together and we talk about all the comments the themes that we heard and that informs the next iteration to the to the best of our ability.

Yeah so for me I think I'm now comfortable with option three um I think you know when I asked a question earlier about engagement as far as the design piece and you're saying no they're going to be fully engaged and you know that's the key part for me is you know that engagement and the vote is really asking um do we want to move forward whether or not knowing there's a safety issue.

We're here because there's a safety issue.

And sometimes we get caught up in yes or no in forgetting there's a safety issue that we need to resolve and we need to address um as I've dealt with other role projects um in the past so I'm fine now with option three.

I'll say that I I agree with that I know walking into this I think it was more option two but I think you've done a really good job of explaining how and this is how we are partnering with the community this this does mean that you have to show up this does mean that when you want to be part of it there are options there are online portals like we've talked about now where you can participate and this is our hope that it will draw more people to participate um rather than be the ballot that you may receive and and vote on something you're not educated on in the totality you definitely have the on street perspective of that but there's like counselor branch said there's a safety issue.

So I think you've done a great job and and I think I'm in favor of option three as well.

Yeah, and I agree.

I was a little bit undecided coming into this meeting.

You know, certainly this is an area where we we offer a lot of control to residents and and no one likes to have their control can contracted.

And but I think for me what's really compelling, and you put it quite plainly is that option two doesn't actually gain us anything in terms of efficiencies.

And I think what our community is calling on is to see more projects.

I mean, almost all of my district was built physically in like the eighties and nineties, and so almost all these neighborhoods are just racetracks, my own neighborhood included.

Um like they're just they're just calling on us to to see more of these types of projects that are keeping their kids safe while they're learning to ride bikes and while our elderly neighbors are walking their dogs and and all of that.

And um, so I think knowing that option two doesn't actually gain us any efficiencies or any certainty.

Um, I I have moved a little bit, and I also think you know, I just wonder about the way we go to the public and say, Well, you're we know there's a problem, but yours isn't like a super bad problem.

So we'll still give people an option.

But you know, I just um I'm not sure.

I'm not sure if that creates any certainty or clarity for the for the community either.

Um yeah, and I I would love to eliminate all these neighborhoods that are getting repeat projects, all the staff time that's spent balloting and reballoting and redesigning for this for the same set of voters is uh time you could be spending serving other neighbors who are eager to get these projects.

So um it sounds like there's alignment with option three, and I I wouldn't speak for council member Lambert Milton, but I think he would probably align with us as well.

Madam Chair, if I if if I may, um also just remind you, you know, Will and his program, I think they do a remarkable job of coming and reporting back to you about how things are going.

So you'll hear next year, again, when this time comes around in the year after that, with a couple years of data points under our belt, we'll see how it's going.

And there's always those opportunities to make adjustments.

So I think this is my fifth version of this program.

And just one more thank you for the clarity that uh after three years residents have the option to remove.

I I did not realize that.

Um, so I I think that's an important point for people who are having uh issues, whether that's on Hardamont or or other neighborhoods that have consistent issues that there is that option after a certain amount of time.

So thank you for that clarity.

Absolutely, absolutely.

Yeah, I agree.

I've always appreciated that this is a very like test and learn iterative program, and it's been it's been fun to be on the journey of like tinkering with it along the way.

Um one thought I have is if we are to move to option three to to the extent that staff has capacity on the website where these will presumably all be listed.

It might be nice to have like a hover over that explains like why speed humps here.

Where it would give you a chance to highlight some of the stuff that you've just talked about.

Like we chose speed humps because we got strong community feedback that that was the preference, and or did you know these many traffic circles are here because people didn't comply with the stop signs.

I think that's also meaningful information to give the public, so um, it could be nice to think of a way to highlight some of these like explanations.

We can absolutely do a better job storytelling each one of these projects so that when you go there, if you haven't been a part of it, you can see it.

That's that's a great suggestion.

Yeah, maybe communications can take part of this and use it in blurbs and things of that.

So I think we probably need a motion, so my motion is that we recommend option three to the full body and move in traffic calming forward.

Second.

All right, all in favor.

Aye.

Sounds good.

Thank you all right.

Take us on to the next, Will.

All right.

And so the next stop was uh traffic schedule authority.

So is there any opportunity to to change how we do speed limit reductions and other safety?

We we expanded a tiny bit to be other safety uh focused things to see if if that's something that that you all would want to see.

So option one would be again, no change.

Um it is request-based, people call uh request, we review uh it's an opt-out where we send ballots to everyone, uh and then we bring the ballot results to you, uh, and then you you ultimately get to decide.

So that's that's the current status quo that exists today.

Um option two would be to remove the balloting requirements uh for local speed limit reductions um from a historic perspective.

We have had two total streets that have ever failed that have voted against it.

And in both of those instances, they've been really short streets.

They've been for the reduction, but against the aesthetic of signs.

So it's been not a a real anti-safe streets, but but more about they don't want signs along the streets and so so we get two out of the um 700 or so we've done in the past uh uh seven years or so uh this would allow us to be more proactive and logical instead of kind of doing it random throughout the the city we could start grabbing chunks and working probably counterclockwise around the city hitting all districts working with our our partners in the sign installation crews to to make sure that we're not overwhelming them with with that work um it is still gonna have to to come to you with this option so we are limited by the number of meetings that you have in the council agendas that exist um option three would would be to allow the transportation director authority for traffic schedule updates um and so this would require an update to the municipal code um this was something that was explored coming out of the downtown uh downtown mobility study other cities have have done something similar um in in delegating that authority to the transportation director this again would allow us to be more proactive uh and logical moving through the city especially if we move the balloting requirement and it would also allow us to shift resources from creating those mailers and those ballots into actually making a cohesive plan to to move and reduce speed limits um so there's definitely an opportunity for this is the the most uh opportunities for for efficiency gains I think the big question mark is is what is the level of notification that that you as a council expect us to the public because if we're still doing all of the letters there's not really a staff change from a resource perspective if we're doing notification letters versus creating ballots to send out to the same number of people.

So that that is something that that you you need to weigh from a policy disc uh discussion.

And so if with option three um if that is the the one you would choose we would recommend that you delegate that authority to uh the director to be speed limit reductions always stops and intersection sight lines again focusing on on safety things as opposed to just a broad uh traffic schedule delegation and so again the the three options uh all on uh one screen here um from a uh a level of efficiency and effectiveness I think staff would would recommend option three uh but but certainly want to hear your thoughts because we need to to talk about how and policy gets changed depending on what what you all want us to to do going forward.

Yeah a question I would have is around how this policy change would impact or not impact um how much is this triggered by resident communication so right now it's like resident reaches out says someone speed people are speeding on my road can you check it sounds like in both option one and option two you all would move to a more systematic we're gonna check.

I think it'd be yes and like if people reach out we would want to insert those in uh but but instead of being solely resident driven we we could be more proactive um in in our efforts.

So basically using data from maybe police reports and things of that nature.

Yeah, yeah absolutely data driven approach and again logical instead of right now it's it's kind of sporadic throughout the city and you're just uh distributing different sign crews different ways if we could be a little bit more like we're gonna do this area this month and this area next month we we can better mobilize and be more efficient and effective with our resources with the um increase of doing it that way which I I think is great uh do you think you have enough staff to do that or do you would you need to increase because you might find more streets and more things to do.

It depends right right so so if it's still the notification requirement is is going to be in there's not gonna be a ton of proactive nature that we can do because it's still generating the same number of mailers, the same number of uh mailing uh address lists to go through um we've worked with with Jed and his team in the past uh to to figure out and make sure that we're tooling our output to to meet that resource need.

You know, if if you tell us that you want to get this done in the next you know one to two years, then absolutely we need uh heavy consultant help um or or increase staff.

Um if you're you're saying that you want this to happen over the next five to ten years.

I think we can probably do this with with the existing staff levels that we have.

Um, one plug is is that, and and if you have questions, I think Jud can get up here is is that there's new standards on retro retro reflectivity.

So the signs have to bounce back light at a certain amount and they wear out after time.

If we do this in one year, that means we're gonna have a one-year major expense, and then the next nine is gonna be pretty low, and then gonna have a major expense in year 10 or when are the signs roll out.

Whereas if we do this over a five to 10 year period, you're gonna have approximately the same number of signs needing to get replaced every year, and you know, sign budgets will have to increase because it's more assets, but at least it'll be a much smoother budget ask as opposed to really up and downs.

And then with that, um, if we do the you know, the five to ten years and you're able to just do it with existing staff and and rolling on, how does that fit into our safe streets plan?

Is it put us on track?

Is that put us behind of where we we felt like we should be in five to ten years?

Uh you know, it it depends.

I guess we could phase it.

I guess there's a lot of plans and a lot of overlap.

I know that that Sean and I coordinate uh a whole whole lot, and and if if you want to give us just either a hard policy direction or just like general direction, we can absolutely start targeting schools, community centers, like the high risk network, and then build out from there.

Aside from me saying that we're probably gonna go counterclockwise motion, we haven't really developed a plan and how that's gonna be fair and equitable to all areas, but absolutely starting um starting with a core at at our our high entry network or or finding those um streets we find are special and then working out from there would be absolutely an approach that we we could take and would take if that's the desire.

Yeah, I love that because uh again, I think option three, I'm c I'm I'm confident with option three, but as we sell it to the public and we're trying to get their buy-in, something that gave them an understanding of where we're going, what the plan would be, um, would be helpful on my side.

And and so with that, we can communicate that with with you all in your office, but then to to Councilmember Pat and we can storytell on on that website about why we're doing this and how we're going, and again, try to bring predictability to people so that they understand how we're we're processing.

I think that's yeah, absolutely we can do that and should do that.

Yeah, I mean, I'm fine with option three as long as we are truly being proactive and communicating on the front end.

Okay.

Yep.

Yeah, I'm also comfortable with option three, and we'll just kind of add that plug that it would be helpful for us when you've got it ready to um to hear back like the strategy you'll use to cover the city, I think.

Um all the places you just mentioned.

I think using the big jump as a helpful map, like where we're gonna put in a high comp for Greenway or whatever.

Let's also make it safe and easy to get to it by lowering the speed limits that are nearest, and then of course, schools, community centers, bus stops, like all the things you just named.

So, yeah, when once you've developed any sort of further parameters on how you'll approach that.

We'll be happy to bring it back that draft to make sure that we're on the right track for that strategy for you all.

Absolutely.

Cool.

All right, it sounds like there's alignment there too.

So I'll make a motion to recommend out of committee option three, which is delegation of um traffic schedule authority to the depart uh transportation director.

Second.

All in favor, I have one more slide, it's a fun slide.

Uh the no action required, it's just like how are we progressing?

Because we hear from you all for the community that that we need to do more and we want to do more.

Uh and and so traffic calming projects work because we keep them simple.

I kind of I hammered on that in the beginning.

Simple is is fast, complicated is slow.

I think that's the easiest equation that I can really put out here.

And so by by keeping labor laser focused, we can do a lot of projects for a relatively low cost.

Um, but but with that, we're we're trying to to broaden our horizons a bit and and think about how we can better react to the community needs.

Um and two of those ways that we're doing that is partnerships.

The mayor brought up a partnership with GSI.

Um that's one thing that we've been actively working with for about uh five years.

Um we the the GSI team and and the traffic calming team started uh about five years looking, they looked at our list a couple years out so they could start doing some evaluations on what streets would be appropriate.

Um they identified some areas that would be good GSI devices, and then we started to design a project around those areas.

Um it's morphed a little bit and became the Queen Quail Hollow Green Street project that is being delivered through our bike program.

Um, but but with that, we've worked out a deal with them to uh put down a phase one where we're using paint and uh flexi post to reserve the space for them so that we can move as fast as we can while they do the more complicated work to get the surveys to get the easements, everything that's done there.

Um so the Quail Hollow Green Street is expected to go out uh and phase one go on the ground in uh August, September of this year.

We're extremely excited about this being the first phase.

Another great opportunity with this being uh a phase approach is we get to put down the footprint that we think's gonna work and then partner with our our maintenance folks so they can go in and practice maintaining these facilities so we're not getting out there after we've actually invested all these this money and say, oh well, we can't really maintain this well.

So this this paint is a low-cost option to really test out really this the city's first true effort at a a green street.

And then with that, uh we're we're partnering with uh the Eastgate Dam project, as well as the GSI team, as well as streets street resurfacing, so that in the next couple years, when we we walk out of that street, it's gonna have uh rehabilitated dam with a new culvert, uh green stormwater infrastructure, resurface concrete separated uh cycle track, we're gonna close sidewalk gaps that exist on the southwest corner, we're gonna upgrade all of the existing handicap ramps to be ADA accessible, and and just it's gonna be a completely brand new street in the next uh probably three to five years, depending on on how long some of the dam project works.

So we're extremely excited about that partnership and that opportunity.

But again, it's it's it's we're gonna go through a lot of times and do tactical uh short-term interventions so again we can get the safety benefits on the ground while the longer term, more complicated things get to develop and then come in their own time.

And then the other thing we hear, and this is probably the biggest thing that we hear is we would rather have sidewalks, and so we're effective because we don't move curbs and we stay in inside the curb lines, but also Raleigh did a really good job of overbuilding streets, and so that presents an opportunity.

So by street narrowings that that enhances traffic calming, um, and and with that, when you narrow a street, you have a lot of new space to work with.

Um, and so a lot of times we're bringing forward cycle tracks and bike projects because that's um that there's not the same level of of requirement from an ADA perspective, we can more easily retrofit streets to be bike infrastructure.

But with that, we're actively talking with our partners in street maintenance and our ADA coordinators to see how we can upfit those to either be in street shared use paths or sidewalks, similar to like Trenton Road, where there's gonna be concrete separated, and then you're walking at street level, but there's still that level of protection.

Um it has a lot to do with this cross slopes and the grades of the street if that's viable.

Uh, but that's something we're actively taking steps to try to implement.

And then if that doesn't work, we've reserved the space for a much larger, more costly project.

But but instead of having to go get right-of-way and easements and impacting people's front yards, we can now move the curb in and then re-allocate that space to be uh uh an above the curb sidewalk or multi-use path, like we did on Oxford Road.

So again, a lot of these things that we're doing now enhance traffic calming, but what we're always trying to think about how we could take that next step to to really advance uh pedestrian infrastructure as well.

While it may look like bike infrastructure in the short term, we want to you know be multimodal in in everything that we do.

So again, that's just a little bit of a uh a foreshadowing on things that we're actively working on.

Not all the details are worked out yet, but we're excited about this possibility and the next steps here.

So, first of all, thank you.

And as far as the quail's corner work and it being the first phase, can we just really make sure we kind of work with the community and I want to reach out with Oaks and Spokes as well to help and have conversations?

I'm glad I'm hearing that this is a it's temporary at first, so that if there's some things that need to be corrected, we can.

Absolutely.

So if we can just continue to open lines of communication, working with the community, partners in the community, if you can assist as well.

Um, because what we're dealing with now is something that I'm seeing where we're talking about bike lanes that are now really being integrated in neighborhoods.

Historically, they were on kind of our big streets like Rock Carrie Road or you know, other streets that have a lot of vehicular traffic.

But when we start getting into our neighborhoods, we're gonna have a lot of conversations.

Absolutely.

And we need to make sure that the right information is going out soon as possible, and where we need to make corrections, let's make those because maps are on paper, but rows are permanent.

Absolutely.

I just did a James West.

Yeah, and quail hollow is like out to bid right now or something, right?

Or imminently out to bid something.

Yeah, the the markets contract is is currently in routing, and as soon as that's get routed, we'll we'll take advance.

All right, Michael, did you want to add anything?

Okay.

Great.

Awesome.

Yeah, well, this is all really great.

I think this long-term goal is a shared vision of all of ours.

Um one thing I wanted to offer just for consideration for like next when we see you in committee again next year, um, is that you know, when I think about traffic calming as a sort of funnel, like it sounds like 60 to 70 percent of people come in to fit you know the first layer of the funnel and they get out and they don't need to come back, and then so and so it's like relatively low friction.

We've now made it even less friction by delegating some of um some of the implementation authority to um so we've made it even less friction.

So most people are getting out of the funnel there, but then once you if you have to stay in the funnel, it goes from like very low friction to like very high friction, long wait, um, high cost, and and a lot of engagement.

And I'm glad we've created some efficiencies here, but I do wonder if there's an area of like there's like a middle ground, like middle amount of friction and middle amount of cost.

So I don't know what or if there might be possibilities there, but I'd love for you to think about it.

Yeah, we'll we'll continue to do do research again.

We we've yes, we're always keeping up with that best practices.

If if you stumble across something, please send it our way because we're we're we're happy to evolve it again.

I'm here every year, it seems like we're we're happy to continue to iterate and we want to continue to iterate.

So please share updates.

We're happy to have that conversation.

Thank you.

With all of that, I'll make a motion to send this item out of committee with two recommendations to council one for option three of the traffic calming, which is you know, like automatic implementation, and then option three of the traffic schedule authority delegation to the transportation director.

So moved.

All right, all in favor.

All right, thank you.

All meeting adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah.