Sebastian Korda vs. Karin Hashinov is the first Korda final for the men at the Australian Open for 2023. And both guys have had tough matches to get to this stage. Korda started the tournament off as the number 29 seed and would take on Garin in the first round. And after dropping the second set Korda would get through in 4, 6, 4, 1, 6, 6, 3, 6, 2. In the second round he'd take on the qualifier Watanuki and after a close second set Korda would get through in 3, 6, 2, 7, 5, 6, 4. In the third round he'd take on the number 7 seed Mevvedev who had been to the final the two previous Australians opened. After a first set that went to a tie break Korda would eventually prevail in straights 7, 6, 6, 3, 7, 6. In the fourth round he would take on the number 10 seed Hoobi Hercatch who was coming off 2, 5 setters in his previous matches. And after dropping the first set Korda would have to come back for the first time this tournament eventually prevailing in a 5th set tie break 3, 6, 6, 3, 6, 2, 1, 6, 7, 6 to advance to his first Grand Slam quarter final. Hashinov started the tournament off as the number 18 seed and would take on Morales in the first round. And after a first set that went into a tie break he got through in straights 7, 6, 6, 2, 6, love. In the second round he'd take on the wild card Koopla and after playing a 70 shot rally and dropping the second set Hashinov got through in 4, 6, 4, 5, 7, 6, 4, 6, 2. In the third round he'd take on the number 16 seed Tiafo who was looking very, very strong. But Hashinov dismissed him in 4, 6, 3, 6, 4, 3, 6, 7, 6. In the fourth round Hashinov would take on the number 31 seed Nishioca and this was by far the easiest match of Hashinov's tournament. Double bagling in the first two sets to prevail in 3, 6, love, 6, love, 7, 6 to get to another Grand Slam quarter final. These two guys have played three times before with Korda leading the head to head 2-1 having won both their matches in 2022 but the last time they played it a slam was a 5 set epic that Hashinov won at Wimbledon back in 2021. If Korda's going to win this match he's going to have to serve well and he's going to have to keep that variety. We saw it against Medvedev. He came to the net, hit a lot of good shots at the net but he didn't do that as much against her catch which is why the match was so extended compared to the Medi match. If Hashinov is going to win this one he just needs to be consistent. He is pretty much a grinder on the baseline at some points. He's not really like your typical big man, big serving guy. He does have those things but he does let the grind out the rallies and he's going to have to do that if he's going to beat Korda. This is a very interesting matchup because a lot of people thought that we're going to get Medvedev versus Rafa in this Korda final. Instead we've got a couple of random guys but I'm going to go with Korda. I think he's inspired this week. His dad won this tournament 25 years ago and I feel like it's his time to shine and get to his first semi-final but let me know down the comments below. Who do you think is going to win this match?


along the way, but since we have our committee here, I feel like, yeah, we might as well. Cory, I don't know if you wanna share the presentation before we do introductions, or if you just want me to thank you everybody for making the time tonight to join us for this meeting and hopefully reviewing some of the materials we sent out in advance. Just share the agenda quickly, see if there are any changes we wanna make before we jump into introductions and kind of the next steps with the project. So, well, I guess maybe before we talk about the agenda itself, I don't know if we at least introduce the project team. I'm Nicole Loesch. I am the project manager for the Department of Public Works. And why don't I turn it over next to Brian? Hi everyone, thanks for joining us. My name's Brian Davis and I'm with the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission. Nice to see you again and have you on the committee. And I am Cory Mack. I am with RSG as a consultant and transportation planner on this project. Great, I'm Jonathan Slason with RSG, a transportation planner and project manager for the preceding corridor study. Great, well, I will just jump right in here on this agenda slide here. To get us started, we've developed this agenda to kind of guide the discussion tonight. We are looking to introduce the project team like we just did. Go into a little more detail about who we are followed by introducing the stakeholders here. I'm hoping that we can all just kind of introduce ourselves and describe our role and our affiliation and really our goals for this project. After all that, we'll go into a round of public comment where we'll have the floor opened up. Then we can go into the scope of work that we're talking about for this phase A of the project. Very specifically what we're doing for this phase and then also generally for the overall project. The next thing we'll go into is another public comment period followed by a request to approve our scope of work as presented and then just talk about the next steps. So the project team as described here is RSG working for the city of Burlington with the RPC to move this plan forward. We're the overall team includes Nicole Loesch and Brian Davis from the RPC. And we also have on our staff Desmond and associates who have had experience doing the parking studies around the city. So next I was hoping we could go into the stakeholder committee here. If we could just unmute yourselves kind of in this list here, introduce yourself, your affiliation, what brought you here, why you are volunteering to be on this committee and what your goals are. So I'll just open it up if we could go through these seven. I'm happy to hop in. Great, thank you, thanks. Yeah, so my name is Jane Stromberg. I'm the Ward 8 city councilor here in Burlington and avid biker. And yeah, I feel like this is a big part of our community and we all share a lot with this. So I'm very interested to see where we are at and just to hear from everyone. Thank you. I'll start calling on people if possible. All right, great. How about Franklin? Are you right there? I see you're muted right now. Hi there, I'm here. I'm Franklin Paulino, North District city councilor of the New North End wards board seven. Also chair of the transportation energy utilities committee. Great, thanks. Jack, are you available? Yeah, definitely. Hey everybody, my name is Jack Kansen. I'm the East district city councilor and the third member of the two. And yeah, I'm really excited to keep the ball moving forward on Winooski Avenue. I've been involved with this project since before I was even on the council just as a member of the public who really wants to see our city move forward, creating more sustainable transportation infrastructure. So I was attending a lot of the, or I was attending the Winooski Avenue meetings even before I was elected and now I'm excited to, you know, continue to play a role in trying to move it forward. Great, how about Charles? Are you available to give yourself an introduction? My name is Charles Sizemore, go by Charlie. I'm the owner of Taco Gordo. I rented an apartment with my partner on Cromby Street. So I'm just, I'm excited to participate and be part of providing input as a business owner and as a resident of the Old North End. I live and work a block away from where we're talking about putting the bike lanes. So. Thanks, Charlie. Kelly, are you here? Hi everyone, my name is Kelly. I'm the marketing and program manager for Old Spokes Home on North Mooski Ave. And I'm here as an advocate for our Transportation Equity Coalition, not necessarily as an advocate for the bike shop, although I am a cyclist. But I'll just say a little about where we're at now with our Equity Coalition if we have time. But right now it's just nine representatives from around Shannon County who struggle or have struggled with transportation. And they're really informing our work as a coalition. And yeah, I'm happy to check in with them and see if they have thoughts about North Mooski Ave too as we continue with this process, but yeah. Oh, and we also recently with the RPC wrapped up a mobility audit on, in the Old North End just to see what residents' transportation struggles are. And we really tried to target underrepresented community. So as we get that data analyzed, happy to advocate for that too. Thanks. Great, thank you, Kelly. Kirsten, if you don't mind, could you give us a brief intro? Sure. Hi, my name is Kirsten Merriman Shapiro. I work for Champlain Housing Trust. Prior to working for the Housing Trust, I did work for the city of Burlington. So I'm very familiar with the corridor study as a starting point. Champlain Housing Trust owns a number of properties along the corridor, both residential in nature as well as commercial. And so we're really just interested in trying to make sure we get good resolution for our members as well as enabling them to participate and know about the parking management plan as it's developed. Great, thank you.  Yeah, hello everybody. I'm Max Horvitz, using him pronouns. I'm a UVM senior. I live right here on North Winoosky Ave. I'm also an avid biker myself. And I've worked with Jack in the past around weatherization. That was actually through a school project. So I'm really excited now to finally apply some of what I've learned to a real life project. So. Great, well thank you. And thank you all seven of you for volunteering your time on this project. I think the stakeholder committee is a really good example of a broad swath of the community coming together to really help plan for this corridor. I think Nicole, if you could give us a little some points on the committee roles and what we're hoping that the committee can help accomplish, that'd be great. Yeah, thank you. So this committee was created by city council when they approved the Winoosky Ave corridor study itself. And so this was one of our first tasks and first projects coming out of that entire corridor. But in that process council did set up some pretty specific guidance and direction for kind of what we're gonna do over the coming months. The first tasks are really approving the scope of work. So we sent a draft phase A that we'll walk through during the rest of the meeting. Part of that phase A scope of work kind of defines the methodology. And so council did ask that this committee approve that methodology to really create the framework for the parking management plan. And also to improve the public engagement plan which we haven't drafted yet but we're planning to present that in May as part of the phase B scope of work. But that will be a really important part of this project going forward as well. So again, today we're gonna focus on the phase A scope of work which is really the technical methodology. We'll come back in May with a phase B scope of work that includes the public engagement plan and our kind of final methodology as we're trying to figure out how to refine what we're working on. The next steps once we work through some of those initial reviews is to keep reviewing the recommendations that we're developing in the parking management plan. And ultimately the committee will be approving the parking management plan. There will be at least one step before that approval where council did direct us to go to the Ward 2-3 neighborhood planning assembly to do a presentation of the draft before we bring it back to this committee to ask for a vote. And that really makes sure that we can hear from that neighborhood and that you can hear some of the ideas or concerns that the NPA might share before you make your decision. So that's kind of again, like the overview of what council directed. We also provided a draft kind of policies and procedures document for the committee just to kind of help understand the framework of how this group may function. Because council created the committee it will function as a public body and so we'll be following open meeting law requirements. This does also restrict the committee members from either meeting a person or even meeting by email to discuss the parking management plan along the way. We can only do that in our established meetings. That's one of the requirements for open meeting laws. So as part of that, we'll advertise all of the committee meetings. We'll make all the materials available online for anybody who wants to view or participate. And tonight we do also have CCTV streaming this meeting on YouTube. So we'll have that recording as well. It'll be available that we can share afterwards. And all of our meetings will include some public comment time. Tonight we've included two sections for public comment. We have one at the beginning of the meeting, one near the end. You know, that's something that we can kind of discuss with the committee going forward if that's the structure that you'd like or any other ways to take public comments along the way. But that is what we are proposing for tonight. And so once we get into the public comment period, Brian will walk through a little bit about how we're going to invite people to chime in. But yeah, that is the kind of the overview of sort of how this committee will operate. The draft kind of policy guide that I mentioned and I shared can really be a working document for us along the way. I don't think we necessarily need to formally approve it, but we're happy to entertain that if the committee would like to really formalize that and tighten that up. So with that intro, maybe I'll pause there and just see if there were any comments from the committee members on either this process or the structure or the draft document itself. Councillor Hansen. Yeah, so in terms of open meeting law, typically it's restrictive of a quorum of a committee having a discussion versus, you know, with a committee of this size to, you know, one-on-one, a one-on-one discussion between two committee members wouldn't necessarily be a quorum. So can you just clarify so that we all understand, you know, our ability to discuss with other committee members? Yeah, that is a good point. Thank you. So this committee, four people will constitute a quorum. So yeah, one-on-one conversations could be fine, but if there are four or more of you having that conversation or on an email, that's where the open meeting law conflict would kick in. Kirsten? Yeah, I had a question about how our decision-making process is a group. Yeah, we're suggesting that we do, at least for the voting portions, that we do basically follow kind of Robert's rules. And so we'll entertain a motion, look for a second, have a discussion and then ask for a vote. And, you know, if all of our committee members can attend every time we have an odd number, and so we would be able to get a majority vote there. Understood. I guess what I would like just to be because that section in the draft rules and responsibilities says consensus, I think I would like to see explicit in there before we go to a vote that the committee does really try to work within the structure of our group and with the project team to reach consensus prior to going to a vote if at all possible. I just think that's really important as part of trying to keep things, you know, sometimes things are so contentious in the world right now. It just makes me feel a little better if we're very intentional about that. I don't know how other people- Yeah, that's a great suggestion. Yeah. Yep, that's a great suggestion. We're happy to make that change in that draft and we can provide that updated version maybe with the draft notes from today's meeting. Any, would the rest of the committee agree that that's a good change to make? I would agree. Yeah. All right, well, we can revisit that draft at any point but why don't we jump into the next part of our agenda? Yeah, that's a good lead into our public comment period now. So just to let everybody know, there are two ways to participate in the public comment period. If you're signed into the Zoom, the easiest way is to just raise your hand. You will be unmuted by Brian and announce that you can use your be able to talk. Similarly, if you're calling in, you can push star nine and go that same process. This is being live streamed on YouTube. Unfortunately, we're not monitoring the comments in that and that is not gonna be a way that we can really participate. So if you are in the YouTube live stream, you're gonna have to either call in or join the Zoom and the details on how to do that are at the website there shown. So now we'll open up the floor to public comments and Brian, I'll let you kind of direct that if you're seeing. Great, thank you. You can either, so chat, I don't believe chat is functioning, we've turned that off. So if you wish to speak, you can raise your hand while calling you or you can use the Q&A and we'll monitor that as well. So Jane, you can unmute yourself now. Great, thank you very much. I've been pretty involved with this project, I think as many of you know, and I am a little bit concerned that we are launching this study at this particular point in time, that is we are not done with the pandemic and parking, shopping, all these habits right now are not representative of how we think life will be once we're through the pandemic. It looks to me from the document with the study plan that there's gonna be a lot of reliance on pre-pandemic data and modeling. And I'm a little bit concerned about how accurate that this modeling is going to be and I hope the committee will be cognizant of that. I'm also a little concerned that the, I think that the, I had hoped that there'd be a little bit better business representation on this committee. We heard a lot during the mayoral campaigns about helping businesses get back on their feet that after, during a very long period of economic stress. And if we don't understand the parking needs that they will need in the future, the many businesses along the North Moosky Avenue, the parking that they will need to be able to get back on their feet and again succeed, I think we will have failed. I really want to urge the committee to take full account of the moment in history that you are doing this work and the need to really allow the small businesses on North Moosky Avenue to get back on their feet and not to further undercut them by not really fully understanding their needs and coming up with a plan that's going to meet their needs. So I will be watching the work with great interest and I wish you luck. I think it's gonna be a difficult, maybe not impossible task, but it's really, really important that we balance everyone's needs as it come up with this plan. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jane. I don't, Cory, I don't see any other hands right now, but why don't we wait just another minute in case someone. Give opportunity there to chime in. And Jane, we definitely hear your concerns and we hope that we'll be addressing them and partially in this presentation and then as the project continues. All right, Jason, I see your hand and you should be able to unmute. Okay, I hope you can hear me. Sure, so I like to stress, I understand there's business needs and needs of a lot of people, but change is often hard along these quarters, but you have to think this is public right of way that should be used in the best interest of the people that live there and having cars stored on the street for long periods of time and not turning them over is kind of not the best use of that. I understand when there's businesses where there's need for turnover parking and things like that, but as far as we can go, as far as storing people's private cars out in the middle of the road, we should move towards that as part of this study. I think that's an important part. We have to make some hard decisions about how we treat this public right of way. And so as we go forward, I'd like people to take that into consideration is how do we wanna utilize that public space? Thank you very much. Thank you, Jason. Jonathan, you should be able to unmute yourself. Thanks, Brian. Jonathan here from Local Motion. A lot of what Jane mentioned is certainly true. We don't know how applicable the data that we have from before the pandemic is gonna be, how legitimate that'll be after the pandemic and sort of what things are gonna look like. And that includes, you know, we have seen that commuting patterns have really changed during the pandemic and folks aren't going to work the way they used to. And in a lot of ways, I think there's a chance that a lot of that will remain and that has the potential to sort of even out some of the demand that we see on parking supply throughout the day. So we don't see the sort of peaks that can be problematic for the parking supply in certain places. Although I think we've seen repeatedly in our downtown area that we have plenty of parking. I'll also mention that bike lanes and the impact that they have on businesses has been studied pretty thoroughly and repeatedly. And we see if anything, in most places a positive impact on businesses if at any impact at all. Thanks. Thank you, Jonathan.  You should be able to unmute. They may not know that we can't hear them. Yeah, Aiden, or maybe I as I was toggling with Jonathan, maybe I thought it was your hand and it was really his. If you wish to speak, you can unmute. If not, that's fine too. Aiden's from town meeting, excellent. Thank you. Great. Well, I think unless anybody else wants to raise their hand quickly, as I say this slowly, we will move on. May I just quickly say something? Sure. I know I'm on the committee, but just before we get too far into this, I would like, I'm just, I find something a little puzzling. So I'll say it with several nonprofits on the corridor, a little puzzle as to why there's no, they haven't formally been brought in, like the community health center, particularly Feeding Chittenden right now, work across the street and I see lines outside every day. And it just seems, I don't know why we're not, why they're not being included in the conversation as to how it will affect them. These are the most important. As a business owner, like the businesses are one thing, obviously, but there's, there's these incredibly important nonprofits on that strip. So I just, I don't know why they're not included. And I guess I just want to put that out there either to be answered or just on the record. I think I can provide a little bit of context there. The committee structure really was defined by council and they created four available spots for community stakeholders. And it wasn't open round of applications that were reviewed by council president Tracy and Mayor Weinberger. And so they did make the appointments for who would be included on the committee. And then to round out the rest of the committee, they did define the three members of the TUC. And so that's Councillor Hansen, Councillor Stromberg and Councillor Polino. There will definitely be other opportunities to engage other community partners along the way. And they're definitely welcome to join the committee meetings as kind of members of the community, but the council structure really created the committee that we have. And so, yeah, unfortunately I can't answer that question of why they set it up the way that they did. But that is kind of the framework that we are working within and why we have the members that we do. Do we have an opportunity to amend that in any way? I mean, is there a, is it possible for us to bring, you know, particularly these nonprofits that serve the community from, specifically from that corridor that we're talking about from Pearl to Riverside? It's just, I'm not, I'm curious how many folks present live work or are served by those organizations that are on this committee. Kirsten, maybe you can speak to that a little just briefly about your organization role in the neighborhood, because I think that the, again, your organization was one that kind of covered some of the types of organizations that you're talking about, Charlie. Okay. I mean, so Champlain Housing Trust owns the bus barns and we have commercial tenants there as well as residential tenants along the corridor. And we have several other residential properties along there. We, I believe we are the landlord for Feeding Chittenden and, but I do see your point, Charlie, I will say, you know, it's hard because the, as Nicole mentioned, that the city council set the structure, but sometimes, you know, even as I look at our committee, you know, you kind of wonder, I think it's reasonable to wonder, you know, are their voices still missing from the conversation or, and what are those voices and is that important?  And then it's incumbent upon the committee to really, I think also be open to that participation and to try to hear from, you know, all of the points of view along the corridor. All right, well, then, so I don't wanna drag this on too long, but I heard earlier, you know, somebody could make a motion. I mean, can we decide here that we create some sort of space for a dialogue with some of these organizations, maybe a separate meeting? I mean, I know nobody wants to be having more Zoom meetings than they need to have, but it seems like, I mean, if this in any way negatively affects the community health center, the pride center we're feeding shouldn't end, I feel like we're failing, so. Yeah, that's a really good question. And maybe what I would suggest is, why don't we have Corey walk through the scope of what we're asking for the committee to weigh in on today? The only reason I ask for that first or suggest that first is that I think the meetings that you're interested in are definitely something that we're considering as well. And we would define in the public engagement plan that we just haven't drafted yet. That's what we would be bringing in May. So maybe if, yeah, if we can kind of walk through what we see as the really technical components that we don't think that basically it's setting up the framework so that we have something that we can take the public input and kind of feed into the methodology. So it should build on itself along the way, but maybe we can come back to that question after this intro and see if the committee still feels like before approving even this scope of work that we need to have some of those other conversations. That seems fair. Okay. Yeah, I was going to say something very similar that this phase of the project is really a lot of technical analysis just to help document where the parking demand is coming from. And we're not really proposing any changes as part of this. So at that point, we definitely are gonna be reaching out to all kinds of members of the community up and down the corridor. So this is definitely going to be moving into that later phases, which is a great segue into our, what we're actually here for today. So as it's kind of been discussed, we're developing this parking management plan along Northmanuski Avenue. And that's a direct offshoot of the multimodal corridor study that we did last year. There have been several recommendations from that study that have already been implemented that I'm sure we're all familiar with. And that's most notably from Pearl Street down to Maple Street and the downtown core. This parking management plan is also part of the results of those study where it was decided that we needed to evaluate and really understand the parking demand and supply along the corridor here. So what we're trying to do is figure out who and what is generating the need for parking, comparing that to the existing parking supply along the Wynuski Avenue corridor, both on street public parking and estimates of the off street private parking. That understanding of the on and off street supply and demand is intended to inform the strategies that we'll get into in the next phase. And notable all this is that finding what those essential parking needs are, while also with the ultimate goal of freeing up space for dedicated bike lanes. This is obviously a complicated issue. Parking is a near and dear subject to many. So in a way that we're trying to approach this is this phased approach here, where first what we're trying to do is this technical aspect for calling it phase A, which is really to start this public process of having the stakeholder committee convening that. And then the technical work of documenting the land use along the corridor, the physical parking spaces there, and then trying to relate what those land uses mean for parking demand. And then using that understanding of the parking demand, we can really see who's using it over the course of the day and at what times and really why the parking demand is what it is. And then towards the end of this phase is when we're gonna really get into that phase B, which is when we're gonna reach out to all the groups along the corridor, like you were talking about there, Charlie, making sure that we're engaging with everybody who's not sitting around the Zoom meeting with us today. So that really is how we're going forward with this scope. Just for phase A, this is a schedule we've developed where we're gonna be looking into the existing land uses, the existing parking supply and developing what I'm calling a model here to really determine what the demands are along the corridor. And when we get to that meeting in May, we'll be introducing the scope and approach for phase B. At which point we'll be talking about the public engagement plan and how we're gonna, let everybody know what we're talking about here. Street and Elmwood Street and the street's there. So it's basically all the properties and streets bounded by this orange line there. And within that bounded orange line, we're going to be looking into all the parking demand the parcels, address by address, block by block, figuring out the demand and the supply of parking in there. And that's really the next thing that we'll be doing. It's not really rocket science here, it's counting the parking spaces. So we need to figure out the on street supply on all of these streets. We need to figure out the restrictions on there if there's accessible parking spaces or if there are dedicated loading spaces or time limit restricted spaces, and just figure out what's really available for to be used by everybody. And then we'll be putting that into a GIS software. And so what that really is gonna look like is basically as we're showing here on the screen, block by block counts of the number of parking spaces. And then this is a zoomed in version of just the various intersection, or I'm sorry, parcels that we'll be counting, each one representing a building with some number of units or some type of business in it. And so, and a number of parking spaces associated with each parcel. So we'll combine these on street and off street parking supplies to just get a sense of the entire parking supply that's available, either private parking or public on street parking. The next thing that we'll be doing is evaluating the actual land use parking demand that is being generated. And so that's looking at this parcel level again for each building, what kind of parking is being generated by each land use. So you'll see, for instance, in this one I've highlighted the community health center there. So this is just like an example of what one parcel will look like. We're identifying that it's a commercial use. It's associated with healthcare and social assistance. It's got a certain number of employees. And using that information, we can kind of determine, estimate kind of back into an estimate of how much parking they have and over the course of the day. And we'll be using that and doing that through the use of national data sources. So these are sources that have looked at similar sites across the country and have evaluated how many parking spaces, a similar land use of a similar size uses at 10 a.m. or at 2 p.m. or something like that. And so we can do that for the health center. We can do that for general restaurants. We can do that for residential land uses. Based on the number of units that are in each parcel. So we're gonna basically compile that all into that geographic, the GIS database that we're building to kind of quantify the entire demand along the entire corridor. And that leads to a pretty complicated model that we're developing here. And so all this information, the number of employees, the size of the restaurant, the number of residential units, all of this information will be fed into these data sources. The sources will estimate the amount of parking each one of these land uses will generate or that general parking demand that they're creating. And that'll be evaluated at various points over the course of the day. And at each one of these points where we've identified at 10 a.m. there's gonna be so many parking spaces, we're gonna then fill the parking supply that we calculated in the earlier one. So what's gonna happen is it's going to, the model will assign parking spaces to the locations and I'll do it by the nearest parking spaces that are available. And if there's none available, it gets put into the overall bucket of unmet demand. And that is in a nutshell what this model is really doing. And it's gonna be doing that over the course of the day at multiple points. So at some points in the day, when the community health center has their peak demand and people are coming for appointments, they have all their employees on site, that may correspond with when there's the least demand from residential units, when everybody who lives along the corridor, a lot of people who live along the corridor will be at work or Taco Gordo isn't operating at 10 a.m. So there's no parking demand then. So the idea is really to have this aggregate parking demand from all the land uses and how that fills the aggregate parking supply. And obviously, you can't park in somebody's private parking lot if you're not associated without land use. So the way that we assign how it fills up the parking supply is important and it will first try to fill up the identified off-street parking and then it'll go into the on-street parking within some radius of where the demand is being localized. And so it's basically just running a script and some software that will evaluate how all that works. And so that's how what we're trying to do with that model and when we have this technical understanding of what that'll bring. So really what the nice thing that this model will develop for us is over the course of the day we'll know basically who is wanting to park on the street and we'll know if the parking demand is from being generated by the health center or by residential demand or by the nearby studios that are on the street or restaurants. And we can figure that out over the course of the day too. So using that information we'll be able to we'll really be able to test the various parking changes in that following phase and phase B when we're talking about reducing some of the parking demand, parking supply, excuse me, if we remove some of the on-street parking we'll be able to see which uses of the land uses are not being met where the unmet demand is. And so that'll help us identify the strategies for the least impact or how we can make those types of changes. And so that's really it for how we were planning on building this model and what it goes to. And I'm happy to now open it up to the rest of the committee to discuss our approach. Right, I think Kirsten you had your hand up and a couple others. Yes, thank you, I have a couple of questions. I don't know how to follow my hands, there you go. So you said that you would, generally you'll use national models based on something similar to Burlington or Vermont. Is that in terms of size of the community? Is it geographical in nature in terms of climate as well as size? Those would be a couple of my questions there. I have several, so I don't know whether I should pause or tell you- I'll answer that right away. So the data sources are national in scope. So no, it is not specific to Vermont or anything else. So the model will help identify like a mix. But then what we would do is we'd calibrate the model to what we saw earlier in our previous studies. So that would be the earlier version of this corridor study or from other parking counts that Desmond & Associates has done or other observations that have been made. So we'll use the national sources and apply it towards the corridor and we'll recognize that there are some demands out there that aren't exactly met by the national data. That's when we calibrate the model to kind of adjust what we've known it to be. Thank you. So in terms of the model, then as you calibrate it, will there be any kind of dialogue around how that's going, what you're finding? Is it working right? Do we need to make any mid-course corrections or anything like that? And can the model be adjusted so that we can see what happens along the corridor seasonally? Because I also think that's probably, you know, in a state like Vermont is gonna be also important as we think about this corridor. So yes, absolutely. So about the seasonality of it, yes, that is an option. So it does look at the time of day, the day of year and recognizing that there are very different parking patterns in different times of the year. And going to your point about geography in Vermont, there's probably less walking and biking happening in December and January and how that relates to the parking demand. What was the first part of your question? I think that you got to that part. I do have two more really quick, I'm sorry. And then I will stop hogging all the time. My other question was about, you said you would reach out to businesses to like, so are you gonna contact the businesses to say how many employees do you have, hours of operation and all of that? And then the question there is, I don't know that it's useful to get COVID hours of operation or COVID number of employees, right? So I just want us to be clear of what we're gonna be asking for from the businesses along there in terms of what kind of data we're trying to get back that will help with the model. And then the other piece that sort of relates that was just parking counts. Like how old are they? Do we have them along? I seem to recall they were done as part, some counts were done at least maybe during the study. But I don't recall how old those might be or if they encompass this whole section. That is your first part of the question there about the land uses and verifying the parking demand with a number of employees or something. That is definitely one of the harder parts of this project. And we've got to correlate the GS information that we currently have, which has the business. We have to correlate that to the parking manuals that we're using, make sure that it's the same business type and everything. The good thing about that is that these manuals that are estimating the parking generation rates are all pre-COVID. So like when we're using the square footage of a restaurant, it won't take into account, it'll be pre-COVID data that we're developing an estimate for. When we're calibrating it, we wanna make sure that it's realistic to what we've seen in the past. And the challenge there is, if we up the business demand is that not showing, making sure that when we calibrate the demand to match what we've seen in there, that we're doing it in a reasonable way. And so one of your questions earlier was like, how do we get this for like the mid-course corrections? How do we do that? What we'll do is we'll probably end up with our first try and then what we'll end up doing is calibrating it until we find something that we think is reasonable and then describe what we did. And it'll all be out in the open and we'll have a very good documentation process as to why we're estimating it the way it is. I think that it's a model and a model is only as good as the information that you're putting into it. So that's why we have to make sure that the businesses that we're putting into it are accurately described. And the results you have to, when you're using the results, you have to know that it is just based on a model. So we have to recognize that we need to be able to adjust it to our expectations as we apply it. And then for your last question, Kirsten, about the traffic data on North Winooski, we have some limited data from 2019 and it does include all of North Winooski. So that's at least some point of reference that we have to get very localized comparison. All right, are you all set with your questions, Kirsten? Yes, for now, I may have more. Oh yeah, absolutely. All right, Charlie, I saw your hand and then Kelly and Max. Yeah, I've got two questions. One, I'll just just kind of a follow up to what Kirsten was asking. So the national data will be calibrated by these earlier studies. I'm curious what years are these earlier studies from? So our most robust source of parking data is from that corridor study that we did. And it was finalized last year, but I think the count was actually probably done in 2018 or maybe 2019. I don't know if that's what Nicole was referring to. That's where the data, that's where the data is from. From the parking occupancy, yes. Okay. That was for the North Winooski corridor, right? That was 2019. If we wanted to look at other data, like I think we talked about maybe checking the downtown transportation work. Do you remember when that was? No, it was 2015. 2015, okay. And I think to your point that you're about to make, Charlie, is a lot has happened on this corridor. How do you know what was going on? I read mine. Okay, what I would like to point out is that a lot is happening on this corridor, right? Like a lot has changed in the last couple of years, just, you know, since, you know, last year even, even during COVID, things have happened. I mean, there's an X throwing place that's been open now for two years. It's like, there's things have changed on this since we did that parking data count. So that's sort of like why we need to use the model, but know that it's still just a model and we need to just use it the best we can. And it's, okay, I'll let you continue. 2018 seems reasonably recent. I was just, if you were to say 2012 or something like that, I know how slow you all move. Okay, and then the other question is, you said, so it's one block out from North Moosky Avenue and doesn't include the parallel streets. And I guess I'm just curious as to why I imagine the answer is just simplicity. It's easier, it's easier gonna take less time, but if it just seems worth, I don't know how much further than that it would be worth going out, but on both sides of the coin, right? Like maybe there are pockets on the periphery that are underutilized that could handle some of the overflow. Although maybe there's also some that are like highly, highly utilized. And it's gonna cause strain in this ripple effect. And so I'm just curious why one block was chosen. Well, the first part is absolutely true. The wider area, the more parcels we're looking at and all that stuff. But also to the point of the corridor, it's, Moosky Avenue is pretty mixed use. Like there's a lot of residential, the business, the health centers and the services and everything that are on it. So I think that we wanted to, once you get away from that, you're in a much more residential, mostly uses outside of that.  I don't know if anybody else has any other reasons why it would be left. I think it's a good point to talk about that ripple effect is that when do you draw that borgor? How far do we expect people to walk between a parking location and potentially a business or a residence on Moosky Avenue? And so we thought that 300 foot maximum distance of that length off of the street would be reasonable. And then that way, as Corey said, we're not gonna talk about impacting then those residential streets that are parallel to the facility. So I think those are the primary reasons why we looked at it at first and said, let's try to keep it within this corridor, pretty contained and look at the demands and looking and seeing how well we can manage the demand within that footprint. You all set for now, Charlie? Sure, it's because it's easier. It's gonna take us time. I mean, that's part of what I heard, but I think the other parts that John mentioned was just understanding of the distance that someone may walk anyway to access anything on the corridor. You know, how far out is really reasonable? And so again, our assumption was that generally one block is kind of the maximum distance that someone may be willing to walk to get to their destination on the corridor. Yeah, that said, we're definitely curious for input if everyone feels like we were off the mark on that, but that was some of the logic behind that boundary line. All right, well, we can come back to that one. Kelly, I think you had your hand up next. Yeah, just to echo what I feel like has inside about the model, like I feel like the Old North Island is such a unique neighborhood and we are living in a really unique time with COVID. Like I feel like, I mean, this goes without saying, but we shouldn't depend on the model and the script to determine what's going on with parking. So I feel like it's worth saying that we should be very intentional about how we're gathering the data and reaching out and engaging residents of the community as well as businesses and like Charlie was saying, the nonprofits on the corridor. I just wanted to say that. Thank you. All right, Max, I think you had your hand up next. Yeah, so I have a first a question and a comment. My first one is about how you're gonna be actually categorizing and allocating the private parking parts of it. I'll use my own property here at 128. As an example, we have six parking spaces and a sizable yard that we were given and we only use three. And six people can live in this house, but then again, we only use three. What's the reality that everybody's in the house is gonna have a car, especially if they're selling to students mainly. For example, where I lived last year with five people, they only gave us two spots and we just made it work. So I guess that's my first question is how you're gonna kind of look at those parking spaces and try to allocate them. Because I do know looking at my backyard and the neighbor's yard, there are a lot of empty spaces already. Yeah, so that's a great question. So essentially, that's a very site-specific question too, like what you're talking about. And the national sources of data that we're gonna use is I'm not sure how many units are in your property, but maybe there's three units or something like that and each unit gets two parking spaces. So in that situation, we're gonna take, estimate the amount of parking generated by three units using these national sources and that'll be applied.  You have six parking spaces on site. So, this is not what it would actually turn out to be, but let's say that these three units generate eight space or eight parking spaces of demand. Six, we would say that all six would go to your site, even if you don't actually park six, even if you have a preference to park on the street and you would like to save your parking space for your boat or something like that. We're gonna still assume that six would go to there and then you'll still have two unmet parking space demand and that would go into the shared parking street resource. So that would be that two that go into that bucket of the on-street parking. So getting back to your, that parking three units won't generate eight spaces. I'm just gonna bring that back. Okay, good. And I guess my other one's just a comment and maybe Charlie can help me kind of answer this question, but I've been a driver, delivery driver for DoorDash since before the pandemic actually in Burlington. And it really wasn't super popular until the pandemic and obviously everywhere's offering takeout now and DoorDash is really, really taken off. And while that's something that we can definitely attribute to the times right now, I think we also need to consider sort of like the international changes, systemic changes that are happening with COVID and how that's gonna kind of change our world. Cause I think we've all heard from so many examples that, and we know that the world's not gonna return to the way that it was. Even just everybody's, a lot more people are getting online, access to smartphones, things like that. So I do personally believe DoorDashing around here for a year and a half, almost two years now that while it's being used a lot more now, I think a lot of the people that have started using it are gonna continue to use takeout services and things like that. And all around the country, contactless services and things like that are really taking off. And I think well, a lot of those will go away after COVID and there's definitely gonna be a boom of everybody wanting to go outside and be in person and things like that. A few years down the line, as things settle down, I think a lot of these contactless forms of delivery and payments and all that stuff are gonna last. So I think we just need to consider that as well. And I'm wondering, Charlie, what's your position on that as a restaurant owner? What do you think? Thank you for asking, that's very, yeah, that's thoughtful. I don't, I mean, our plan is to get rid of delivery as soon as possible. We do our own delivery. I think that, like, I don't, I think you're right. Like it's because of COVID that we're seeing takeout and delivery spike, obviously. I imagine that people, it's like, people are thirsting to be together. And I think that restaurants and bars are a place that you can't really recreate. So in that way, while a lot of restaurants and bars are like, you know, unduly affected by COVID, I think they'll see a huge resurgence once it's over. That's kind of how I feel. I don't know, I don't have the same feeling that after that initial like, oh my God, we wanna do this, that people will go back to takeout, takeout. It's great for like pizza and certain foods, but for like for our food, it kind of sucks. It's much better eating there. I don't know if that answers your question. No, it totally does. I would agree. And I don't wanna be a delivery driver forever either. I work in restaurants too, and I was a server and tips and all the other way preferable. But I do think that's still a lot of people, for example, like two of my other roommates didn't even know that Dornesh was a thing. And now I've got them on board as well. But I think for the people like that that didn't even know these delivery options, things like that are even possible. There's a lot more people kind of hopping on board. And unfortunately, I think it might stick around a little bit. And like you said, there will be definitely a resurgence of everybody wanting to get back together again. And then, but I think things will start to flatten out potentially after that. So. Well, one of the interesting things about developing a model like this is that we can test that. We can have a scenario where the restaurants have twice as high parking demand or something like that. We can calibrate the model and the data from our national sources to maybe double their parking demand from seven o'clock to 10 o'clock or something like that. Obviously, I eat pretty late, I think, but that's one of the benefits of having a model like this. So while it's kind of ethereal and that it's just that it's a model, we can play with how these different demand scenarios will play out and how that the corridor can meet the demand that's out there. I know there's at least a couple of faces in the panel that I look forward to seeing back at 208 North when you scale and it was soon as possible. I can't wait to do it. It's my last comment would just be a motion then to add that as part of the model, like count on a resurgence of everybody going out to eat and because I personally can't wait either. How I'm gonna quit DoorDash when this is all over. So yeah. I see Kirsten with her hand raised. So I just would point out though that the testing of the model would be part of the phase B when we're looking at different strategies to approach these. So right now phase A is really just building the model, kind of just documenting that there is a restaurant there and that it has this potential generation. And then we kind of know over the course of the day how that works out to what that parking demand is. But then once we get this model built, then in phase B, we can really like test it and say like, okay, well, what if there's less parking here and they have a takeout only model from here out? Like that's what we could really look into then. And maybe actually Kirsten, before I jump back to you, I think I saw counselor hands and hands up. So maybe we'll do a first round of everybody before we come back for a second round. Cory answered my question, he anticipated it. Yeah, I was just gonna say, well, I think that's a great point or many great points that folks have been making, but Max's point of, yeah, I don't think the world's just gonna go back to the way it was. I think the impacts of COVID will be lasting. And so I'm glad that we're gonna be able to like look at different potential scenarios because I don't think we know what that means, but I do think it's a permanent, a lot of the changes from COVID are gonna last for decades and beyond. But I guess my other, a couple other questions or points is so these national models and then we're gonna calibrate it. And does that calibration include, for example, like car ownership in the old North End? Cause I know the old North End has relatively low car ownership. Is that accounted for or going to be? It could be. So basically the way that we'll probably approach this is by just using the standard rates right now and then seeing what that looks like out there and to our parking counts, our observations that we made from 2019. So we'll develop the model with just the standard rates and then we'll start testing what variables would change and the generation rates, which would be the parking demand for residential. Like if we drop that a little bit, if the parking demand goes down, that would kind of correlate with less vehicle ownership, what that looks like in our observations, compared to our observations. So it could be one of the factors that we've used to calibrate the data. And I would imagine it would be. Got it, got it. Yeah, I think just echoing out there is of, as much as we can take into account local conditions as possible, I think is good in local realities. And then my other point, so the context of this obviously is that the corridor is going to be changing soon and there's going to be on street or park, on street parking is going to be replaced with bike lanes. And so are we planning for that future, I guess? Because I guess, we're expecting that creating this much safer infrastructure would result in more people biking. So is that part of what we're looking at? So, sort of like how the new infrastructure will change behavior, is that sort of what you mean? Yeah, exactly, exactly. Because this is specifically trying to plan for that new world. I mean, that's why we're doing this, is to plan for that. And so are we taking into account, yeah, how that infrastructure would impact behavior? So I don't know if it is really going that far into like the impacts of the parking generation. Really the way that I see this tool being used is to identify and understand where the demand is coming from so that when we do make a change, we know who's being impacted and how we can then account for that impact. So maybe one of the simple things we could do is just say like two hour parking or something. And that means that residential parking wouldn't be there during the day. But maybe we allow overnight parking. So that means that people could park there overnight. So there's like a variety of circumstances that we can use this model to kind of inform how we make decisions. I don't know if this model would be the best way to analyze how it would change behaviors moving forward. It's not a predictive model in that sense, Jack, but it would be able to be tested. So in that scenario that we were just talking about with what if a particular business increases its parking demand in the alternative scenario is that what if all of the businesses slightly reduced their level of parking demand because people were traveling by bicycle? So that could be a hypothetical that could be explored in the phase B of this study. Okay, yeah, no, I think that'd be helpful just because we got to go a bunch of us, I mean, people on this call were there, but a bunch of us got to go up to Montreal and see a lot of those changes that they had made of replacing on-street parking with bike lanes. And they saw, you know, if demand had stayed the same it really would have been a disaster probably because they removed, they said close to 10,000 on-street parking spaces to create this infrastructure. So if the demand was stagnant then that would not work at all. But they also saw the number of people riding bicycles during the wintertime triple. So you had thousands and thousands of new people now biking that, you know, reduce that demand as the supply went away. And so it's just, yeah, I hope we're thinking about how these shifts are gonna influence the demand side as well. Yeah, the PMP, the whole park management plan had a component of the demand side as well. And that's partially why we have Desmond on the team as well as realizing that we wanna try to reduce the parking demand. The model will be an output of those assumptions. So there'll be a separate process in that phase B that will say, so what if, as Corey said, if we put parking meters in, that's gonna affect a particular, it's gonna create a demand shift for certain behaviors. But what if there were a significant proactive approach on transportation demand management?  What if we encouraged, there's a variety of other incentive type of programs. And that's again, what we have to do kind of off model first and say what type of response would we get to shift people, if possible, away from a car? And then we can reflect what that change would be in this parking model. Yeah, that's really helpful. So I think I understand this point of just creating this foundational model that we can then use as a base to then look at different scenarios. And I think that that will be really helpful for sure. All right. Councillor Stromburg or Paulino, any comments or questions from you before we circle back to the rest of the committee and the public? I'm good for it now. Thanks. Sorry, my internet is very unstable right now. So I'm keeping my screen off, but I heard most of what Jack said. I am so sorry. I'm trying to switch networks. We've got a lot of people working from home. Sorry. No problem. Okay, Charlie, I see you have your hand up and then check with the rest of the committee. I guess I just, I'm curious, do we not have data about like levels of people riding bikes in the wintertime in Burlington currently, like as a percentage of population? And I guess are we expect, is there an expectation that, I know Jack just said that a Montreal cycling tripled once this infrastructure was built. Is that like people that used to not bike starting to bike or is it just people that were biking elsewhere now utilizing the infrastructure? I'm curious what that means exactly like specifically. And if are we actually expecting this far north that people will, once we put some bike lanes out that will be, that they'll be just biking more despite the cold weather and it's not one such. Yeah, I'll try to answer a little bit of this first. The Montreal is definitely, you know, they experienced similar winters if not a little colder than we do. But typically when a city like using Montreal as an example, when they expand their bike network in the way that they did and show those increased numbers of new riders, it is typically new riders. And it's not necessarily people that have been coming from somewhere else in the city to use that facility. It generally shows a city wide increase in the number of people that are getting out on their bikes. That said oftentimes it does depend on the type of bike facility that is installed, you know, studies that have been done in other communities. If, you know, something like a protected bike lane as an example, and that's a lot of what Montreal has installed is much more attractive to people that are especially newer to riding on the road. So yet not necessarily always the case that, you know, if you build it, they will come but if you can build the right kind of facility it is likely to increase ridership. Right, I've ridden on the up in Montreal and it's incredible. But that's not what we're talking about here, right? This is an unprotected bike lane. You know, like there's the one down which is going to be amazing in the summer, spring, summer and fall down South Manuski Avenue. Incredible, I mean, I would feel safe riding there now. But I mean, in the winter it's like there isn't a bike lane, it's just snow. Yeah, it's a good question. All right, Kelly, I see you have your hand up. Yeah, just to answer some of that, Charlie, I know a few years ago local motion did some bike counts in the old North End and I'm not sure if they went, they were shared with me once and I totally lost them but I'm not sure if they counted during the winter but I wonder if that's a resource we could tap into just to see, yeah, and just to kind of echo, keep saying echo, but just on the topic of like if we build it, will they come? I know in the survey we've been doing Old North End recently, a lot of people have like anecdotally said that they would bike but there's just not enough maintenance of the bike lanes in the winter so I think that's a really valid point. All right, if the committee is okay with it, I might suggest we open it up to public comments and questions and then we can come back to the committee for some final discussion before we see if we want to vote on the scope of work today. Right. Well, we will come back to the committee when we're done with the public comment period but same deal for making the comments, raise your hand or push star nine on the phone and I think Brian will be directing the calls from here out. Yep, thank you. Thank you committee for that good discussion, very helpful questions. Jeff McKee, you should be able to unmute yourself. We can't hear you, Jeff, if you're talking right now. Still nothing from Jeff. Jeff, I will try you again in a minute. All right, Jason, you should be able to unmute. Yep, hi, this is Jason Stumple on LLN Contestor Ave. I use this corridor on a regular, you know, walking, biking, driving. And I think, you know, some of the most important points is that we have to make sure that people can come through this corridor with ease no matter what their situation is. You know, right now we keep talking about how many parking demand is right there now, what's gonna be in the future, but part of this is changing the demand from parking to other infrastructure that dictates that people will wanna walk and bike and, you know, be in the neighborhood. And so I think that out of all of this, we just have to consider, you know, there is the parking demand now, what we think it will be in the future. But, you know, when you look at these national models, Brownton's very different, it's a very small city with a lot of people that need to get around and a lot of communities in the old North end that are cut off by high, you know, high access streets I call where the cars go very fast. And so to cut that down, I think it's a win. So I just urge everyone to think about what is the best use for all of the people around there in the future. Thank you very much. Thank you, Jason. Jane, you should be able to unmute. Okay, thank you very much. I stayed till the end of the meeting, so if you're gonna speak briefly again. This time with my hat as a resident near North Muske Avenue, I'm outside the study area. But I hope that you will be wary of pushing unmet parking demand onto residential side streets that are outside of your study area. I think we all know that, you know, parking is scarce, it's a dense neighborhood. And I hope that you'll just like keep that in mind too, that it's great to reduce the parking demand, but please don't push parking demand into the residential areas, you know, around North Muske Avenue. Thank you very much. Great, thank you, Jane. And we did get a message from Jeff, he's the CEO of CHCB, so we're glad to have you on the call. I'm gonna try to give you permission again in case it works. All right, you should be able to unmute, we'll see if that works. Looks like we might still have some technical difficulties, but we appreciate you being here. You've heard the great conversation we've had tonight, so thanks and stick with it. And Jeff, absolutely feel free to like email your comment to Nicole there. Her email address is at the bottom of the screen there, the nloche at Burlingtonvermont.gov. We'll be happy to have this conversation with you as we continue this work. And Jason, I see your hand is up. I don't know if it's still up, or if you have another comment. Okay, it looks like that's it for the attendees for now. Well, I appreciate all the public comment. You know, I think that what we've just heard from Jane and Jason are very valid points. And, you know, the purpose of this model, what we're doing now is just to really understand where the parking demand is coming from. So, you know, we can really get into those comments, those points that you've made as we move into phase B. I don't see any other hands in the attendees, so I'm gonna move on to the action that we were hoping to take tonight, which was to approve the draft scope of work. You know, I think that, you know, we're hoping to get a motion from somebody on the committee to approve it and, you know, have the discussion and hopefully go forward and with what we've presented tonight. Move to approve this scope of work. Thank you, Charlie. Is there a second? I second that. Okay, Max seconded. Some discussion. Councillor Hanson, I see you have your hands up. Yeah, so I was just wondering, so in terms of the geographic scope and the idea around the 300 feet, is that based on, I'm just curious what's that based on? Because in my mind, I don't know, like in downtown, especially people, I think typically park a little bit further than that, in many cases from where their destination is. So yeah, I just didn't know what that was based on because in my mind, I could imagine someone parking, you know, a block and a half over from their destination potentially, but not sure if there's data to the contrary or something. Yeah. I can speak a little bit to that. I think originally we were hoping to do intercept surveys, but like everything has been affected. So we've gone a different route using the model really handily to use the national data. 600 feet is what often is used. And I think to Jane's concern there about the other residential streets that are primarily residential parallel to this facility. And then Charlie made a comment, it's the ripple effect. So when do we draw the line? Where do we draw the line? Is it the next parallel streets? If so, that's fine. We have more work to do, which is not an issue in my mind. It's just simply what is the highest return on the investment? And so part of the reasoning was to, if we bounded this with the perpendicular streets and just along the corridor itself, we're gonna say, we kind of put this boundary and said, we're gonna calculate everything in this boundary. And as Corey said, the model will tell us if our demands exceed the capacity within that boundary. And we might come back to you all and say, we need to allow some of the parking demand to go park on those parallel streets. So we're gonna have to widen out the study area. That might be a conversation. But I thought initially we had said, let's bound it. Let's see if we can meet our parking demands within that boundary. So it's somewhat of an artificial challenge there, Councilor Hanson, but that was the idea is that we were trying to focus the corridor demands and the supply within that geographic area. Okay, I think I understand that. And so, but yeah, I guess if that's not the case, I hope that we don't sort of just give up and say, oh, you know, there's no way to make it work, especially if 600 is the traditional number and we're using 300. So I mean, I agree with the goal of like, let's see if this makes sense even just within 300, but I just hope that if it doesn't, we then go to the normal sort of 600, I guess, and look at that. That seems reasonable. Kirsten, I think you have your hand up. Yes. So I think I understand, I would say I feel okay keeping the scope to the corridor one block off. I don't know, like, so 600, maybe the national model, but that might be because in some larger cities, your block sizes are significantly larger and in Burlington, our block sizes are pretty small. So, but we certainly, I think we should determine what's happening within this corridor first. As Jason, Jonathan mentioned, we could see if that's sufficient as we move forward, which gets to sort of my second part about the scope beyond the geographic area. I just wanna, at the next meeting, once you've sort of put together this model and decided how you've got all the inputs together and stuff, you will come back to us and present to us what the inputs were that went into the model, how those, how they were gathered and the assumptions that were made. Yes, that's the intention. The intention would be to show you exactly how we got to these numbers and any deviations from the data that we've done, any type of customization to parking generation or any type of the demand rates or any other ways that we kind of made the numbers work. And I don't mean that we're like cooking the books or anything, I just mean that, how we're getting to the results that we're showing you. And if there's any anomalies that are saying like, oh, like at this area, there's all this unmet demand, that'll be shown. And that's exactly what we're hoping to show, like where this unmet demand would be. And then at that, at our next meeting, once you show us that, is there an opportunity at that point to have the conversation about the geographic area again and or any of the, I assume we can have a discussion more robustly about what those assumptions were and how the integration was gathered. I would imagine so, I would imagine that that's what we'd be using that meeting for is to really to discuss the applicability of the model. So, just to show like what our initial results are showing us for parking demand and if it's got any deficiencies, we'll be able to highlight those. And if there's recommendations that we need to do to expand the geographic area or make any other adjustments, well, we would discuss them at that point. And that would be on top of the phase B kind of a discussion approach, like how we'll use what we've done so far to go into phase B. Thank you. So in phase B, there'll be, this is more sort of technical and quantitative, but phase B will allow for that engagement and some qualitative information to come forward. Yes, that's exactly the intention. That's when we'll be testing the model for various scenarios and recommending strategies to minimize impacts or account for any type of shortcoming as well as the whole public engagement and outreach plans. All right, any other discussion questions? Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Why don't we take a vote to see if, I'll just, so Charlie's motion was to move to accept the scope of work. All in favor, would you like to say aye? Aye. Aye. All right, anyone opposed? Okay, excellent. Well, thank you so much. This was a great discussion. Really good questions. Cory and Jonathan have a lot of work ahead of them. We'll be getting a lot back to you, but we'll quickly go over some of the next steps and kind of what we'll be bringing to you next time. So this is the same slide as earlier with the schedule. Really, we're just gonna be going into doing the actual, getting into the analysis here of, quantifying the existing supply, quantifying the land uses and then building that model. So that's really these first two phases of the existing land use and the existing supply. And then that next phase of, excuse me, not phase, next task of calibration is where we would do that adjustment to like ground test it to make it look like what we'd expect out there and what we have seen in the past. And so that'll help lead to this model where we'll be able to present to you what we've developed and any type of anomalies that have encountered. I would expect that to be done towards the end of April, at which point we'll be developing all these materials and getting out this information to you for this mid-May meeting. And until then, you're absolutely welcome to contact us. Anybody that's watching the presentation also feel free to reach out to us anyway they can and stay up to date with the project website here on the city's website. And Brian will be developing a website at the RPCs also. You can reach out to any of us on the team and let us know how we're going forward. And yeah, I'll just add to that quickly. The link to the DVW website, there is a button that you can sign up to get email updates on the project. Someone to just ask about how people can stay up to date and follow along. So feel free to do that there. The RPC also has a mailing list for everybody from the corridor study itself. We're still sending out updates to that email list. If you can't navigate a website very well and find those buttons, feel free to reach out to the project team directly. We're happy to add you to those mailing lists. One last housekeeping question for everyone before we end tonight. Does this time of day work okay for our next meeting? I would anticipate the meeting might be a little bit longer because they have a lot to get through. Okay, I see a lot of thumbs up. Good. All right, so we'll be in touch probably in several weeks to try to find another date for that meeting. Yeah, but helpful to know that this is a decent time of day. All right, any last thoughts before we let you all go for tonight? Just thank you so much, everyone here. This is very informative. You're very welcome. Thank you all, committee members and everybody for signing in and sharing your thoughts with us. We couldn't do a project like this without the community support. So we appreciate how we're going about this. Thanks to the members of the public who tuned in to join us tonight and we'll be sharing the link. You can, you know, I'll send it out to the project list with the link to the CCTV video and the RPC webpage. So thanks to the committee members. Great to see you and have you on board. This is a really helpful discussion for us. Thanks so much, everyone. Have a great night. Have a good night. Thank you. Bye, everybody. Take care, everybody.


Yeah, we on boss talk one-on-one. Okay. If you could go back in time to before his passing and say- Mo3? Mo3.   What would you say to him to help him to discourage him from what is about to happen?  It's so kind of hard to say that. You can say something anything, but everybody know I'm blunt.  Right. I agree. Because shit, after he died, no matter who did the interview and revealed they said if they ain't got down the next day. Mm-hmm. Yeah. I was trying to think. Damn. He told me about them girls I ain't done on the battle. It ain't take long though. The next day I just seen them doing the interviews. Dang, yeah. Right after that. I love all this, too. Yeah, yeah. Wow. But because I always think that you know him best. So you would know how to get through to him. So you saying that to him? I would have just explained it. So I would try to explain it so, so much and so long. You know what I'm saying? I was lying. I was lying too. And I think they're my whole guy. They are disease, you know what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.  You know what I mean? And I would stay in San Francisco because you know, the next day. We did two videos that day. So nobody know when we went to flew to San Francisco and flew to drove to Sacramento because a little kid paid for two videos. And he woke me up at the middle of the night. Wow. At four in the morning. Because, you know, all our flights we catch like six, seven in the morning and in the morning. So he woke me up and told me, come on, let's go. He ain't never tell me that. Wow. Yeah, we on Boss Talk 101.