Written by the reviewer from the ASR + docket; [verbatim-ASR] = quoted machine transcript; [paraphrase] = reviewer's wording, not a quote.
0:04 September 21st meeting of the housing planning
0:07 and development committee to order.
0:09 First order of business,
0:10 I'll make a motion to approve the minutes
0:13 from the September 8th, 2026 meeting.
0:17 Motion and a second.
0:22 Second item on the agenda, ordinance 40-2025.
0:28 This is dealing with upgrade up.
0:33 Making some improvements to our bicycle infrastructure
0:36 coordinances here within the city.
0:39 Assistant Director Boss is here, will walk us through.
0:42 I think we've had a session like this before
0:45 where we've gone through cases,
0:47 the case boards updates and input
0:51 for what those should look like.
0:52 So this will be, I believe the last round
0:53 of those inputs that we'll see.
0:55 And it'll give us a chance to discuss those
0:59 So that I'll turn it over to Assistant Director Boss.
1:06 Yes, as you said, so what I've got here
1:09 is basically a summary that builds on,
1:12 I believe that last time I was here was in July.
1:15 We reviewed the in-progress deliberations
1:19 post-June case meeting.
1:23 So this is now post-September case meeting
1:25 where we finalized the recommendations.
1:29 So just have a handful of slides.
1:32 That's four slides that kind of summarizes
1:36 the main changes to chapter 301,
1:39 which is the definitions under the traffic code.
1:42 And then chapter 373, which is kind of the,
1:44 it's the chapter on the operation
1:46 of bicycles and motorcycles.
1:49 And then the last one is the section from 903.10,
1:57 That's talking about the duty to repair sidewalks,
1:59 which we didn't really change anything in that one.
2:02 Our focus was in 301 and 373
2:04 was where all the main recommendations were.
2:08 So some of these things were kind of,
2:13 I don't call them minor to like play them down,
2:16 but like some of them were kind of
2:19 almost administrative changes or updates.
2:21 As you're all aware, I think the last time
2:24 that we really looked in detail at the,
2:26 but these same chapters was in 2019.
2:30 And it was, every time you look at the code
2:33 and you make changes to code,
2:34 it's always got some bend or focus on it.
2:36 And the focus at that point in time
2:38 was the shared mobility devices
2:43 and the proliferation of scooter rentals
2:46 and all those at that time.
2:48 And they were coming into Cleveland.
2:50 We were working on a pilot program here in Lakewood.
2:53 And so a lot of the updates at that time
2:57 were pretty limited to just bringing that shared use
3:01 or that shared mobility program into the community
3:05 and making sure that we had the regulations
3:07 and the definitions to support those specific devices.
3:10 So I think as we all have learned
3:11 over the last like seven years,
3:15 the proliferation of these devices
3:16 has really increased over time.
3:19 And so I've tried to bold some of the new things
3:24 but I'll just go bullet by bullet here.
3:25 So we did update the definition for motorized bicycle
3:30 and that was any of these updates
3:33 and a lot of these things I pull forward,
3:35 it's because the state updated their definitions.
3:37 And so we try to pull those in
3:39 any time the state updates theirs and they apply.
3:42 So the motorized bicycle,
3:44 that is traditionally known as a Moped
3:48 and the state definition still talks about
3:50 the cubic centimeter displacement of the engine,
3:54 gas-powered engines.
3:56 So we updated that so that the definition
3:59 matched the state definition
4:01 and the clarification from the case board
4:05 was to make sure that that definition also says
4:07 does not include an electronic bicycle
4:10 and a low-speed micromobility device
4:13 just to make sure that we had,
4:15 I think we had a mobility device earlier
4:18 in there, an e-bike,
4:19 just to make sure that people
4:20 don't get those things confused.
4:23 We added a new definition for,
4:25 I'm calling it the e-moto,
4:27 that was the term that it settled on,
4:28 we discussed it in case.
4:30 There is no state definition for that
4:33 and so that is a homegrown local definition
4:36 to describe those devices that basically exceed
4:41 the capabilities and limitations of an e-bike
4:44 under the state code,
4:47 the state definition for an e-bike.
4:49 We added the full definition from the state for an e-bike.
4:53 Previous to that we had a much more simple
4:56 definition of e-bike that,
4:58 and a lot of that code work that we did in 2019
5:01 I did in partnership with the City of Cleveland
5:03 so that we would match as those shared mobility programs
5:07 were kind of going over our boundaries,
5:10 going back and forth,
5:10 we wanted our code to match.
5:12 Cleveland has updated theirs,
5:14 we updated it and the case recommended
5:16 to update that to the full state definition
5:19 that includes all three classes of e-bikes.
5:21 So it has sub definitions for class one, two and three.
5:25 We changed the current generic mobility device definition
5:29 which was the generic term used in 2019
5:33 to describe both e-bikes and e-scooters.
5:37 So the new state term is,
5:39 they have a new term called low speed micromobility
5:41 device that kind of,
5:44 it defines all those things that are not e-bikes
5:48 not e-motos as we're defining them.
5:52 And so we brought that state definition in
5:56 but also added kind of some additional language
6:00 that include but are not limited to e-scooters,
6:02 electric one-wheeled unicycles, electric skateboards.
6:07 You could probably make that list like 20 lines long
6:10 but that was a recommendation from the case
6:12 to just include some of those examples
6:14 so that people would have an understanding
6:16 of what those low speed micromobility devices are.
6:19 I retained the statement in there
6:22 that it does not include devices solely used
6:25 for the use of children
6:26 or assisted mobility devices
6:28 used by persons with disabilities.
6:29 That was something that we had in 2019.
6:31 We kept that in there.
6:34 Try to avoid confusion
6:36 and that's another reason for getting away
6:38 from the mobility device generic term
6:41 in any potential confusion
6:44 over what you're talking about.
6:46 Are you talking about a motorized wheelchair
6:48 or are you talking about a knee scooter?
6:53 Then we added, and there were no changes or anything
6:57 but we did add the ORC definitions
6:58 for a bikeway and a shared use path.
7:01 So the bikeway talks about infrastructure
7:03 that's basically curb to curb.
7:04 It's within the roadway.
7:06 Shared use path is obviously infrastructure
7:08 that is separated from the roadway.
7:18 so once we finished kind of the work
7:20 on the terms that we needed to add or refine or change,
7:25 now we got into the operation chapter.
7:29 And so each of these sections
7:32 is you kind of work your way down here.
7:34 So we do have a section on reckless operation.
7:36 I think I walked through that in July.
7:38 That is, it's a pretty broad section
7:41 but it covers a lot of those behaviors
7:43 that you don't want anywhere
7:47 from people riding bicycles, motorcycles
7:50 or any of these devices.
7:53 And so that did have kind of an obsolete line in it
7:57 that we added in 2019.
7:59 Both Cleveland and Lakewood adopted a speed limit
8:05 And it was pretty low.
8:06 It was 12 miles an hour.
8:08 And it actually, while our shared mobility program
8:13 died after the pilot,
8:14 Cleveland's obviously has continued
8:17 that 12 mile an hour limit cause enough issues
8:21 in terms of safety and devices
8:23 that were going too slow in terms of traffic
8:26 and people riding in the roads
8:28 that Cleveland did away with that speed limit.
8:30 And so we're just, this is kind of a cleanup item.
8:33 We don't have a shared mobility program
8:35 but just to get rid of that speed limit.
8:41 Doesn't help anything.
8:43 And so recommending that we remove that.
8:46 In the riding on sidewalks section.
8:50 Sorry, Councilman Bullock.
8:54 Thanks for the outline.
8:56 Let me interject here.
8:57 So because e-bikes have baked into the definition
9:01 of the device, some speed limits,
9:05 I think that that is probably lacking for e-scooters
9:09 and also my question is low speed micromobility device.
9:16 So if it's not in the law in one spot
9:21 might it not be advisable to have it in a different spot?
9:24 I did hear what you just said by the way.
9:26 And then the other question is physically
9:29 are there top speed practical limits for e-scooters
9:35 and other low speed micromobility devices
9:40 that approximately parallel class one,
9:44 class two, class three e-bikes or we can't assume that.
9:49 So you see what I'm driving at is
9:51 I do like the e-bike three tier approach
9:58 and of course it's consistent with state and federal law.
10:01 I'm assuming that the, or am I correct
10:04 in assuming that manufacturers are adhering to that?
10:07 It's been on the books for quite some time.
10:08 So a class two can't go higher than it's supposed to?
10:14 So that speed limit, we put that in our code
10:17 to be consistent with Cleveland.
10:20 That was something that was then because it was a law,
10:23 it was implemented through
10:25 shared mobility device operators.
10:28 So through like the Lime system,
10:31 they could physically govern electronically,
10:35 govern their devices to 12 miles an hour.
10:38 Just like they could restrict them from certain areas
10:41 or the scooter would stop working
10:42 or it would go really slow.
10:44 Like they had the ability.
10:46 The state now in the definition
10:47 for low speed micromobility device says that
10:52 it's capable on a paved level surface
10:55 of not more than 20 miles an hour
10:56 when propelled by electric motor.
10:58 That's generally the, while there isn't a speed limit
11:02 and we don't have a speed limit
11:03 and I'm not recommending a speed limit for scooters,
11:06 most of those devices operate at 20 miles an hour or less.
11:10 The e-bike speeds in the new code definitions
11:13 are recommending those are when and where
11:17 the assistance either picks up or drops off
11:22 You could certainly ride an e-bike faster
11:24 than 28 miles an hour going downhill,
11:31 we're not recommending speed limits at this time.
11:34 If you're riding an e-bike on the road,
11:36 the speed limit is the speed limit of the road.
11:39 Just like, because that's in reckless operation,
11:43 it's in all these sections that you will abide by
11:46 the traffic laws that you're,
11:48 of the roadway that you're riding on.
11:51 So if you're riding on, yeah,
11:52 if you're riding on the street
11:52 then I would say the speed limit
11:54 for all devices is 25 miles an hour.
11:56 Okay, all right, so that's a helpful,
11:57 so the definitions in the e-bike side of things
12:00 is an approximate description of their capabilities
12:04 and their power level.
12:05 But it is not a hardwired guarantee
12:09 on the top speed of any device.
12:11 They're not governed at that,
12:12 it doesn't stop, like it's not gonna keep you
12:15 Okay, I appreciate that clarification.
12:17 So, okay, so the through line to spoiler
12:23 is that it sounds like this draft is written
12:26 not to have specific speed limits
12:28 but the reckless operation standard
12:31 throughout the various classes.
12:33 Okay, thanks, I'll be up and running.
12:35 Yeah, so I think that's, that wasn't,
12:36 I mean, as a discussion that we had at CASE,
12:39 I think there was, there was obvious discussion
12:41 of do you wanna implement speed limits
12:43 on paths, on in parks, all those types of things,
12:46 like you can certainly do that.
12:51 We didn't, I mean, the recommendations
12:53 don't have a speed limit right now that's out there.
12:58 And as I walk through some of these things,
12:59 you do have the ability through the,
13:02 and we had it before, through the existing code
13:05 that like the Director of Public Safety retains,
13:10 in all of these things, retains the allowance
13:12 to restrict certain aspects of operation
13:15 per signage anywhere.
13:18 So the Director of Public Safety can put up a sign
13:20 and say you can't ride a bike on this sidewalk.
13:23 You can only ride two miles an hour on this sidewalk.
13:26 And that's the legal basis for the recent
13:28 Lakewood Park announcements regarding e-bikes.
13:31 You can put up signs to restrict operations.
13:35 I guess the perspective that I was trying to keep,
13:37 and I think a lot of the members in CASE kept,
13:39 is that this is a broad,
13:40 like this is the whole, community-wide,
13:42 this is broad, understanding that yes,
13:45 you can, you can implement further restrictions
13:49 specific to a certain area,
13:51 and that the Director of Public Safety has that ability,
13:54 but do you wanna implement that like writ large wide?
13:57 Because it does, I'm not trying to go down a rabbit hole,
14:00 but they did discuss speeds, and it's just hard.
14:04 It's hard for police to enforce a speed
14:07 on a shared use path.
14:09 You're gonna park a cruiser up there
14:11 and chase a kid down.
14:13 It's a difficult thing to do in practical reality.
14:19 So just to quickly clarify, just for folks who are,
14:22 so it sounds like we've made the speed limit.
14:24 It's basically a policy decision,
14:25 not a codified ordinance decision at this point,
14:28 and can be modified in a case-by-case basis
14:31 as the Public Safety Director sees fit.
14:36 I think that's, yeah, correct.
14:40 If I may, Mr. Chair.
14:42 Yeah, and I think if you think about it
14:43 from a practical perspective
14:45 to Assistant Director Abbas' point,
14:46 I mean, our law enforcement's out there
14:50 radar-ing people driving, right?
14:53 But even under Ohio law,
14:55 I think law enforcement officers are allowed
14:56 to determine that, in my judgment,
14:58 in my personal judgment,
14:59 that person was over the speed limit,
15:00 so I can cite them as such.
15:03 I think, in this indication,
15:04 I don't even know if they make radar for bikes
15:07 or for people on devices,
15:09 so I think that would be more challenging.
15:12 I think it's the conduct, right?
15:13 So if there's a police officer present
15:15 and they view reckless conduct,
15:19 I think they can cite the person,
15:20 which I think is what our residents want.
15:26 And I've gone back and forth on this.
15:28 I was involved in the case discussions,
15:30 or at least present while they had them,
15:31 and I think that makes more sense.
15:34 Director of Public Safety, you can get more nuanced.
15:38 The situation calls for it, so thank you.
15:40 I'm starting to keep,
15:41 this is a fruitful discussion,
15:42 helpful to me, at least, Mr. Chair, if I may.
15:45 So that also, that structure,
15:47 which I think I'm receptive to, supportive of,
15:50 would then allow, let's say we pass this
15:54 or a version of this.
15:56 Six months in the future,
15:59 the practical experience is that on a shared use path
16:04 there's a problem that we're experiencing.
16:06 Then there's flexibility for the Director of Public Safety
16:09 to post a sign that says,
16:10 for this facility, this area, here's different rules,
16:15 here's tighter rules on the road,
16:17 literally to address whatever we're experiencing.
16:19 I think that's correct, right?
16:21 The other point, though, to the Chair is,
16:24 so it's not vehicle-based,
16:29 this draft doesn't contemplate vehicle-based speed limits,
16:32 nor does it really necessarily contemplate
16:37 special attention enforcement by the police
16:40 for these devices alone.
16:44 It would be a part of general traffic,
16:46 but there would be speed limits
16:48 associated with different roads,
16:51 just like any other traffic, right?
16:53 So as we think of this,
16:54 prevailing speed on Detroit Avenue is different
16:56 than Clifton is different than a sidewalk
17:00 is different than a shared use path, correct?
17:02 We'll probably get to that in a little bit.
17:06 I think that's all the, so reckless operation,
17:09 and I'm sorry, I don't have all of the existing
17:11 elements of that section in here,
17:13 but if you read through that section,
17:15 the things that are expected of someone operating
17:18 a bicycle or any of these devices,
17:21 it's all relative to the environment
17:22 that they're riding on.
17:24 So while there are, and there are specific things
17:26 that we'll talk about in our code
17:28 about riding on a sidewalk,
17:29 so there are additional regulations for that,
17:32 and we tried to mirror those,
17:34 kind of that same model of new specific regulations,
17:38 so now if you're on a bikeway or a shared use path,
17:41 so if you're like in the bike lanes or whatever,
17:44 or if you're on a shared use path,
17:45 like what are the things that you really need
17:48 to regulate or guide?
17:50 Outside of those specific kind of things
17:53 for bikeways, shared use paths, and sidewalks,
17:55 like that reckless operation addresses most of that,
17:59 which is kind of the point I made back in July,
18:02 that like those tenants hold true
18:05 across kind of all environments,
18:07 so yes, you have to adhere to traffic laws,
18:12 I could pull it up and go through those things
18:15 that are in that section,
18:16 but it's all of those types of general principles,
18:21 I just didn't copy them down in here, so.
18:24 Mr. Chair, the definition for reckless operation
18:28 is without due regard for safety of persons or property,
18:33 so I think that's a judgment call by a police officer
18:35 as to whether or not the operation
18:36 is without due regard to the safety of the person,
18:40 even themselves, I think, or property,
18:42 other people's property.
18:45 Yeah, thanks everybody for taking the moment
18:47 to go through that particularly, specifically,
18:48 because I think this is something
18:50 I've specifically heard about this
18:51 and kind of the misunderstanding
18:53 of why we're recommending this the way we are,
18:55 so I appreciate going through this piece by piece,
18:57 and us also underscores, I think,
18:59 the need for us as council and us as a city
19:03 to get out there and re-educate the public
19:05 on these laws that already exist,
19:06 that can now be enforced and get people up to speed
19:11 on how they fit into the new landscape
19:13 or with all these other devices, or below speed.
19:18 So thanks, and sorry, please go on, sorry.
19:20 No, it's fine, I'd much rather have a discussion-based,
19:23 like, than me just going through this, so.
19:27 So I'll go to, like, riding on sidewalks,
19:29 we'll just go right to that.
19:31 So we already had a fairly robust section
19:33 on regulations on the sidewalks,
19:37 and so the things that we changed to that section
19:39 was, again, focusing more on the behavior than the device,
19:44 so making it clear that people can ride
19:47 kind of the appropriate types of devices on the sidewalk
19:51 in accordance with those stated regulations
19:54 that we already have for the sidewalk.
19:57 It retains that allowance for the Director of Public Safety
20:00 to further restrict aspects of operation
20:03 certain areas of sidewalks that may be more
20:05 or less appropriate for people to ride,
20:10 like the parks is an example of that.
20:12 We did restrict and upheld the restriction
20:15 on motorized bicycles, to my knowledge,
20:18 as long as we've had this section,
20:20 you've never been able to ride a moped on the sidewalk,
20:22 so we extended that to include
20:25 the newly defined e-motos,
20:27 kind of treating those things in a similar category.
20:30 And then based on case recommendation,
20:33 we added just a kind of a, not a clarifying statement,
20:38 but like an exclamation point of that,
20:42 you shall ride so as to not constitute
20:44 reckless operation per section 37308.
20:48 And then the code previous to this
20:51 had a whole section about
20:53 age restriction for roadway operation.
20:56 I think it was eight years old,
20:59 that you had to be eight to ride in the road,
21:02 and then it had a bunch of roads that were restricted,
21:05 like except for these roads and all those things.
21:07 And so I just thought as I was working through this
21:10 that that section would be more appropriate
21:13 actually to add into the next section.
21:15 Bikeways talks about infrastructure in the roadway,
21:20 so I just pulled that down to the next section,
21:23 so we can talk about that on the next slide.
21:26 So the new section, 373.101,
21:31 this is in relation to the two new types of infrastructure
21:34 that we're defining, the bikeways,
21:35 which is curb to curb stuff,
21:37 bike lanes and other infrastructure that's in the roadway,
21:41 or immediately adjacent to the roadway
21:43 and shared use paths that are separated,
21:45 physically separated from the roadway.
21:48 So again, removed any restrictions.
21:52 I think our earlier draft,
21:54 when we first submitted this,
21:55 talked about not allowing adults,
21:58 anybody 18 years or older on e-bikes or e-scooters
22:03 to ride, again, staying consistent with case discussion
22:07 and recommendation to focus on the operation behavior
22:10 rather than devices.
22:13 And so just like sidewalks,
22:15 we added all the appropriate devices,
22:17 electronic bicycles, low-speed micromobility devices,
22:19 as long as bicycles is legal to operate
22:21 in accordance with the state of regulations.
22:25 Here is where I added, or I kind of copied and pasted
22:29 that section on the age restriction.
22:33 And so the old restriction was eight.
22:38 From the research I did, it's hard to find an age
22:42 that someone's gonna throw a dart board or a dart at.
22:47 What I did find that some of the safe routes
22:48 to school and kind of the age of 10
22:52 was in some of those things.
22:54 That generally corresponds to kind of around fifth grade.
22:58 Kids are starting to ride the school on their own
23:00 a little bit more, getting them ready for middle school.
23:04 10 was, I say 10 is what I found
23:07 and what I'm currently recommending.
23:10 And that is for, you have to be 10 or older,
23:14 basically to ride anywhere in the roadway
23:17 without adult supervision.
23:19 And so that's an update,
23:22 and then realigned under this section.
23:26 Again, just like on the sidewalks,
23:31 certain areas can be restricted,
23:33 aspects of operation under the authority
23:35 of the Director of Public Safety
23:36 by putting signs up to the earlier discussion.
23:42 Again, we restricted mopeds and motorized bicycles
23:46 as well as e-motos from this infrastructure,
23:49 just based on their operating characteristics.
23:53 And then just like on sidewalks,
23:54 we added the emphasis on riding
23:57 so as to not constitute reckless operation.
24:04 Under the section on motorized bicycle operations,
24:08 just updated it to reinforce the prohibition on.
24:13 Prior to this, it just used to say sidewalks,
24:16 and so now it says bikeways, shared-use lanes,
24:19 and sidewalks, or shared-use paths, it should say.
24:28 And then I created a new section
24:31 based on the definition of an e-moto.
24:33 Again, Wild West, there's nothing out there
24:36 at the state level to tell you.
24:38 There's no licensing requirement
24:39 or anything for these devices.
24:42 And these are the devices that have an engine
24:47 that is in excess of 750 watts,
24:49 so it puts it outside of the category of an e-bike,
24:52 and it also provides assistance
24:55 beyond the current basic restriction on a Class 3 e-bike.
25:00 I think it provides assistance up to 28 miles an hour,
25:03 so an e-moto would take you beyond that.
25:05 And so it is these higher power, higher speed devices
25:10 that are out there.
25:12 I modeled the new section
25:15 on the motorized bicycle section
25:18 that's right above it,
25:19 but I obviously had to take some things out
25:21 because there is no state licensing requirement,
25:23 and we do not, to my understanding,
25:25 we do not have the authority
25:28 to implement a licensing requirement
25:31 for someone to have an operator's,
25:33 like a valid operator's license.
25:36 The section does classify this just like a moped.
25:38 It classifies it as a vehicle.
25:41 As I understand, that makes it,
25:42 there's some different aspects of that
25:44 in terms of police and enforcement
25:46 from their aspects of,
25:47 instead of being like a bicycle or a device
25:52 It restricts the age to 16.
25:54 This was obviously a point of discussion in case.
25:59 I originally had it at 14,
26:01 and it was a good discussion.
26:03 I took the recommendation.
26:05 There were two recommendations, 18 or 16,
26:09 and they voted for the 16.
26:13 You had to be 16 or older.
26:16 But just like a moped, you have to have a helmet.
26:18 The device has to have rear-view mirrors.
26:21 Just because of the increase,
26:22 we don't allow them on sidewalks,
26:24 shared-use paths, bikeways.
26:26 They're operating in the roadway in traffic.
26:28 They have to have the same things
26:29 that you would expect out of a moped or something
26:31 in terms of visibility and operating requirements.
26:36 And then just like mopeds and motorized bicycles,
26:40 restricted carrying passengers in operations
26:43 and bikeways, shared-use paths, and sidewalks.
26:47 So the section looked an awful lot
26:50 like the motorized bicycle section,
26:52 but without the licensing requirement
26:55 and some of the other things from the state.
27:03 This one I just was an ad
27:05 based on the last case recommendations,
27:10 is that the state of Ohio does require someone
27:12 to be 16 to operate a Class 3 e-bike.
27:16 So I pulled that in.
27:18 I created a new section, 373.142.
27:23 And this is just Class 3
27:25 electronic bicycle operation age requirement.
27:28 And so it is the only thing under that state law section
27:32 of 4511.522, per the discussion that we had at CASE,
27:38 that I could pull in.
27:39 And so it's exactly as it reads on the slide there
27:42 that I added in there.
27:43 It's just a single line under the heading
27:46 that references that code section
27:48 and reinforces that no person under the age of 16 years
27:51 of age shall operate a Class 3 e-bike.
27:53 However, you can ride,
27:55 a person under 16 may ride as a passenger
27:58 if that bike is designed to accommodate passengers.
28:02 That is straight from the state law.
28:05 I felt like it was better to put this
28:08 in the operating section than add it to the definition.
28:12 We had some discussion on that.
28:14 And so I decided just to put it in as a new section here.
28:22 And then the last piece is that 903.10,
28:27 the duty to repair and maintain sidewalks.
28:29 This basically creates a delineation
28:32 and a differentiation between sidewalks
28:34 and municipally designated shared use paths and bikeways.
28:38 And it designates the city as responsible
28:41 for the repair and maintenance
28:42 of those municipally designated pathways.
28:47 And that's specific to those shared use paths
28:51 so that we will maintain them
28:53 and it's the law that we maintain them.
28:56 And so that's kind of the summary,
28:58 the highlights of those main changes
29:00 that came out of CASE.
29:03 There was a lot of work through the meetings
29:06 prior to June and prior to that
29:08 and then to finalize in September.
29:10 I think that the last two recommendations
29:13 that really came to the vote
29:15 was the age for the e-moto operation
29:18 and then just making sure that we included
29:20 the age requirement for the class three e-bikes
29:25 So pending any questions, Mr. Chair?
29:29 Yeah, thanks, Assistant Director Boss.
29:31 I certainly think this helped me
29:35 with a couple of outstanding questions and issues I had.
29:37 So thanks for all your hard work
29:38 and thanks for the case board.
29:40 We have a member here today who
29:41 I'm thinking will probably like to speak,
29:42 but first I'll go to committee members
29:44 and then other members of council
29:45 who have questions or comments.
29:51 I guess I have a process question.
29:53 So there was a formal ordinance with some changes,
30:03 some of which are kept,
30:04 but a lot of which have been refined
30:06 through these word documents you provided,
30:09 which essentially show red lines
30:10 from current code provisions.
30:13 Process-wise, is the law department gonna need
30:14 to draft this up and put it in a substitute ordinance?
30:17 Is that what you're envisioning or?
30:19 Yeah, I would defer to the law department on that.
30:21 I would probably work with Jen Swallow to redraft it.
30:29 Yes, through the chair, absolutely.
30:31 And I mean, we're looking at three different areas
30:35 of the ordinance, so we'll take some meshing,
30:38 but absolutely, the law department will be involved.
30:45 Yeah, and so, like I think it was at the,
30:49 confirm whether it aligns.
30:51 So to me, that sounds like a substitute ordinance
30:53 as opposed to a new ordinance,
30:56 but I, that's a process, but important.
31:00 Because I do think that,
31:03 thank you, Assistant Director Ross.
31:04 I know this was a lot of work,
31:07 although I will say I think it shows the benefit
31:10 of case and some of the feedback we've gotten.
31:14 I'd like an opportunity to see it all in an ordinance
31:18 and print it out and spend some time with it,
31:21 but I think I'm 95% way there as far as what's in here.
31:25 I do wonder, and this is,
31:27 I wonder if there's any discussion about,
31:30 we just say maintain and repair shared use path
31:34 for the city's duty to repair
31:35 in the sidewalk section.
31:39 Wondering if we wanted to get specific
31:41 and say snow clearing as well,
31:42 or we just assume that maintenance has that.
31:45 I just wanted to ask,
31:47 because we have been telling people
31:49 that that includes snow removal,
31:53 and I intended to, I don't know what my colleagues feel,
31:56 to include snow removal on the shared use path.
31:58 So just curious if there's been any discussions
32:02 internally at the city about that.
32:04 I think that's assumed that that's included,
32:06 and that's assumed to include a responsible
32:08 for the repair and maintenance of the path,
32:12 that it's part of the maintenance as a clearing.
32:18 There's no pushback that I know from public works.
32:21 Great, and then secondly,
32:22 can you explain what the,
32:26 I'm trying to envision the plans for Bunce Road,
32:31 assuming that we may have others in the city.
32:35 and then the concrete is the apron for the driveway,
32:38 and the concrete is the,
32:39 or it could be asphalt for the driveway,
32:41 I guess, whatever a resident has.
32:45 So the city's maintenance obligation
32:46 will be basically edge-to-edge of the shared use path,
32:51 and then it's kind of on the resident
32:52 for the driveway, apron, and all those other things.
32:56 I would defer to public works,
32:57 and I would assume that it's edge-to-edge,
33:01 but I'm not gonna speak
33:03 for the director of public works on that.
33:06 It seems to be that's the way it written.
33:09 and this is actually one
33:10 where I might spend a little time massaging that language
33:12 because it's a little,
33:14 just concrete's different than asphalt,
33:15 what that looks like,
33:16 what that joint looks like,
33:17 I think, is gonna be important,
33:18 so I don't have a suggestion right now,
33:22 but I think I may work with Director Gordon on that.
33:25 Yeah, and Councilman Baker, just to answer your first,
33:27 I had not envisioned sending this back
33:29 to council for approval today.
33:32 I think we need some time with this,
33:33 so that was what I was thinking,
33:34 so it sounds radical or aligned.
33:37 Councilman Bullock.
33:39 It's been a helpful process,
33:41 and I wanna acknowledge Emily Lindbergh in the audience,
33:44 who's a member of the Case Board,
33:45 and also Safe Routes to Schools coordinator,
33:49 volunteer extraordinaire slash bike Lakewood board member.
33:53 She's done great work.
33:54 Emily, I don't know if you're gonna say something soon,
33:56 part of the meeting,
33:57 but you'd be welcome to be with the chair's permission.
34:03 On the point that Councilman Baker just mentioned,
34:07 if you've got a heavy snow,
34:09 the plow's gonna kick up a ridge in both directions.
34:14 You're gonna add, hopefully not a huge,
34:16 but nevertheless a non-zero snowbank to the apron,
34:19 so there's some thought to be.
34:22 It depends, you can get the brush one,
34:29 I know that we've had a couple different models
34:31 of sidewalk plows over the years.
34:35 I don't know what we've got right now,
34:36 I'd be surprised if we have a brush one.
34:38 But anyway, that's certainly worth a worthy topic.
34:43 I too would like to digest this,
34:45 just one more pass.
34:47 I'm increasingly comfortable with the approach.
34:52 However, the approach does turn upon
34:56 the city's ability to do some enforcement.
34:59 And I think what the chair,
35:01 to throw the chair softball in the strike zone,
35:03 is gonna advocate for is education.
35:06 Education and communication, communication, communication.
35:10 Because I think nobody in public safety
35:14 expects to be able to issue citations
35:17 in large enough numbers
35:18 that we're gonna be successful with that alone.
35:21 So these are big changes.
35:22 And in many ways, the city, the community is,
35:26 we're victims of our own success here.
35:28 We're expanding, walking, cycling.
35:31 And then the technology companies are meeting us
35:34 more than halfway with all this proliferation
35:36 of e-mobility devices.
35:38 And so that's adding more focus and velocity
35:43 which means the change that we're about to have
35:46 in the next short time period is gonna be larger,
35:52 at least in the public perception
35:53 than it has been in recent years.
35:55 So there's safety and there's perception of safety,
35:59 there's neighborhood norms,
36:01 the perception of neighborhood norms.
36:02 So there's gonna be a lot of people
36:04 on all sides of this question.
36:06 And I think we're gonna have to bring our A game
36:10 to the communication side of things.
36:14 Some of that's face to face,
36:15 a lot of it's gonna be repeated,
36:18 electronic communications, et cetera.
36:21 But do we, for the purement side,
36:25 if you've got pedestrians on,
36:28 let's take random example,
36:30 Bunce Road multi-use path,
36:33 or you've got people doing their yard work
36:35 of Bunce, you know, in the front yard,
36:37 and they've got to be on the multi-use path
36:41 and we've got people whizzing along,
36:45 those residents are gonna want,
36:47 and I think it's not unreasonable for them
36:49 to expect and desire some enforcement
36:52 and some city support for safety.
36:57 And of course, there's the version of a car backing out
37:01 and getting T-boned or the other way around,
37:04 backing into somebody.
37:06 Nobody wants that on either side of the equation.
37:09 So I think what we're defining here
37:15 is a coherent and rational outline,
37:18 but the value's gonna turn on how well we educate
37:25 Has that discussion been had on the administration side
37:28 or in the case board side?
37:31 Or is that, should I hold those questions for a follow-up?
37:37 I think we had a brief kind of initial discussions
37:42 about education, but we didn't get,
37:44 I mean, we're trying to get the code in place first,
37:46 I think, in terms of what we need to educate people on.
37:49 But I would say predominantly the focus
37:51 would be on the reckless operation
37:53 and then the expectations within each of these sections.
37:56 For both of them, if you're familiar
37:58 with the sidewalk regulations, it's very similar to that.
38:03 But yeah, there's definitely products
38:04 that could be developed around those.
38:05 They're pretty straightforward regulations
38:08 in terms of behavior, but I can't speak
38:10 to the enforcement of it either,
38:11 whether or not, I'm sure the police can.
38:15 I mean, have the police been engaged to date?
38:18 The police have been in every case meeting
38:21 and they participate, neighborhood officers participate
38:23 in the Safe Routes meetings, so they are engaged, yeah.
38:28 Okay, so it's a conversation that remains in front of us.
38:31 You know, and it may be straightforward
38:33 in some ways, that's good, but I think probably
38:36 we're just on the verge of a broader cross-section
38:39 of the community actually tuning in,
38:41 paying attention and experiencing this.
38:42 And I do know that people are pretty keyed up
38:45 about e-bikes already in the parks
38:46 and in the neighborhoods, so thank you.
38:49 And just to address one of your concerns,
38:52 Council President Hamilton-Steiner and myself
38:54 have been talking about this,
38:55 that education is peace specifically.
38:58 We've seen other communities roll this out,
39:00 kind of a program involving the police
39:03 that walk through these things
39:04 so people have a better understanding.
39:06 And then also trying to figure out
39:07 how we can involve the schools in that conversation
39:09 because we think that's the best way
39:11 to reach a lot of these kids and their parents.
39:13 So it's an ongoing conversation as well
39:15 that we're certainly aware of
39:16 and I think it is critically important to this.
39:22 Council President Keppel.
39:25 Yeah, and I'll just add to that too
39:26 is our public information officer
39:29 is also an ex-official member of CASE
39:31 so and helped put together the signs in the parks
39:35 so hopefully it can be helpful with this.
39:39 So a couple of things, so thank you,
39:41 I just wanna first of all say thank you,
39:43 Assistant Director Boss for all of your work on this
39:46 and thanks to the CASE Board.
39:48 This is, I know it's been a long road
39:50 but this is what we envisioned
39:52 when we wrote up the CASE Board legislation
39:56 so I think it's a better product
39:58 and we get all the different voices
40:00 because we know everyone uses the rights of way
40:03 so it's helpful to have representation
40:05 from all the different types of users.
40:07 Couple things, one thing in 301.182
40:12 there's language that says solely for use by a child
40:16 and I'm thinking that that is intended to mean
40:21 like the little motorized toys,
40:23 like the little cars that, yeah,
40:26 the Hot Wheels kind of thing
40:28 but I just wonder a little bit about clarifying that
40:33 because the new Emoto section may override that
40:38 because part of the concern that I have
40:42 and I think a lot of folks have about
40:45 without putting us on them,
40:49 I would, I think of as Emotos that a lot of kids,
40:55 we're seeing a lot of young people writing around
41:00 the city and that's part of the concern
41:02 and so if a parent buys an Emoto device
41:06 solely for use of a child,
41:09 are those two things in conflict
41:10 or does, we don't have to answer this today
41:13 and that's a question when law is drafting this
41:15 but it's just something to be thinking about
41:17 if it's overridden by the section saying
41:20 that those types of devices cannot be
41:22 on the sidewalks period,
41:24 then it doesn't matter if it's solely for use of a child
41:27 but just wanting to kind of clarify that.
41:32 But the intention is the Hot Wheels kind of thing.
41:35 And then the other thing I want to mention,
41:41 373.10, we talked a little about some of the behavior things.
41:49 There's already language about cyclists
41:54 riding on the sidewalks needing to walk the bicycle
41:57 if there's a large amount of pedestrian traffic
42:01 and then it also mentions not riding at a speed
42:05 greater than an ordinary walk
42:06 but that's specific to around certain areas.
42:13 So when we were talking about that with the speed limits,
42:15 it's sort of mentioned in there
42:17 so that gives a hint also about reckless operation.
42:22 And then I also want to mention 373.101,
42:30 the riding on sidewalks and shared use path.
42:33 It doesn't, whereas the section,
42:38 the previous section, the 301,
42:40 talking about riding on sidewalks,
42:42 it specifically calls out that a cyclist,
42:47 if passing a person needs to give an audible signal,
42:51 walk the bicycle if it's,
42:52 but then it specifically calls out
42:54 if passing a blind person
42:56 needs to get off and walk the bicycle.
42:58 And that is not on the shared use path
43:00 and I just wondered if that was discussed at all
43:03 or if the thought is that the path is wide enough
43:06 or if it was just not discussed
43:08 or I just wondered if that had been looked at at all.
43:11 It wasn't discussed.
43:12 I think in drafting this,
43:15 I think just recognizing the physical limitations
43:19 of our sidewalks versus appropriately designed
43:23 shared use path was the main difference.
43:33 And the shared use path may be wide enough
43:35 that it's not an issue,
43:36 but I just wanted to see if that had been
43:39 thought about at all.
43:40 And then this will probably get addressed
43:42 when law drafts this,
43:47 A is missing three.
43:50 It goes one, two, and four.
43:54 I know they're working from a lot of different versions
43:56 and taking things in and out,
43:59 so that's a minor thing.
44:00 But again, I just want to say
44:03 how much I appreciate all the work on this
44:05 from everyone, all the different departments
44:08 that participate in CASE
44:10 and all of the CASE board members as well.
44:14 Any other members of council who'd like to comment?
44:17 Councilman Vickstein.
44:18 Thank you, Chair Evans
44:19 and thank you, Assistant Director Bass.
44:21 Thank you, members of CASE.
44:22 I really appreciate the recommendations here.
44:25 because I want to make sure we give people
44:26 from the audience a chance to speak as well.
44:29 I particularly appreciate,
44:31 as someone who has an eight-year-old
44:32 and sees how eight-year-olds generally behave,
44:35 I really appreciate the roadway operation provision.
44:38 I think that feels like a more appropriate age,
44:43 as kids are starting to approach middle school
44:44 and may need to become more mobile in doing so.
44:49 I also really appreciate the emphasis
44:51 on addressing unsafe behavior
44:56 and focusing on reckless operation.
44:58 My question, and this is really just to clarify
45:01 when constituents bring it up,
45:02 but I know you guys went out of your way
45:05 to establish consistency in a variety of ways,
45:09 but with regards to the existing park policy,
45:13 there would be an inconsistency,
45:14 and correct me if I'm wrong,
45:15 in that the CASE recommendation
45:18 for sidewalks and shared-use paths allows e-bikes,
45:25 they're allowed only if the motor is disengaged,
45:27 is my understanding.
45:29 And I believe that there's probably a case to be made
45:32 for why that makes sense,
45:35 just the inherent difference between
45:37 an area that's used for recreation
45:39 versus an area that's used primarily for mobility
45:42 and maybe even just the level of congestion
45:45 in young people who might be in a park.
45:47 But I just wanted to make sure,
45:49 and I know that it's a different situation,
45:52 but that I understand the rationale properly
45:54 so that when people point out
45:56 that perceived inconsistency,
45:58 I can at least speak to it properly.
46:02 I really can't speak to it, I'm sorry,
46:03 like in terms of that.
46:08 What I can't speak to is why we focused
46:10 on the things that we did.
46:12 I think trying to get it,
46:14 so towards education and enforcement,
46:16 of trying not to make regulations
46:20 be so overly onerous
46:24 or that they require,
46:26 like is a police officer gonna know
46:28 whether or not your motor is engaged
46:31 or disengaged in a park?
46:35 We talked a lot about the need to allow people
46:38 to use the devices that they need to use.
46:41 A lot of times the e-bikes,
46:42 they're used by people that maybe a regular bike
46:46 would be difficult for them to use
46:48 or they need that assistance or whatever
46:50 just to operate it in the same manner
46:52 that you would operate a bicycle.
46:54 And I think that's the direction
46:56 that we ended up after some good long
46:59 and significant discussion
47:01 and kind of arrived at a common position of that.
47:04 Again, regulating the behavior,
47:09 not the specific, like regulating device,
47:11 I think, it puts the enforcement arm
47:14 and the police in a bad position
47:16 where they're then having to determine,
47:19 you know, from, I don't know,
47:22 10 yards away, 20 yards away,
47:25 Is that a regular bike?
47:26 Is that a class one e-bike?
47:28 Is that a class two e-bike?
47:31 And then I would defer to Emily,
47:35 I'm certainly not an expert on these devices
47:37 that don't have an e-bike
47:38 but I don't even know if there are models
47:40 that you can disengage the engine
47:42 based on the classification.
47:44 Like some of them, I think the engine just works
47:47 and provides assistance within that speed range
47:49 that is designed to provide you to.
47:51 I'm sure there are others that have that option and stuff
47:54 but it's a hard thing to enforce.
47:57 And so I think I can explain the way
48:00 that the case and the discussion went
48:03 and how we arrived at what we arrived at.
48:06 But that's certainly within the purview of the code
48:09 and again, it's a policy decision to make that
48:13 where you come up with additional restrictions
48:15 and it's a policy decision.
48:21 Yeah, it seems like that we've given
48:23 the public safety director broad discretion
48:25 to do other things outside of what's here
48:29 and to me, the public safety did so
48:32 in that particular case in the park.
48:33 So we're just codified.
48:34 I would believe it's appropriate.
48:35 It's appropriate based on the timing
48:37 and you can more timely respond to concerns
48:41 and things that come up, so.
48:44 Councilperson Hamilton-Steiner.
48:46 Thank you, Chair Evans.
48:48 I know we want to get to public comment.
48:50 Do we want to clarify what we mean by Imodo?
48:56 So I think Imodo might be a newer term
48:59 for folks in going off of what President Couple
49:02 was talking about, the items
49:04 that are specifically geared for kids
49:05 and if you look at, and when I Google that,
49:09 up pops electric dirt bikes
49:11 and I believe that's what we're talking about
49:13 is really electric dirt bikes.
49:15 So do we want to say that
49:16 because even on this website that I'm on,
49:19 it says, designed with child-friendly features.
49:21 These dirt bikes are perfect
49:23 for fostering confidence, adventure,
49:24 and a lot for outdoor exploration
49:26 and then it goes on and on.
49:27 So a parent sees this, they're gonna think,
49:30 great, this is wonderful for my child.
49:33 They'll have so much fun.
49:34 What's the harm in this?
49:36 So I think we may want to define
49:39 a little bit better what we mean by Imodo
49:41 and if we are referring to specifically
49:43 electric dirt bikes, let's just say electric dirt bikes.
49:47 So I think that's clearer
49:49 and then at least for parents, they know,
49:52 well, if we buy this, it's gonna be a waste of money.
49:55 We're not gonna be able to use this in Lakewood.
49:57 So just something to think about.
49:59 All right, throw it in there at the 10th hour.
50:03 I can just provide you my perspective on this
50:06 is there are a thousand different types
50:09 of devices right now
50:10 and there will be 10,000 by Christmas.
50:14 I'm not trying to be quip on it,
50:16 but we tried to, at least in my effort
50:19 of trying to define what an Imodo is
50:21 was trying to make it the clearest definition
50:25 that of everything kind of that is
50:29 beyond the scope of an e-bike
50:31 in terms of its performance envelope.
50:33 It may look like a million different things,
50:37 but if it's, but there are Imodos
50:40 that look like e-bikes.
50:42 There are Imodos that look like dirt bikes.
50:45 There are tons of them that are out there,
50:47 but if it doesn't fall within the classification
50:50 of a low-speed micromobile device
50:52 or an e-bike as defined by the state,
50:54 I'm basically calling it an Imodo
50:55 because it's, and again, I could be wrong,
50:58 but I'm just saying based on my perception
51:00 and the discussion and kind of what I took in
51:03 from Case and the discussion there
51:04 is that the concern is driven by more powerful devices
51:10 that are unregulated in their speed
51:13 regardless of what they look like
51:15 or what they're called,
51:17 and so I settled on Imodo.
51:20 You could call it an electric motorcycle,
51:23 but then we talked about that at Case
51:25 is that that has its own connotation with it
51:28 because there are electric motorcycles
51:29 that you have to get a motorcycle operator's license,
51:33 and this is different than that, so.
51:36 Yeah, no, and I hear you.
51:37 It's just, you know, if you were pairing,
51:41 you were going to Google this,
51:43 it could be confusing because there's a website
51:45 that uses and refers themselves as Imodo,
51:48 but it has e-bikes on there,
51:49 and so in other things that you can buy,
51:52 so I think we just may wanna just think
51:54 a little bit more and maybe just be clear
51:57 with what we mean and just state what we mean.
52:01 I think, and that goes to Councilman Bullock's
52:03 and others' points earlier.
52:04 The education piece on this is like,
52:07 so I got Imodo, you know, one of the,
52:10 I think it might have been Councilman Baker
52:11 to send me a thing from Westlake.
52:14 They've got a whole, it's like a menu
52:16 of what's allowed, what's not,
52:17 and the regulations that it is.
52:20 Once this is adapted and goes into place,
52:23 we can make our own of those,
52:25 and I think that is where,
52:27 if you call it Imodo or whatever we wanna call it,
52:30 the pictures that are then associated with that,
52:33 and then it should be as simple as a parent
52:36 checking the wattage on an engine
52:39 because they should have a wattage rating on the engine.
52:43 Is it more than 750 watts or is it not?
52:47 And I think more and more states,
52:50 I don't know if the state of Ohio
52:51 is gonna go in this direction,
52:52 but more and more states are requiring
52:55 the e-bikes to have classification stickers on them
52:59 that tell you what class they are,
53:01 and so, again, not something that we can regulate,
53:04 but the state could regulate,
53:05 like Maryland and other states that do that,
53:09 and so that was just my perspective
53:11 and the discussion was trying to make it as easy,
53:14 and we can provide a lot of pictures,
53:16 but if someone just looking at a device saying,
53:19 is that engine more powerful than 750 watts,
53:22 it's not an e-bike, then,
53:24 and it will take your kid at 28 miles an hour
53:27 or higher in traffic, so.
53:32 Thanks, any other comments from council?
53:36 Just briefly, just to, on that,
53:39 is when Councilman Hamilton-Siner
53:43 and Vice President Baker and I met with the mayor
53:45 to talk about, just because we were hearing so much
53:48 about the, especially young people riding the emotos
53:51 and in the parks as well,
53:54 and so we talked a little about
53:55 what action we could take quickly,
53:57 and the mayor's, the executive branch
54:01 can act a lot faster than the legislative branch can
54:03 and should, because we need to be deliberative,
54:06 and so that was where we thought
54:08 the quick action of the signage in the park
54:12 that is really intended to address
54:15 that mostly the emotos and riding in the parks
54:19 and irresponsible behavior
54:22 into Councilman Bixenstein's point
54:25 is a little different,
54:26 because a park is more of a destination,
54:28 and a lot of people using that,
54:30 so it was rather than a place of transportation,
54:34 active transportation,
54:36 but it was also a way that we could take quick action.
54:39 This body could always legislate that more
54:42 if we wanted to, but then the other thought
54:44 was also trying to get this passed
54:48 as quickly as we could.
54:50 Good legislation passed as quickly as possible,
54:54 because we do want parents to get this information
54:57 sooner rather than later
54:58 so that they aren't investing in devices
55:01 that their students won't be able to use on our sidewalks.
55:10 So Ms. Lindberg, you know the drill.
55:22 I just wanted to come here and hear the discussion.
55:27 I think it was a great discussion
55:29 that you've all had today.
55:32 I think Assistant Director Boss
55:36 made some really great points about,
55:41 and arguments about reminding you all
55:45 about the different uses of e-bikes and these devices.
55:50 I know that there has been a lot of issues recently
55:54 with children using e-motos and using devices improperly.
56:01 But we can't forget that a lot of these devices
56:06 are being used because parents are taking their kids
56:13 to school and older adults who maybe can't operate
56:20 a traditional bicycle anymore can continue their mobility.
56:27 Just before I came here today,
56:29 I was listening to a podcast about an autistic person
56:34 who doesn't have the executive function to drive a vehicle
56:39 but he can ride a bicycle.
56:43 And so we need more infrastructure
56:47 that is all ages and abilities.
56:50 So I really appreciate all of this thoughtfulness
56:53 and discussion on this right now.
56:56 That said, I really liked the discussion
57:02 about the sidewalk clearing and the shared use clearing
57:09 and I'm excited that we now have a definition
57:13 for bikeways which includes those on-street bike lanes
57:19 because unfortunately they don't get cleared
57:22 of snow properly year after year after year.
57:27 We've had these bike lanes and those snow plows
57:30 are pushing that snow right into the bike lane
57:32 and it's not getting cleared.
57:34 So I'm really happy to see that language.
57:41 And then finally I just wanted to reiterate
57:44 what I said last time I came in here
57:47 which is that I would strongly recommend
57:50 that you consider not allowing these emotos
57:56 even on our streets.
57:58 This is something that other communities
58:04 These like has been just, we have discussed here today
58:07 these are not regulated vehicles.
58:10 These are very powerful vehicles
58:13 and just saying that you need a helmet isn't enough.
58:15 It's a regular bike helmet going,
58:19 when you're going 28 miles per hour
58:21 or over 28 miles per hour is not going to do any good.
58:25 It has to be a specific bike helmet
58:27 or it has to be a specific helmet.
58:31 So then that's just one example
58:32 but like these are dangerous.
58:36 They don't require any kind of regulation
58:40 in terms of a license or registration, you know,
58:45 lights, you know, so much.
58:48 And so just requiring any old helmet
58:50 and a mirror is just not gonna cut it.
58:55 These things should only be allowed
58:57 on private property, the end.
59:00 That is my personal recommendation
59:03 after going to the active transportation conference
59:06 and the research that I've done.
59:10 So yeah, thank you so much for, you know,
59:14 really taking the time and considering all of these things.
59:20 Thank you, Ms. Lindbergh
59:21 and thank you for your service to the case board.
59:24 As I think President Keppel said,
59:26 I think this demonstrates exactly why we put that in place
59:29 and it led to a lot better legislation
59:32 that we hopefully can adopt soon.
59:35 Do we need to have an action on this?
59:42 So if anything else before this board,
59:46 I'll make a motion to defer ordinance 40-2025.
59:51 Second, all in favor, aye.
59:53 Motion carries, nothing else to hear tonight.
59:56 Give us a couple minutes for regular meeting of council.