We are going to call
this February 9th special meeting of
this city council to order at 6:30 p.m.
And there is a remote aspect to our
meeting and our council president Barb.
Michelle is attending virtually tonight
and we are first going to start with
public comments and we're going to ask
you if you have public comment please
raise your hand. If you want to raise
your hand virtually you can do that as
well. Not seeing any public comment we
will now close public comments and you
can always submit comments to us via
email and that is city council
atisqua.gov up. And we will now go into
the main portion of today's meeting,
which is the special council meeting on
transportation. And we're going to go to
Andrea Ler.
>> Good evening. Just one moment while I
pull up the presentation.
Council member Joe has found a song we
can play during times like this.
We have to find out if the rights the
song can be purchased for 112's aqua
beanie.
I will see the musician tomorrow. I'll
negotiate on behalf of the city for you.
Looks like we have liftoff.
We do. All right. The system has caught
up with us. It now allows me to share
the
information. Let's get back to the top
here.
All right,
sorry for that delay. Good evening
everyone. I'm Andrea Leonard, deputy
city administrator, and we're here to
talk about various uh topics related to
transportation and what the
administration's priorities are
regarding transportation. So, um we have
a few
presentations kind of backtoback planned
for you this evening. The first to kick
us off, Mayor Mullet will be discussing
his transportation priorities and the
administration's transportation
priorities and approach for 2026 and
beyond. Uh including capital projects,
TIP update and which is the
transportation improvement program
update and the transportation benefit
district funds. Also, city priorities in
regards to light rail and our upcoming
light rail station. Then we'll have
Bennett Ashbar, streets manager, uh
discuss pavement management. And then
I'll be back to talk about Metroflex and
microtransit options. And we have a
bunch of questions for council and
direction needed tonight, all related to
each of those projects, including
feedback from you this evening on the
administration's capital priorities and
how they will inform the upcoming tip
update. As a reminder, that
transportation improvement program is
going to come back to council in June uh
because it needs to be adopted by July
1st per state law. Then we have a
question related to light rail and our
approach to light rail. How does council
want to be kept informed and engaged on
light rail work with sound transit? More
information coming in the mayor's
presentation. And pavement management
techniques. Should the city continue to
prioritize cost effectiveness in the
treatments we use on our roads or does
council want to set a higher aesthetic
standard for the roads and have that be
the guiding priority? And then finally,
Metrflex or Microtransit goals. This is
a return from last fall when council
said we need to come back and talk about
what's the definition of success for our
microransit program and for metrlex and
we can also discuss a few other options
at that time and get your feedback on
those. And so as we begin here,
uh, Mayor Mullet.
Okay, here we go. My official tech skill
challenge. Oh, look at that. That's like
a low enough bar I can jump over it in
the IT world. I appreciate that. Uh so I
think we're going to start off with and
this comes back from the council retreat
that we just had last month and kind of
highlighting that in the 2728
uh banium budget from the
administration. you will see a large
priority placed on maintaining the
infrastructure that we currently have
and the payment management program which
you're going to hear about from Bennett
tonight is is kind of the core of that
of how you choose to make sure you have
capital budget resources so that program
can continue and be effective and you
won't slip behind.
So here's the chart that shows historic
funding from the city of Isiqua when it
comes to pavement management or street
overlay, whatever you want to call it.
But you can see that there were several
years where we were under a million
dollars in terms of money that was put
into the program. We did have one point
where it dipped down. We then did use
ARPA dollars to have it go back up. The
last couple years, it's kind of been
around that $ 1.4 to$ 1.5 million mark.
And the plan from the current
administration is to actually fund it
back at the line where we're saying we
need to be funding this so we're not
falling behind in terms of maintaining
our infrastructure which would be in
that $2.7 million range which would
actually be record investments for the
city of Isiqua in terms of street
overlay. And you will see a much more
in-depth presentation later on from
Bennett in terms of how you can smartly
spend those dollars and and try to get
as much life out of your streets as
possible before you actually have to do
the full street overlay. And that'll be
the council discussion. So that's the
main priority. The second thing we want
to be really clear with our community
about is we are going to finish the
trail that comes in from the South Lake
Samish communities into town. Uh these
communities were annexed in Isiqua 20
years ago now and so this has been a
priority for these communities since
annexation. Obviously the cost of this
project is not getting any cheaper. It
also happens to currently overlap with
all the covert work happening via a
washd right now, which basically means
we can't the soonest we can start work
on this project is the summer of 2028.
But we also want to be very clear with
these communities that we will start
work on this trail in the summer of
2028. And we're making this public
promise that it will happen, it will be
done, and it will finally be complete.
And we think it has a variety of
benefits. We don't know yet how we're
going to score in terms of grant funding
on this proposal, but if it has to be,
we're committed to pay the entire thing,
but it also we're going to be as
aggressive as we can in the next couple
years are trying to secure grants for
this project as we move forward. And if
people have questions, my I encourage
folks to ask them as we go. You not need
to wait till the end. I find it much
more helpful to have it as you go
through each slide.
Yes, council member Joe.
>> Um, quick question. So, you mentioned
the council manic bonds repaid by uh
transportation benefit district
revenues. Do you have a sense of what's
the total like what's the maximum amount
of bonds we could get in terms of
capital funding?
>> Yes. And it is roughly $30 million from
bonding the TBD money. And we also have
$4 to5 million in traffic impact fee
funds that we also will have access to.
But finishing the portion of the trail
that we currently haven't paid for
through design funding is basically half
of that. It's roughly $19 million. For
us to finish this trail coming in from
the South Lakes manage communities will
eat up literally over half of those
dollars. But you will be left with a
portion of I think the whole proposal
you're hearing tonight is that the money
that is left over from that we want to
try to figure out the smartest way to
invest those dollars in our community.
Take advantage of the fact that we can't
start that project till 2028. So how do
we make the best use of projects coming
up in 2027 that we can invest in?
>> Council member Nicholas. Yeah, I' I'd
like to just double click and question
the premise that we can't start until
2028. Uh I I know that's that's the
commonly stated belief. Um and I
understand it's around the culvert. I
understand why we can't complete the
this I I asked a question a few meetings
back of how how long is this culvert
area? It looked on the map like it's a
few hundred feet, something like that
max. Um, this is a long road that's
significantly longer than that that
culvert section alone. Um, why couldn't
we do everything but that? Um, it will
obviously not be completed at the
culvert, but I would think the final
date could be pushed sooner if we were
to start the parts that we could do
sooner sooner. Um, and in any situation,
there will be a a less than optimal
diversion around that culvert during
construction. So, it's it's no worse off
than it would be not having that that
complete. and the rest of it will be
better sooner.
>> So, I'm going to give you a
like former life state construction
chair example, but then I'm going to
phone a friend to have Emily Moan come
up to address this question. But I think
the challenge I found funding state
capital projects was people want to bid
like they mobilize and get their
workforce there and if they have to
leave and come back, it tends to be not
very efficient from a cost perspective.
So you normally wait to start the
projects when once everyone's on site,
they remain on site until the project is
done. You don't end up having leg
periods where people move on to a
different project and then have to come
back. But that's my guess. But Emily, do
you want to come on up to address that
question?
>> Good evening, Emily Moon, public works
director. I think there are a variety of
reasons why um we have this sequence the
way that it is. First uh WAT has a lot
of disruptive work. It's not just in the
vicinity of the of the covert. So first
phase includes uh utility relocation
that runs the whole length of the road,
not just at where the covert is being
installed.
Um it's not just the culvert. They're
building a whole bridge. So I would
argue our project is going to be
underway. Earlier we're building the
bridge first. Washd is building that for
us. So, there's that. There's, as the
mayor had said, uh, mobilization,
demobilization, having multiple
contractors with multiple different
project owners and oversight all in the
same area at the same time would mean it
would be very complex to make sure we
have the level of accountability and
oversight. If those contractors are
getting in each other's way, undoing
each other's work, making it more
difficult to get the project done, I
think ultimately it may take just as
long or longer if you have those sorts
of conflicts. So that's just some of the
reasons why.
>> And I think Council Member Nichols, we
all share your kind of sense of urgency
on this project. We know this community
has waited a long time. I think our hope
tonight is to make a very public
statement to the residents in South Lake
Samish that it is a priority. We are
going to do it. We're committing to
doing it even if we don't have any
success in securing outside grants to
help fund the project. This is going to
be paid for entirely by city of his
squad dollars if that's what it takes to
get it done. But it's a priority and it
will be done. And yes, it would be nice
if we could do it quicker. Uh and if we
find ways to speed it up, I think we'll
pursue those options. But I think right
now that's roughly the plan.
Oh, Council Member Marsh,
>> thank you. Um,
this has been going on for a while and
those residents really need the ability
to have that safe transportation. Have
we considered or is there an option to
utilize something in a temporary way to
provide um a protected bike and walk
lane? um that would allow a little bit
less exposure to vehicles on that very
tight roadway.
>> I would suggest something like a plastic
baller.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I think we're open to those
conversations. And so I will admit at
this point I don't have any cost
estimates of what those would look like.
But if there are things we need to do on
a temporary basis to help make it easier
to travel that route for the next 2 or 3
years while the project's waiting to
start and even after it starts, we still
have a construction window obviously.
Okay. So, I think those are all being
considered, but standing here right now,
I can't give you any good cost estimates
of what those would be.
Okay.
So, oh, Council Member Nichols,
>> this is a quick followup for the the
bridge that Wash is building. Does that
have the same um
I forget what this is called exactly,
but the number of lanes and widths for
pedestrian and uh bike uh access as the
the rest of the planned?
>> Yes, the answer it will accommodate
that. So, there won't be a narrowing
there. Uh okay, the next update now
these are a list of projects that are
almost entirely except for a couple
exceptions design funded projects. Not
these are not going to be in
construction in 2026. Uh so front and
sunset and when we talk about front and
sunset it's the sunset portion. We're
trying to make it easier to have better
flow whether you're coming from the east
or the west on sunset approaching that
intersection. Black Nugget wall is
something council member Martz and I
were dealing with when I was on the
council 15 years ago in terms of how we
stabilize that is just existing
retaining wall is staying we're building
a second wall outside of that wall and
that's how we're going to provide the
structural integrity but once again this
is design work northwest Gilman bridge
uh once again these are design work
projects where grants are coming in the
IT is an actual project that we do want
to get done in 2026 and the the main
focus because of our IT investment in
terms of intelligent transportation
system and this is trying to line up
your signals the best you can is kind of
focusing from front and sunset all the
way down towards Gilman and then Fourth
Avenue and that's where the focus is
going to be. Uh the other
yeah this so the rest of these it is a
it's a substantial amount of money a
large majority of this money is coming
from outside resources not directly from
city of squad dollars but we are
spending the design money so those
projects will be ready to go into
construction next year in 2027.
So, this brings us I think to Oh,
council member, deputy president,
>> I have a question about that list and
you're going to tell me that you you've
already told this. I'm just maybe having
a senior moment, but remind me the the
pedestrian walkway along 900. That's our
responsibility, right? Where does that
fit in all this?
>> Well, it is now done. We did it. So,
it's it opened last Thursday. I think
Council Member Nichols rode his bike
through there. We made it unceremonial
ribbon cutting of
So, I think the message, the moral of
that story is a squeaky wheel does get
the grease and our staff did a good job
of being the squeaky wheel with Wash Dot
and they got it done last week.
>> Well, that happened a lot faster than
Hillside Park, I just have to say. But,
all right. Thank you.
Okay. Okay. So, this I think gets into
council member Jeng's kind of question
of what do we have in terms of excess
revenue after we finish this trail
coming in from the south lake Samish
communities and there's one project on
this list that we just saw the front and
sunset where it was already part of our
you know transportation improvement plan
we have design all ready to go on that
so that is one project we are committing
to doing next year once the design is
done we would like to get that project
wrapped up and done and you're talking a
project that's roughly $2.4 million if
you were to put a rough estimate on the
total value design and construction.
The other projects, I'm going to be
honest with you right now, we don't
know. We don't have enough information
to say which ones make the most sense.
And so I think this is where we're
looking for council feedback tonight
because this is just a sample list of
potential project ideas. Uh, one's an
extra leftbound left turn lane when you
get off exit fe 15 as you're heading
west towards Seattle. Another one is a
roundabout where second avenue hits
Front Street just south of the high
school. Uh, we also talked about
extending the right turn lane into Talis
further down towards where Squawk
Mountain Nursery begins. So, you could
kind of double the length of that right
turn lane to make it easier for Talis
residents to exit evening afternoon
traffic congestion. But, this is just a
sample list. And at this point in time
today, we don't have enough modeling or
enough cost estimates to even be able to
weigh in on which one of these would
make the most sense. And this list is
not I mean, this is where we're really
looking for ideas. And so ideas from
people on the council. I've actually
made an open ask to Isqua staff members
who spend a lot of time driving around
our city like in the public works
department. We're looking for
suggestions of place where we can make
smart investments to provide congestion
relief. Oh, Council Member Walsh.
Yeah. Uh, I guess I was going to ask, we
have a whole list of tip projects that
do not have funding associated to them.
So, how do you propose balancing out the
idea of adding new projects compared to
things that we've had on the list that
we haven't been able to fund? things
like the IT project which would provide
smart traffic signals which a lot of
people have asked for or um the Squawk
Mountain multimodal project which would
provide bike and walk um pathways to a
neighborhood that's been in the area
without any um for a while. So I guess
I'm trying to understand you're coming
in here new. We have this whole list of
projects. Um how do those ideas compare?
I mean, I think it's
I don't think there's one silver bullet
that solves the traffic challenges
facing our community. So, it we'll see
in a further slide, is one of the things
we do plan to fund immediately with
these dollars. And I think it's actually
a legitimate use of transportation
bonding dollars to actually complete
specifically like we mentioned earlier,
the front and sunset down to Gilman over
to fourth as kind of the priority
corridor. We want to make sure the IT
investments are focused on making that
part of the city move more efficiently.
In terms of multimodal, like those
projects are all on the list. Like just
because they're not listed up here as
potential example ones, like they're all
things we're willing to look at as
potential things moving forward and and
how you balance. I think the challenge
with the current list of projects is we
have a lot of projects that are
extremely expensive. And as we talked
about earlier, we're really talking
about investing 10 to$15 million as
efficiently as we can between now and
the summer of 2028 because we know the
the trail projects can eat up majority
of our capacity. And we have a lot of
projects on that list that exceed that
by a factor of five, if not six or
seven. And so this is our challenge is
those projects will still be on the
list, but we're trying to figure out
what can we do in the meantime to
provide congestion relief rather than
just doing nothing because we have no
money falling out of the sky to pay for
a lot of those projects right now.
But everything you come up with, please,
we want to hear about it and and those
are the ideas we're looking for in the
months ahead. In terms of the other
safety examples, I think having the
crosswalk by the Village Theater and the
one on Black Nugget as you kind of go
from the Fred Meyer complex over, you
know, towards a 24-hour fitness complex,
uh, traffic calming around schools,
sidewalk extensions, these are all
things that we think as we try to
identify good projects we could get done
in 2027. But this is where we want to
work with the council to figure out what
what list makes the most sense.
Council member Jen.
>> Yeah, I mean looking at the
transportation improvement plan, I do
think there's a lot of items on there
that are very very large and there is
one in there called strategic small
capital projects. So I think identifying
which projects might fall into that
bucket is probably good. Um I think the
Squawk Mountain sidewalk in my view
would be a big priority. Similar, you
know, somewhat similar to the um
Northwest Seamish uh road improvements
projects where it's something we've
talked about for a long time. We
approved the it, you know, last year we
approved the study but with no funding
source. So it would be ideal if I and
the cost is not that much. It's like one
or two million maybe. So definitely
seems like a priority. One other thing I
would flag that is not in our
transportation improvement project is um
so basically once you get past the
highlands like um on Isiqua once you
cross isqua Fall City Road and go north
from there there are some neighborhoods
where there's like no safe route to get
from there to the highlands. So, you
know, when we were doorbelling there um
in the fall, the parents there were
like, you know, my kid rides their bike.
It's very scary. Would be great if you
could do a sidewalk there. There's one
section of it where there's like new
development. So, they put in the
sidewalk, but there's no sidewalk before
or after that. So, would be a good
opportunity to kind of, you know, fill
in those gaps. But those are the perfect
examples of why we're doing this
outreach now is we want to be able to
look at the list of projects, try to do
our best cost estimates of what they
are, and then you try to make smart
investments from there. And yes, the
projects that come in that$1 to2 million
price range are very appealing. When you
only have 10 or $15 million to spend,
we're trying to avoid doing one $12
million project that maybe just helps
one part of Isiqua, but doesn't actually
help the entire community. who were
really trying to figure out how do we
strategically invest dollars throughout
the Esqua community in a way where no
matter what part of town you live in,
you feel like some improvements were
made. We'll go to Council Member Nichols
and then Deputy Council President Marts.
>> Um on the same uh theme as Council
Member Jang brought up, the uh so all I
think all of the projects up there are
at least on this list, which I
understand is not intended to be
comprehensive, but just to to make the
point, um they're all focused on car
improvements. Um we there's lots of
places we need to improve our safety and
throughput for vehicle for motor
vehicles to to your goal of spending
some of this lower dollar more
efficiently. So, there's likely some
pedestrian and uh other mo and cycle
mobility options out there that might be
smaller projects that could have a
significant impact and I would encourage
us to think through those carefully and
look at them and see if those could be
um
>> and and I I know we have two members of
our council who are very use or have a
lot of knowledge about the various bike
choke points in our city. So that's is
we want to hear the feedback like we are
looking for really specific concrete
examples of projects like you're talking
about council member Nichols so we can
try to get cost estimates of those
projects and that is the entire point of
our exercise here tonight is to say we
want to we have we're trying to label
for the council the rough amount of
money we have to try to invest and we're
trying to figure out what's the best way
we can get the most out of those
investments and it means all modes of
transportation. So yes, I think the very
bottom example here on this list you can
see is not anything to do with car
movement, but uh yes, the ones in the
middle, we just use car examples. Deputy
President Marks, thank you. At the risk
of going back to cars, uh how do we get
our arms around the potential um traffic
improvements on I mean in my in my gold
standard would be that like you'd have a
before and after from Torstston on like
every every little thing, right?
Obviously, we're not going to run 50
major traffic studies. Do we have an
ability to understand the potential
traffic uh ramifications of of some of
the some of these small to midsize uh
improvements?
>> Yes, is the answer. So, that's what we
have to determine what that list of
projects we want to run through that is.
But yes, we feel like if we know what
we're looking at, we can for one, you
can just do some actual, you know, where
you lay down the little chords people
run over to kind of give you data
counts. Uh, sure,
>> but we also can go to traffic modeling.
So, I think the plan is to
>> to figure out the list and then try to
figure out what the models say, which
ones will be the most helpful, and then
figure out how much they cost.
>> So, my new favorite verb is t-shirting.
So, do we have the ability to t-shirt
these and say small, medium, large, uh,
impact or maybe small, slightly less
small, medium?
>> I we will by the time we've looked at
them. I think we'll have a very good
sense. I think what we can't say right
now is
projects that are in that like $2 to $6
million price range. We can't tell you
which one we think provides the most
improvements in terms of flow through
our city. So, that's sort of what we
have to figure out. But the ones that we
suspect might, we're going to put some
some more computational horsepower
behind it because Yeah, because traffic
is really weirdly nonlinear, right? So
it could turn out that there's like one
crazy little intersection where if you,
>> you know,
>> Yes.
>> make an improvement there at all.
>> Some would say the intersection could be
front and sunset.
>> Okay. Uh, so this just talks about
Oh, Council President D. Michelle,
sorry.
Go ahead. Oh, you got bigger on my
screen just now.
Oh, I think you're on mute, though.
>> Now, can you hear me?
>> Yes.
>> All right. Well, I just wanted to follow
up on Council Member Nichols comments.
Um, King County uh just released their
draft traffic safety action plan, and
there's a great emphasis in that plan on
pedestrian safety. Um Washington state
is is experiencing
uh the most traffic pedestrian traffic
deaths um in its history in the last few
years. And so from that standpoint,
looking at that uh crosswalk at the
village theater, I think would be an
excellent uh focus for us because it's
really dark there. We have crowds coming
out of that theater almost every night
during the season and um getting people
I've seen people kind of cruise across
that street during the daytime um
because it's so frustrating to walk all
the way down to the next light to cross.
So I think that's a project that we
might want to think about. But I I like
the idea of looking at more than just
car safety. We need to be looking at
pedestrian safety as well. Thanks.
Yes, excellent point. And I think
specifically, we have this one on the
list. And so, like right now, I'll be
honest with the council, we're trying to
figure out like, do the lights, can they
be solar powered as opposed to wired?
We're trying to figure out how to drive
down the cost of doing these projects.
And so, uh, in this case, I think we
hope to come back to you with cost
numbers that are lower than what our
traditional projects would cost because
we're trying to be creative. And I think
with things that involve lights, if you
can use solar to make them operate, it
obviously will substantially reduce
installation costs. And I think for the
village theater, that's our big question
we're trying to answer right now.
Okay. So the next slide really talks
about the importance of securing grants
from outside sources. And I'll go back
to my previous career in the capital
budget. I thought from a state
perspective, our goal was to draw down
federal dollars into our state of
Washington. And I think from a city
perspective, we're in the same camp
except we have more things to choose
from. So we can choose from county
dollars, we can choose from state
dollars, we can also choose from federal
dollars. And I think our focus
throughout this entire process is we
want to attract outside dollars into our
community to help us meet the challenges
when it comes to transportation and
mobility and and we're going to be
aggressive on that. And I think uh you
know we had a conversation I think on
one of these projects the council
meeting last week and you know we've
done a deep dive tried to understand
with the Newport project of how federal
money plays into that project and and I
think this is going to be the stuff
we're really trying to get our head
around as we go forward for the next
couple years. I think once you commit
that you're going to put your money on
the table I think you do have a big
advantage in going after a lot of these
grants. And so our hope is that we
commit to putting our money on the table
and we think it will give us an edge as
we go into these grant cycles in the
next one or two years ahead is our hope.
Okay. And there's any other questions on
that we are going to shift in this qual
light rail update.
Okay. We are making the shift. Uh
obviously I think we're all familiar
that originally we were on the ST3 map
at 2041 when they hit their first bump
in the road. We got bumped back towards
2044
and there are big decisions. I'll repeat
that. Big decisions being made on light
rail and Puget Sound. They're all going
to happen in the next one to four
months. So, we expect by June 30th, if
you want to be on the ST3 map, you're
going to have to do a lot of work
between now and the end of June to make
sure if you're on the map that you stay
on the map. And so, this is our focus, I
think, as the administration is to make
our case of why we deserve to stay on
the map and how we want to be a good
partner with Sound Transit of actually
getting this line built.
I think before we go into this specific
details, I think the council did see the
letter that was sent by the CEO of
Costco today to the Sound Transit. Uh
similar letters are coming from, you
know, the president of Belleview College
and you know, elected leaders along with
other you know important businesses in
this region and we're having a meeting
with Swami Tribe on Friday to discuss
their support. Uh I think we have rough
commitments from the mayors of both
Maple Valley, Snowquami, Northbend,
incarnation that they would consider,
you know, signing on in support of the
importance of this line. I I think our
our argument to Sound Transit is if you
look at the light rail map, the cheapest
line to build on that map that is
currently not built is the Isiquata
Belleview connection. And so it's
already the cheapest. And I think we're
making an argument as we met with Julie
Meredith, the head at Wash Dot, that you
could run a line basically using almost
exclusively the the wash dot ride ofway.
And so that would involve a station that
would you'd have to figure out where it
ends. But if you're going to end on
washout rightway, it's very likely in
the middle of I90 with some sort of
pedestrian overpass. And then you would
have a stop at Eastgate and then you
could connect to Belleview at what is
the most costefficient connection point
which we think would be South Belleview
most likely. But I think in meeting with
elected leaders in Bellev they seem to
be open-minded to figuring out the most
cost-effective way to build this line.
And there currently is a station at
Richard's Road and we're trying to
figure out if that station is necessary
or if you could reduce costs by not
having the Richard's Road station. And
so I think the message we're making to
the Sound Transit board members right
now is we're looking at this in a way to
try to be a good financial partner of
how you could do this line at a better
price point than what's currently on
their Excel spreadsheet. And we don't
know and this is we're trying to be
different than some of the communities
right now that are going through who are
currently further ahead of us on the
list but are actually doing the
opposite. They're demanding more
stations. They're demanding alignments
that involve a lot more rightaway
acquisition and we're trying to do the
opposite on both fronts and but it's not
going to be easy and I think the the
goal is the meeting on February 24th uh
save as quas light rail I think is is a
chance to have important leaders in the
transit space come and talk about why
this is a time-sensitive topic and that
takes a little explaining for a line
that's currently scheduled to come to
our community in 2044. So, I think we're
trying to make that argument. And I want
to be clear like our goal in this whole
process is to say this line is one you
can build under budget and ahead of
schedule. And we're trying to figure out
if there's any way we can actually move
ahead of schedule. And I don't think
that means, you know, you're going to
have light rail here in two years. But
once you start and commit to a light
rail line, you can be open in 10 years.
And so I think our goal is it'd be nice
if we could open in the late 2030s as
opposed to going into the 2040s. And
this is our challenge in the next couple
years is to really make our case about
what will we're willing to do as a
community in this project and and the
advantage that we would have for Sound
Transit to actually have a line get done
had a schedule and under budget. Uh
are there questions
on some transit?
Yes, I do like this save light rail. If
anybody else has a catchier phrase, feel
free to share it with us. But right now,
that one seems to be the one that's
standing out. And and I think as we talk
about the specific ideas, it's around
rightway minimizing that uh minimizing
parking garages right here in the Esqua
Valley floor saying we already have two
Sound Transit garages that are already
built off SR900 up in the Highlands. Uh,
and we're really focused on how you can
connect to Belleview at the the most
efficient price point. So, those are the
big three I think that we're bringing to
the table that other other communities
are are doing the opposite when it comes
to light rail right now.
And I think this communication one is we
just
we're trying to share as we submit
comments to Sound Transit, we're trying
to share them with the council from
these letters of community support. Uh
but I think we are tonight open to
feedback in terms of the level of kind
of updates you want and uh and it could
be there's more updates between now in
June just because this is when
everything's really timesensitive. But
for for folks who know people that are
passionate about transit like now is a
time to let your friends know that this
is the time to weigh in. And I plan to
personally attend the Sound Transit
Board meeting on February 24th uh to
share my comments. But, you know, other
folks can start weighing in because the
time is now. There's going to be a
retreat for Sound Transit in March where
I think some of the big decisions will
start to get discussed. And so, this is
why there is a sense of urgency of of
making sure we make the case for this
community around why these light rail
investments are really important.
Oh, Council President D. Michelle.
>> Yes. Thank you, Mayor Mullen. Uh I will
let you know I am thrilled with this
approach. So um uh I think there's been
uh in my opinion there's been a little
bit of mixed messaging coming from its
and I think that uh making a forceful
statement in that we are here to uh
support this link light rail station is
really really important right now. So, I
really appreciate your approach to this.
Um, and I would personally be quite
willing to uh participate in advocacy
with the South Transit Board or to round
up interested people in the community to
testify on behalf of of our link light
rail station. Um, I just I think the
stronger our message, the more important
it is right now. So, thank you very much
for your um strong advocacy on this.
Thank you. No, thanks for saying that. I
think this goes back to the council
retreat where we were saying we're all
in a we're all in a canoe together. The
the if we're all willing to row in the
same direction, I think we'll go a lot
faster and be a lot more effective. And
I think to council president D.
Michelle's point, the mixed message is
you have heard people talk about bus
rapid transit. And I will say my
experience for my 5 years living in
London, my 5 years working in New York
City is you see investments around light
rail investments in the community around
those stations in a completely different
way than you do with bus rapid transit.
Completely different way. They have the
ability to positively transform
communities. Whereas bus rapid transit,
because those lines can move on a whim,
you don't see the kind of follow-up
investment to create the really vibrant
walkable village communities that we
think would work right here both north
and south of I90. Uh, okay. We are now
Oh, council member.
>> Uh, yeah, I did want to echo the same
thing. I really do appreciate your
aggressive approach and really moving
quickly on this. I guess my question is
really goes to the idea of, you know,
you mentioned this is the time to act.
this is the time to do stuff and what
does what exactly specifically help can
we andor the community do to help this
is that you want crowds of people at
these meetings what yes what are they
what's the concrete action that we can
take place now until then to get things
moving
>> I think every sound transit board
meeting that happens this year if we
have people from our community showing
up to talk about the importance of this
line that will help and and so the next
one is February 24th there's then a
retreat in March And Andrea, you want to
come up?
I
>> I'm sorry. The board meeting is on
February 26th. We can send out I'm so
sorry.
>> We can send out that information to city
council. We'll also be um publishing a
web page tomorrow that's going to have a
lot more specific actions. We'd love to
share that with city council so that you
can share it within your networks. Um,
and of course we're having our own
community meeting on this topic on
February 24th from 5:30 to 6:30 in this
very room. And so we're going to
encourage as many people to come as
possible to learn more about what they
can do and learn more about the current
status of of light rail. So we hope that
you can help us getting people to that
meeting too. Thank you,
>> Council Jen. Um, one other thing I would
add, so Sound Transit also has a system
expansion committee which
>> chaired by Angela Bernie.
>> Yeah. So they meet um their next meeting
is this Thursday at 1:30. So if anyone
that I think system expansion committee
is really where they're going to be
making the decisions on which light rail
uh lines to prioritize or not. So in
terms of having people show up to
meetings, I think that one would be a
good one in addition to the regular full
board meeting.
>> I completely agree. We did invite Mayor
Bernie to our community meeting on the
24th, but that is the night of a Redmond
city council meeting, so she is not able
to attend. And okay, now you're going to
get Bennett's infectious energy for
street overlay.
>> Deputy President Mart. Yeah, I I I want
to plus one your comment about the
transformative effect of of transit. You
know, Minneapolis had a really hard time
getting going with with uh uh light
rail. And it actually took, bizarrely
enough, a former professional wrestler
uh to be governor to just say, "We're
going to do it."
>> That Jesse Vera's baby.
>> That's That's right. And and it has a it
has had a profound impact on Minneapolis
uh in a way in a way that's seen as very
positive in Minneapolis. And so, you
know,
it it is easy to to talk about those
things um when talking to uh the Sound
Transit Board and and to to do all that.
Um there's also the element of um you
know, we we live in an era five years
ago, I talked about a lot about how um
some states were big net contributors to
the federal government and um didn't
necessarily get a lot back. that that
conversation and that metric has become
really pronounced in the last few years.
Um it's true regionally as well, right?
And nobody wants um a rich community
saying boohooh who, you know, we don't
get all the services, but you know, we
ask a lot of the voters, right? And um
and we like to think that um there is
some equity around contributions that
are made into regional funds um coming
back into the communities. Right? We
supported ST3, right? This community,
there were a lot of people that said the
east side wouldn't support ST3, but we
did it. We took a leap of faith. We
supported it. I pay huge tabs every year
on my cars. I'm sure a lot of other
folks do, too. Um, you know, again, I we
can't say boohoo because, you know, we
we don't have some of the needs that
some of the other communities have, but
we do have needs. And to get so little
back for so long, if it if it were to
turn out to not uh that ST3 wouldn't
fund this, um it would be a real loss
regionally. And I think it would make it
a lot harder to make regional arguments
um when other large ticket items come
along if if we if this huge investment
we made 15 years ago or 12 years ago,
whatever it was, doesn't pan out at all.
Thanks.
>> I 100% agree. I think we are advocating
on behalf of Isqua taxpayers to get what
they were promised when we asked them to
vote for this back in 2016 and I was one
of the people that asked them to vote
for it. So, it's very personal to me.
Okay, Bennett. It's all yours.
All right. Well, thank you for having
me, Council and Mayor Mullet. Um, my
name is Bennett Ashba. I'm the streets
uh manager for public works and I'm also
responsible for the pavement management
program uh TR30.
Uh so tonight I'm going to talk about uh
pavement. Really exciting, really fun
stuff. Um there's a lot of nuances to
it. Um as as simple as it looks out
there. Um so we're going to go through
that. I also provided a memo um pretty
extensive memo on this to get through
the technical jargon and whatnot uh for
this uh presentation. So
all right
um so the direction needed tonight um
should the city should the city continue
to prioritize cost effectiveness or does
council want to set a higher aesthetic
standard? Uh today I got a question from
council member Adair and uh just to
reiterate what we're looking for. Um
this is when we talk about the aesthetic
higher aesthetic standard we're talking
about the appearance and uniformity of
the surface after a maintenance
treatment. Um so ultimately that that is
what the question surrounds right.
Um, and this decision can really
influence, you know, the different types
of treatment budgets, um, the whole nine
yards in terms outcomes when trying to
maximize the pavement life, the useful
pavement life.
So, to get started, we're going to go
over the standard uh, deterioration
curve of asphalt roadways. This is
really important and intricral to this
discussion. Um
in when you're looking at this graph,
the black line represents the standard
deterioration curve of asphalt roadway
without maintenance performed. So you
can see it starts at 100. In theory, um
in the first four or five years, it
drops pretty drastically down to that
85. At 85, it plateaus in that good
condition. You might get a small crack
here, a small crack there, um in that 85
range. And then once you get once you
get through that plateau, um you get to
a point where it's starting to go down
that curve and you can see it it goes
down that curve faster and faster and
faster. That's when you get a pothole uh
that turns into a larger patch that
turns into a crack that turns into
something else. Um so our goal with PMP
is to take a citywide systematic
approach and looking at the whole system
um and decide what treatments apply to
the what road at the right time. So
there are some roads as we know as you
guys know driving around that you see
and you're man this is bad condition.
Some of those roads have reached a point
where they have to get a higher cost um
I'm calling it reactive treatment um
which is removing the top surface um
coming back and placing a brand new top
surface.
The goal in a perfect world is going to
be that we we perform maintenance
treatments, lowerc cost maintenance
treatments in the good or the top of the
fair range. And that will again re bring
our PCI number or pavement condition
index numbers a grade that we provide
the roadways u which I'll get into in a
little bit and it brings it back up and
it starts that deterioration curve
again. Um so that's the goal of of PMP
um the pavement management program. How
do we extend the life of these roadways
to the maximum extent possible?
Um so our our level of service goal for
the city is to maintain an average PCI
of index pavement condition index PCI of
73 to 80 in a range. um performance
measures. Uh we're aiming to treat 8.1
lane miles annually using preventative
and reactive methods. Um and then we
also get an updated PCI uh through a
third-party analysis every three years.
That's the industry standard. Um and
then additionally, we've invested in our
in-house crews and some equipment and
we're using our in-house crews to do
spot repairs um to slow that
deterioration. And when you get that
first pothole, we're going to be there
to do a patch. So, if we don't have it,
keep going.
Now, I talked about the pavement
condition index. Um, as you can see on
this on this uh slide here, the PCI
rating is on the
left side, the left side uh here. So, it
goes from 100 down to zero. And it
basically acts acts like a grade in
school, right? So 100 is excellent. 15
points below that good, fair, poor, very
poor, failed. In that 100 to 85, the
excellent to good range, that's when we
want to be doing the preventative
maintenance uh treatments, which is
going to be crack seal, surface seals,
and patching. These preventative
treatment maintenance techniques cost
between$1 and $8 per square yard. Um
they can extend the life of the pavement
between three and 10 years. Um then you
get down into the fair and poor
category.
This is where you're looking more at
reactive maintenance. Um the fair
category you'll see in later slides I
highlight on both the preventative and
reactive because there's other variables
that come into play there. They might
have just two really bad spots on that
street segment that we can patch and
make good. Um or it's already gotten
past that point and we need to do a full
reactive treatment.
Uh the one thing I want to highlight
here on this fair to pour category is
the cost difference um as well as what
it triggers. So if we do a surface
removal and overlay removing the top two
three inches of asphalt and replacing
it, we're looking at $35 to $45 a square
yard. And that difference there is
between residential and arterial and
collectors are kind of in the middle. Um
but not included in that price is it
triggers regulatory ADA upgrades. So we
have to federally mandated we have to
repair and replace all uh pedestrian
access ramps. Um those can range between
uh about 7,000 to 12,000 depending on
you know are there utilities in the
ramp? Are we relocating wire? Are we
doing this or is it a standard
residential ramp that has nothing in
there?
Um so it does trigger that as well. Um
council in 2022
uh uh we created the TR054 which is the
concrete maintenance program and that
program actually works with PMP and they
replace the ramps on those roadways that
we need to do that work on. Um so that
these regulatory upgrades are not coming
out of the PMP the TR30 fund but the
>> one second Benny Deputy President Mart
has a question.
>> Yeah. So, you know, I'm a math nerd,
right? So, it um I'm I'm struggling with
the one to eight dollars per square yard
because it's such a huge difference.
Yeah. And and you get some actual
overlap
>> um because of those ranges and the
ranges on the added life. You actually
get some overlap between the
preventative maintenance and the
reactive maintenance in the dollars per
yard per year.
>> Um because of that huge spread. Can you
talk a little bit about that? That seems
like 1 to8 seems like a huge spread.
>> Yes, it is. And I'm not exactly sure
where my slide is, but in a few slides
I'll have pictures of each treatment and
I can show you like crack seal is a
dollar. It's we're just chasing cracks
around. So it averages about a dollar a
square yard. A surface seal can get up
to $8. Uh
>> and so there's I'm combining them all as
preventative treatments, but that that
is a large spread. Um so but crack seal,
for example, only lasts three years
before you have to do it again. A
surface seal goes up to eight to 10
years. So that's why that spread is so
wide there.
>> So but well no that helps. So the $1 is
closer to the three years and the $8 is
closer to the 10 years because if you
the you you know if you were selling
reactive maintenance technologies,
right? You would say, "Oh, $8 per square
yard and it only lasts you three years,
right? And then the and then the
reactive maintenance looks better." But
what what you're telling me is that they
>> they're proportional. The the the cost
and the life has some proportionality.
Okay. that makes it maybe less.
>> I appreciate your question though
because that that does help.
>> Thank you.
>> Um
yes. So
we've gone through excellent to good.
We've gone through fair to poor. Very
poor to failed. Um in the council uh
memo that was put out. There were some
pictures to kind of show the difference
between those treatments. But very poor
to fail is where you're talking
reconstruction. reconstruction is taking
it down all the way to base, subbase,
repairing any structural issues, the
whole nine yards there. Um, and that's
why you have the 85 plus per square yard
in that category because you're not
quite sure what you're going to get into
when you open up a road that's failed
and where the failures are in the base,
what type of fabric you might need to
use is all it's kind of all happens once
you start opening the road up. Um, but
that if we get into that point, those
roadways, if we do a reconstruct,
there's also federal required uh
federalmandated
uh storm water upgrades that have to
occur if you disturb so much square
footage of a road. And typically, when
you're doing a reconstruction, you're
going to be meeting that threshold. So
then you have to upgrade all the storm
and do all the ADA. So our philosophy is
to try to stay out of that um out of the
subbase as much as we can utilizing all
these different types of treatments. And
you can see here the net gain on added
life. It's not huge with a reconstruct
because you're still talking about that
top surface that that's exposed to all
the elements and traffic.
>> Any questions? Yeah. I'm not sure. Um, I
mean, I know it's on this slide, but I
was curious like do do we have roads
that are approaching that bottom level?
>> We have sections of roadways that are um
>> I don't One of one of the worst roadways
right now is Gilman. Um, there's there's
a lot of areas with concrete panels
underneath the roads from old highways
that they just caked uh asphalt on top
of. And as those roadways as those
panels have failed underneath the road,
it brings the asphalt down, breaks it
up. So we we have some plans on how
we're going to hopefully repair some of
those. But additionally, some of those
projects are already identified um such
as Newport uh Maple to Sunset is a big
project that's been talked about, I
believe, everywhere. Um so that is
that's one of them. So, a lot of the
failed sections are actually in areas
that have been identified for other
projects as well.
>> And I will say the the Gilman fix did
not fall in the 2 to4 million price
range unfortunately. And I think the
other thing that came up with that is
obviously the light rail discussion is
so what hap we're kind of waiting to get
some clarity of what's going to happen
there because I think we want to put a
bike lane on Gilman. We want to have we
want to do the overlay, but we also want
to do it when we know kind of what the
full vision is going to look like, which
right now in I don't think there's any
way we'll know this year exactly what's
happening. Council member Jen, did you
have a question?
>> Yeah, I guess I mean one of the roads
that I go on that to me seems to be one
of the worst is the Newport Maple to
Sunset. And so my and um is basically
the concept that we're not really going
to do the full roadway repair until we
can do everything in that one project
all at once.
>> It's a great great segue uh into kind of
talking about how we go how we make our
plan for PMP. So we've known Newport is
a roadway that we needed to treat for
since we at least since we did our first
scan to create our benchmark in 2019.
um probably before that before I was
here. Uh however,
as we go through these projects, we
coordinate with everybody um all the
different utilities, all the different
capital projects. Our goal is to build a
roadway, to maintain a roadway, and to
have nobody touch it for at least a few
years and not throw away that investment
basically by having having to mill it
out. So, in the case of Newport, it's
actually on our work plan this year.
We're probably going to be doing a lane
width patch over that bad section off
the side of the road. And that's
actually right on the edge of a concrete
panel that's failing. Um, so we'll do
small patches and try to hold the road
together as long as we can. But there
are times where we've had to pave the
road knowing that there's upcoming
projects coming down the pipeline. It's
just a balance of what's what's how can
we provide that safe, reliable surface
for everyone and maximize our dollars.
Um, but we utilize our in-house crews a
lot more for those types of projects.
>> Okay. And one more question. I'm curious
if we, you know, I feel like with
budgeting for the PMP, we typically do
it in the bianial budgets, but do we
have a sense of like, you know, over the
next 10 years, like what's the ideal
amount of maintenance that we should be
doing? like if we don't, you know, like
if we fall behind, what's that going to
mean for
>> We do um
>> Okay, great.
>> The pavement condition scan is occurring
right now. Um we don't have the final
numbers yet. Um they still haven't
scanned the road. Uh so we're trying to
find a good weather window to scan the
road. And then part of the summary
that's going to be uh provided at the
end of that project, it has all of the
different scenarios of do nothing, you
know, don't fund PMP and this is how
your roads will deteriorate as a network
to fund at this level, fund at this
level, and we we provide them with those
numbers of, hey, can you can you give us
one where we're minimal funding and
we're only doing surface seals? Can you
give us some when we're fully funded? um
which was on that that graph that Mayor
Mullet showed and that we'll show again.
Um so yes, we do have we will have all
those scenarios. Um I didn't present
those now because those are 2022 numbers
and we've had a lot going on in the city
in terms of new roads and and
construction. So
>> great. Thank you,
>> Council Member Walsh.
>> Thank you. Um, can I make a request
that given we have uh some newer members
of council, I think when we get those
new numbers, it would be a really great
opportunity to take us on a little bit
of a tour.
>> Love it.
>> Um, just to be able to, you know, we
haven't done a good bus tour in a little
while and all y'all need to really pack
into that van a little bit with us. So,
I think that would be a great way to
really demonstrate the difference in
pavement quality.
>> Absolutely. Um,
>> Bennett drove me around town. He's a
much better driver than Penelopey, so I
can say uh it was my 15-year-old, but he
he was very safe. I felt very secure.
>> I only missed my three times as I was
talking. Um, but otherwise, yeah, I'd be
happy to.
>> Council President D. Michelle.
>> Oh, yeah.
>> Hi. Thanks. Uh, Bennett, could you talk
about what what is entailed by higher
aesthetic standards?
>> Yeah. So, well, if you if you wouldn't
mind, if I can get to those treatments,
I think you'd have I'd be a lot easier
to explain while I have the pictures
pulled up. Um, so in about two or three
slides, I'll I'll address that. Is that
all right?
>> Okay. Yep, that works.
>> Thank you.
Um,
so this is the overall citywide PCI map.
Um, and then what I did here is I took
out all the failed, very poor, and poor.
Again, as I talked about, I left the
yellow in there because those are hit or
miss whether or not they're reactive or
preventative maintenance. But overall,
our net, this is 83% of our network is
in this category that could potentially
receive uh the preventative maintenance
treatments. Um, and that's a great
number to have. Um, and those
preventative maintenance treatments
are here. So, here here we go with the
with what we were talking about. So,
crack seal, $1 a square yard. We're this
is we're following the cracks around.
We're basically sealing them like you'd
seal the cracks on your house to prevent
water from getting in. Uh, potholes. I
think we all understand that piece. Um,
spot specific patching. Yes, this can
get expensive if you're doing it on a
square yard basis, but the impact is
small. Um, so we're we're potentially,
this is a lane width patch. Um, in this
picture here, that's our crews
performing that lane width patch. That's
really helping out the overall ride and
safety and reliability of the roadway.
Um, but it can be cheap at the 25. It
can be more expensive if you're
including all traffic control and all of
those other aspects that come into uh
you know arterial type uh patching.
Uh and then on the bottom you have the
surface seal. Um so this these pictures
are of slurry sealed streets. Uh the one
on the right
um forgot which street that is. It's in
the woods. Um and this is the product.
So, slurry seal on average costs about
$4.50 a square yard or 12% uh the price
of an overlay. Um you can see here,
council member DM Michelle, uh the
surface on the slur on the slurry seal
on the right side is doesn't have that
compacted smooth like super smooth
finish. And that's what we're talking
about with the aesthetic piece of it.
Um, so similar with the the crack seal,
you know, you have these lines all over
the street. That's not very
aesthetically pleasing, some might say.
Uh, you have you have a road and you
have four patches on the road segment.
That's a different color and a
different, you know, different material.
Some might say that's not aesthetically
pleasing. Um, is it the right treatment
for those roadways in terms of PMP and
and maintaining your system? Yes, 100%.
Um, so that's that's kind of where that
that question is is coming from. Um, so
in this case, you have the slurry sealed
$450
50 cents a square yard. Its life
expectancy is around 5 to eight years
and then you come back and you do a
crack seal treatment or something like
that. Um, so that's that's the slurry
seal side of things.
Bennett's side hustle is going to create
a dating app for street overlay and
everyone's going to choose the one they
like the best.
>> Exactly.
>> Uh yeah.
>> Oh, Council Member Walsh.
>> Thank you. Um I know we approved slurry
seal several years ago as a way to
really stretch out our pavement
management program dollars and allow us
to pave or retreat more miles of
roadway. Um, some of those neighborhoods
have had a pretty negative reaction um
to that immediately after. I know some
of that was due to um poor management of
the particular um contractor that did
it. Um but
have we looked at different ways to
message that the treatment gets better
and smoother over time? And can you kind
of talk through what your approach is to
slurry seal in the future? What how you
would do it differently?
>> Yeah. Um so you are correct. In 2021 we
uh it was actually a cape seal which is
a different surface seal treatment. Um I
just didn't highlight it in this. Uh but
yes, the cape seal happened. Uh it was
supposed to dry quickly. It did not dry.
Um, and that's enough to make many
people upset um that there was a
mechanical equipment error on all of
that. But we have talked as a group um
as a pavement management team and with
with uh Emily Moon and we are coming up
with a much more robust outreach when we
do surface seals again. We are not
slated currently to do them in 2026
because we have some overlays we need to
get done. That's been on the plan for a
while. Um, but coming into 2027, should
this conversation uh support that
treatment, we're definitely going to
have a lot more outreach. We're going to
have videos and messages of what what it
should look like month one or week one,
month one, month two um uh and all and
all of that. So, we definitely going to
have much more robust um public outreach
and maybe even meeting with the
neighborhood specifically like, "Hey,
I'll be out there at 3:30 on this day if
you want to talk about what's coming."
Stuff like that.
>> Councilor Nichols, you have a question.
>> Thank you. So, there I see a lot of
different options. Um they have you're
you're pointing out some aesthetic
differences, but also um cost and life
expectancy differences. Um, how much of
the life expectancy for these is is
related to the amount of vehicle traffic
that hits these uh repairs effectively
and the types of vehicles that are
driving on them?
Uh, very good question. Um, so when it
comes to surface seals right now in the
industry, those are not typically
applied to arterial streets. Um,
arterial streets have a ton of weight.
Sometimes they're truck routes. They
have a ton of turning movements. They
have a ton of stop and go. All the
things that that make it really hard on
the top top surface of uh arterials. So
most arterials are getting overlays
pretty much move at this moment in the
industry there. That that technology is
not quite there yet. Um when it comes to
residentials,
the biggest contributor is trash trucks.
Um, and the damage that they do just
being on the on the far as they go
around the street to pick them up, their
tires are right on that interface
between the concrete and the asphalt and
that's your weak point in the system
anyway. I don't think we're getting away
from waste management. So, uh, what we
do is we try to build that up a little
bit better. Um, so ultimately
all of it all of it has an impact. all
of those data points and how how many
how much vehicle traffic ADTS is
happening on a daily basis is all
contributing factors to these treatsmen
success. Um yeah.
>> Okay. So as a followup to that, have we
looked at for any of those roads any of
those road classes all the way up
whether reducing vehicle miles traveled
by either pedestrianizing or partially
pedestrianizing, blocking off
neighborhood access, etc. to only
residents. Whether any of those things
could add lifetime to these in a way
that might creatively decrease the cost
of these improvements and help us bend
that curve down towards a place where we
want it.
I have personally not really gone down
that route that that road um in terms of
you know road diets and whatnot and how
that might impact the the longevity of
the pavement. But there are other
factors that we can't really help and
one of the biggest ones is the sun. um
the sun oxidizes that material on the
surface and it eventually is going to
crack and become brittle and that oil
get leaves the top surface and that's
that's one of the biggest failures is
the sun
and then snow and ice. Um so we've had a
very mild winter, but as soon as any
water gets in a crack and it freezes
that night, it's popping that crack
wider and bigger. And so some of those
things we can control, some of those
things we wouldn't be able to control.
Yeah. So, last follow up on that. So,
yeah, I understand that the none of
these roads will last forever and uh
eventually entropy will will will win
the day. Um it would be interesting to
know though if there are any even even
if they're partial pedestrian
pedestrianizing efforts uh temporary,
etc. Are there any places where we could
in effect save money by uh converting
some of our streets into those in in
somewhere areas and uh
>> per perhaps making some win-wins there.
>> It's definitely something we can look
into and get back to you on.
>> Council member Dair, do you have a
question?
>> Uh yeah, I'm I'm just having trouble
quantifying what the aesthetically
pleasing option is in terms of it's like
does that mean like we won't do crack
seals that are a dollar anymore? will
only do these slurry seals or like like
dollar-wise, what does the aesthetically
pleasing option look like?
>> Aesthetically pleasing option is the
full overlay, the removal of the
surface, the overlay, that 35 to 45
maybe $50 um treatment. Uh because
that's what
that that provides the smoothest
surface, you know, it's just the most
uniform smooth surface that you can
provide. But that is a higher dollar
treatment. And the other side of that is
we're not going to perform that on a
good road. That doesn't make uh
financial sense. So we're that PCI value
that we have is going to be dropping
drastically. Like we're not going to do
it until it gets to that fair to poor
category. So our overall network PCI is
we're going to have potholes. We're
going to have patches. We're never going
to get away from patches and potholes.
Some communities don't do crack seal and
surface seals are starting to become
more prevalent. Reton's doing them.
Kirkland's doing them. Belleview piloted
them. Um Belle's going to put together a
crack seal uh contract this year. So the
lowerc cost maintenance treatments are
definitely starting to get more of a
rise in this area in general.
>> Council member Jen,
>> um sorry I didn't ask this question
earlier, but very basic question. How
many miles of roads are there in the
city of Isiqua?
>> Great question. So, we have uh 285
lane miles is how I use I calculate
that. Um so, a lane mile is 12t wide by
5280 or 7,040 square yards. Um so,
that's how that's how I use them.
>> Okay. So, we have 280 lane miles and
we're treating about eight miles per
year. So just mathing that that means
that the average lane mile is getting
treated once in every 35 years.
>> You stole my thunder. Yes.
>> And the length of most of these I mean
especially with these preventative
maintenance things you know the if the
lifetime's like 3 to 10 years it seems
like probably over time we're probably
falling more and more behind. Is would
that be accurate or
>> it would be accurate if we are going to
pursue only overlays. Um, if we pursue
only overlays to maintain the same PCI
that we're in now, we have to reduce
that down to about a 20-year maintenance
cycle to keep up, which then increases
our budget, you know, four to five
million a year, maybe needed going
forward instead of where we're at now on
the trajectory we're on. So,
with the use of maintenance treatments,
you know, PMP is not the only one that's
doing overlays throughout the city,
right? We have these major utility
projects, uh, private utilities, PSSE,
they have requirements in our standards
that we've made pretty tight that they
are required to repair the road andor do
a full width overlay. Um, so the PMP
goal on that 8.1 lay miles is is uh the
35-year maintenance cycle. And you can
see in further uh slides that when we
use the surface treatments, we're
gaining that 11 10 and a half. We're
gaining a lot more uh treated lane miles
than we are when we're doing just
overlays.
>> Um that makes sense. Do you have a sense
of how many miles of pavement are
treated through other programs that are
not PMP?
>> Well, we have a lot of good
opportunities like the NHS grants that
we've been able to utilize um in 23
and I think we got approved or we got
approved for two more I think it was in
24 that are upcoming. Um, so I don't
have a perfect clear sense. Um, and I
not sure I should throw a number out
that I'm not quite sure about, but we
can get it.
Yeah, it really is up and down. It's
totally dependent on what projects are
coming in and and and what we're funding
ourselves to do on the utility and water
treatment, I mean, water line
replacements and whatnot. And the NHS
grants for the national highway safety
grants like PSRC and that'll like the
last one was I think on East Lake Samish
like the main roads is where we score
really well on those grant projects but
yeah very true.
>> Cool. Thank you.
>> Yeah.
Um
cool. All right. So in this slide I took
away the good and excellent. You can see
the network uh the red's highlighted a
little bit more. So you can see those.
Um, and this accounts for only 17% of
our network. Um, so that's that's still
a great number because many of these are
arterials. And I mentioned we can't do
some of the surface seal type treatment,
but we can do the crack seal and the
patching. Those are very important for
um the to keep the arterial roads in the
shape that they're in.
And these are the reactive maintenance
techniques that we've talked about
already. So on the left you see the
surface removal and overlay. on the
right is the reconstruction and honestly
I don't have a picture of doing that in
Isiqua because I'm really trying to
avoid it as much as I can. So um but
that this shows you know the top surface
course is what you see every day and
that's about six to eight inches thick
and we'd have to go and replace that the
base course and the subbase depending on
the failures and whatnot
and it triggers those regulatory ADA
upgrades.
So what's our PCI at the moment? Um
I uh have upgraded some of the roadways
that have been paved since 2022 and some
of the treatments that's been done and
my estimate currently is the weighted
average is a 76 um based on those
numbers. Um I some of the roadways
uh I went through all the math, all the
data, it's hard to even describe just
stuck there looking at all the data. Um,
but right now we're at a 76 in my
opinion and we'll have new numbers.
Uh, this is a shows the lane miles
treated annually like we were talking
about. Um, basically in 2019 we had a
presentation here and the council chose
at that point to, you know, this is
serious. Let's invest. We were on a 75
year maintenance cycle at that point.
Um, which that's gravel by the end of
that, right?
um if we're lucky. So with that uh we
put in um we started planning and did a
great job and then the COVID 19 came and
we wanted to reserve those funds for
potential outcomes of what what that
would be. So we held off that year on
PMP and then making it through that we
really heavily invested in 2021 for a
record investment and we were able to
treat 8.6 six lane miles of surface
seals as well during that year and that
brings us at 10.9 well above our 8.1
lane mile average
or goal. Um in 2022 we made the concrete
maintenance program that drastically
helped by we weren't diluting the
pavement treatments with needed concrete
repairs. Um so effectively we g gained
more funding by creating that program
for the PMP.
Um
again in 2025 this last year we treated
another 8.2 lane miles with the surface
seal again getting above that 8.1
average. So every year that we've
employed these different uh strategies
we have gotten above our our level of
service average.
Um in 2026
uh right now we're estimating about 6.8
um 6.8 eight lane miles to be paved
based on our draft project list that you
guys got. It's still a draft. Um, but
that's where we're projected right now.
And you can see in 27 and 28, we're not
sure because we're still coordinating on
projects. We're still coordinating
heavily with different utilities and
different projects to make sure we're
not paving something that they're going
to tear up right after.
Uh, back to Mayor Mullet's slide he
shared earlier. This is the actual
funding sources um that we've had and
shows the investment that we're that we
have had and where we're at and where
we're aiming to be in the next few
years. Um it pretty much correlates with
the other lane miles paved. Uh
>> council member Walsh.
>> Oh, Council Member Nichols.
>> Look at the look at the honesty from our
council. Nobody's jumping the queue.
>> I'm not used to the
>> like a British council.
>> I think she'll get to go too. So, um,
okay. Um,
I have a bunch of questions about this
graph. Um, I want to start by saying
linear projections kind of scare me a
little bit. Um, you've got a bunch of
nonlinear things at play here. We have,
um, just kind of thinking through how
these this I think you're describing how
the system works.
If we when things are kept in relatively
good repair, um, it's easier to keep
them in good repair longer for less
money, put simply. And then once you
start if you fall off a cliff you're
talk eventually you talk about
additional ADA requirements that have to
be built in there etc. The going back to
different um more expensive
uh remediations things you said you
would like to avoid for example. Um, how
does this graph put us on a path towards
the goals that you set out at the
beginning of this presentation, which
were to keep a I think it was a med
either mean or median um PCI of 73 to
80. Um, you've got this green line here.
Is that the green line that keeps us
there on that? And if so, for how long?
It's only going out two years. And I
could imagine since we have these all
these nonlinear effects in here, is it
what happens if we start dipping below
some critical threshold, can you model
that in some way that might be
informative for us to help us spend
money now more wisely? um or is this a
path that you think is going to be fine
and that we will be able to at this rate
and continuing at approximately this
rate keep our pavement PCI at a level
that's acceptable without having these
kind of doom loop effects.
>> Yeah. So let me let me try to summarize
and capture everything you asked right
there. So you're asking basically this
green line there's a lot of different
variables that could come into play to
maintain the the pavement in general,
right? And this is a linear line that
we're that we're going off of. So in
2019, the industry standard at that time
was about $1 a square yard for a healthy
pavement management program. So that was
our benchmark when we started really
investing into the pavement management
program. The line represents a 4%
uh annual inflation rate because cost of
oil is going up and down, up and down,
and we're we're tied to that as well. So
that's that's what the green line
represents is that 4% inflation rate.
What we can show with this graph is if
you look back at the other one, it's not
necessarily linear. It doesn't match
exactly the budgets in terms of we were
able to do a lot of lane miles and pave
a lot of lane miles with lower budgets
as well. Um, so the pavement management
program would be pretty flexible if we
have this array of maintenance options
available to help hold it together. If
we were to
not, you know, have a low less than
adequate funding for 5 10 years, we've
been really having a hard conversation.
But in this in this scenario, over the
last three years, we've dipped below
that line because we've needed to
allocate that money to other priorities
within the city. We've still managed to
perform these surface seals, get above
our level of service goal for one of the
years. Um, we're projecting that we can
get the funding back up to a level where
we can we can do more um more different
treatments and different surface seals
and all of that. So, I guess what I'm
trying to say is we can be flexible. We
can do a ton of crack sealing and
maintain those roads to a certain point.
we can do a ton of surface seals and
make keep the good roads good and then
and then wait until we have the funding
to do the surface overlay hopefully
before it gets to a reconstruct phase.
So, it's all a balance, but every year
is a balance in terms and trying to be
flexible and adapt to the needs of the
city and what funding allocation we can
have uh for PMP. It's another reason why
I don't really project 27 and 28's lane
mile that I'm going to be able to
achieve.
But I think council member I mean the
main theme I think of administration
tonight is yes we're looking at roughly
doubling the amount of money we've been
spending in this program compared to the
last previous two years and uh I think
part of that goes back to the very first
slide of length of time is you know 15
to 25 years you think about our
community like 25 years ago you had two
very large hillside communities
developed in Talis and the highlands and
so I think we're trying to get in front
of what we think is us approaching that
curve by us having a commitment to
larger investments in the space. Uh,
Council Walsh,
>> thank you. Um, can you go back to the
Lane Miles, the one previous?
>> So, I think the goal of 8.1 if we had
been doing that for a long time makes
sense. But
how do we address, you know, if I add
all of those negatives up for the number
of lane miles that we didn't treat in
previous years, that's like 30 35
lane miles that
are we behind at that point? And if so,
how do we work on not just maintaining
the 8.1 mile lane miles per year, but
catching up?
>> Great question. Uh, I guess what I would
say is in 2019 when we did that scan, we
got our benchmark number of our pavement
condition index and that's a networkwide
number. So regardless of what happened
in the past before that, we used that as
administration and everybody as our
benchmark moving forward. And since that
time
without talking about 20 2020, uh we're
averaging about 8.8 lane miles a year
getting treated. So, we are meeting that
goal that we set out and the new PCI uh
numbers that come in in that report will
show what levels of investment will do
to our overall pavement health
networkwide.
Um, and then it's our job to take that
and go down, you know, we go down into
every single road segment and we can
even go into 100 foot sections with
PCIs. Um, so that's
That's kind of how we have started and
developed our our program moving forward
from 2019.
>> Yes sir.
>> Deputy president Marks.
>> Can I ask maybe a related question? It
looks like we took a big leap in
efficiency between 2019 and 2021. If you
look at the expenditures
um you know in 2019 we were spending
almost a million dollars and only and
only covered 1.8 miles. And then just
two years later, we did go up to $2.3
million, but holy moly, we got almost 11
miles.
>> Yeah. So, can we do more of that?
>> Yes, we sure can. And that is our
surface sealed program is when that
kicked in.
>> Okay. So, that's specifically the
surface seal.
>> Yeah. So, we Oops.
So in 2021, we did that at 8.6 lane
miles of surface seal. You know,
additionally, some of these years, if
we're low, we could be paving a really
wide street like uh Highlands Drive
where we have really wide wide street
with big quantities that give us a lower
price, but we're not, you know, we're
trying to get to that level. It's all
it's it's just a balance of trying to do
the right thing um in the right year.
Okay.
All right. So, in conclusion, basically
u our goal maintain 73 to 80 PCI. We're
at a 76. Perform annual maintenance
treatments on 8.1 lane miles. We're at
8.8 eight over the last five years.
Important fact. Um,
and overall we're able to do this by
utilizing both preventative and reactive
treatments. Now, I want to make clear in
the memo I mentioned that you can't
solve all the roads and maintain all the
roads with only one type of treatment,
right? So, we can do two maybe three
preventative treatments and then we have
the high dollar overlay. uh and then we
go back and then we can go back to those
maintenance treatments pending any base
and structural issues. So our goal is
75% preventative, 25% reactive
maintenance on a road. That's our
ultimate goal and right now I think
we're on our way to achieving that. So
that's that's where we're at right now.
>> Thank you very much, Bennett. Uh I think
you guys have been asking the questions.
Oh, Council Member Walsh.
>> Yeah, I asked a lot of questions. Now I
want to give my opinion.
>> That's all right.
>> Um, you know, I'm a huge, huge fan of
fully funding our pavement management
program. I think, uh, coming in in 2019
and seeing the difference that we could
do when
>> you came in and said, "Hey, there's all
these other techniques that we could
do." I really want to applaud that. Um,
whenever I am running around the city,
you know, my husband calls me a a city
nerd um in the fact that I look at those
um crack seals and I'm like, "Yay, that
means we are being cost-effective with
taxpayer dollars and it means we are
actively
doing preventative maintenance." And so
I see that as a benefit. Um, I also
really like the use of creative and um,
testing different methods for um, slurry
seals and other things that we can use
for our neighborhood streets. So, I
definitely applaud that and I think the
more that we can do to stretch our
dollars, the better. That being said, I
think we need to um look at what some
other cities have done as far as
messaging to let residents know that,
you know, this um pavement style will
improve over time um and make sure that
we have our um
um street cleaners um through there
pretty effectively during that period. I
think we can respond to the um concerns
of the community and effectively still
keep these cost-effective measures. Um
looking at our overall program, um so as
far as the do we want to set a higher
aesthetic standard, I would say no. Um,
I think we are doing an effective job
and that um, if the community really
understood the cost difference of of
those, they would absolutely support
that. Um, from a planning perspective, I
would really like to dig into once we
get the new PCI stuff, um, what portions
of our lane miles are in that poor, very
poor, and failed. And I understand some
of those like Northwest Seamamesh Road,
we're not going to repave right now. And
so getting a better understanding of
which ones are delayed due to future
projects versus which um we just don't
have the funding for would be really
important to me. And then I'd also like
us to really start talking about the
difference between arterials and
collectors and neighborhood streets.
because if we're really planning out and
looking at um some failures or some poor
roadway conditions on something like an
archer like uh Gilman, then we're not
going to use, as you said, a slurry seal
or something like that there. And so
really understanding that we have a
commitment to both sets of roadways and
the tools that we would use for them are
different and the needs um for our
particular roadways once we know the
pavement condiction index are going to
be different. And so I'd really like
much like we split out pavement
management and concrete management, I
think there is a different pathway and
budgetary need for the arterial and
collectors versus the neighborhood
streets. And so I would be interested in
better understanding that because the
effective cost per lane mile on an
arterial is going to be much higher. But
there's much more need and much more
community awareness of some of those.
And so I would be willing to better
understand
not stretching the dollar on some of
those. Um the city administrator will
know that when we tried to do some of
the crack seals on Highlands Drive, I
complained quite a bit because the sun
reflected off of them because there was
just too much of it. So I think dealing
with and having to understand that
overlays are really necessary on some of
those larger arterials is important. So
that would be my feedback there.
>> Council member Jane
there
>> I think to answer the question obviously
I agree with Council Member Walsh. Um I
think we should continue to prioritize
cost effectiveness. I think the higher
aesthetic standard. I think the question
for me is basically like if we went out
to voters and said, "Are you willing to
pay $3 million more dollars per year in
taxes so that the roads look slightly
better and more aesthetic?" I don't
really think that would pass. And so,
you know, then if we want to hold
ourselves to that higher aesthetic
standard, what else are we going to cut
million dollars from? I don't think
there's anything that would be worth
that trade-off in this community. Um,
and I also want to echo some of the
points that have been made on, you know,
wanting to understand some of the like
with these roads that are in very poor
or failed condition, kind of what's
what's the long-term plan for them,
right? Like we don't I think most of the
roads in Isiqua seem to be pretty good,
but then the ones that like people will
notice when they start getting really
problematic and you know, making sure
that we're actually taking care of those
like Gilman or Newport Way um or you
know, Northwest Seamish. Obviously, some
of them have reasons that they're
delayed. Um, but we want to make sure
that we're also, you know, accounting
for those, budgeting for those, and um,
making sure that, you know, we kind of
keep the maintenance up because I think
a lot of these, you know, bigger
projects like full repaving um, is
probably going to fall outside of the
scope of the pavement management
program. Um, so we just want to like
understand what that's going to look
like.
C council member.
>> Uh yes, also I'm going to echo the same
as someone who actually just did a
budget meeting today. Cost effectiveness
obviously all the way especially in
these times where budget is tight. I did
want to add though a slight not wrinkle
but just comment to the higher aesthetic
standard and okay it's gonna go back to
like a story but so I grew up in Texas
and not that Texas is a model for most
things but there was this in Texas there
was often this like pride in their
highways type thing and something that
they did which I don't think necessarily
think all the highways were great but
they put a lot of effort into the
highways right at state lines in that as
you would be driving from like New
Mexico and come into the state it'd be
bumpy a bumpy road and then as soon as
you cross a state line, it is smooth and
pleasant and just like the best road
you've ever been on. But it created this
mental sense that the roads here are
great because whenever you did that, you
just you felt it. And arguably there
could be, you know, an effort to certain
high visibility roads get a higher
aesthetic standard to create that sense
that the roads here are better than
maybe all of them are. But it is
something that I just wanted to note as
something that I experienced that it did
you felt it. You you had a certain
thought that these all the roads here
are great because you had that transfer.
So it's just something I wanted to bring
up as a thought that you could identify
specific ones to maybe get a higher
standard than others
>> without actually tearing up Belleview
roads. We'll just make our roads better.
Okay. Council President D. Michelle.
>> Uh thank you Mayor Mullet. Um, just
grab. So, I want to echo what uh council
member um Wash said. I'm a big uh fan of
the pavement management program and
really pleased with the results of our
investment that we made back in 2019. Um
my concern is um
I would like to look at this at this
request what appears to be a budget
request to me uh in the context of the
entire budget that we put together for
27 and 28. Um if we fully fund uh the
pavement management program, what are we
giving up? Um I think that council
member Jen also referred to that. Uh I'd
like to know what the tradeoffs are. uh
in terms of the overall budget before I
can support uh committing to fully
funding. Uh it looks I I have to say
that I'm a big fan of the uh work that
was done uh I think a year ago on Sunset
Way. That is a beautiful job that was
done by uh our city uh with the new
crosswalk near the hatchery and that
street is just beautiful there. So, um
it certainly does make a difference in
our community to have beautiful uh
well-maintained roads, but uh we have to
think what else are we giving up when we
uh fully fund this program. And so, um I
would like to just hold off and wait
till we get into the thick of our budget
deliberations
um before I commit to uh really
supporting the full funding of the
program. Thank you.
Oh, that's excellent. And I can speak I
think administration's perspective. I
think we're saying we're not proposing
to add like a new department to the city
of Isqua. We're basically proposing what
sounds kind of boring, but just
investing a lot more money as our next
kind of thing that we're going to focus
on of just the mundane, you know,
support of our infrastructure. And so I
don't think our plan is to cut something
to do this. I think but our we are
saying we're not necessarily going to be
proposing other new programs. We're
going to be trying to make this a
priority. Council member Nichols.
>> So getting at the the core question I
think you're asking at least on the on
the slide which is prioritize cost
effectiveness or aesthetics. It's it's
still it's hard for me to answer which
actually does that in part because of
what I was trying to get at when I was
picking on the graph. uh I won't go back
to it, but you know the one I'm talking
about that only goes out a year or so.
Um
this li we have a difference in costs
that are stated in terms of dollars per
square yard. Um I think to really make
this argument well you would need to add
per square yard year or some unit of
time in there to understand where these
do the do these cross over at a point
where if we have for example like let's
say we're sealing our cracks every year.
Um just as to to put something note
there as a one book end. Um but we only
have to surface seal every 10 years. Um
if we look at the full lifetime cost of
this payment management plan over 35
years um the more aesthetic one is
actually the less expensive in that
case. um potentially and I I would like
to understand if that's where those are
the cases and making sure that we're not
um
only modeling for a single year and not
taking into account longer term costs
could actually be lower.
>> Okay, I I can definitely do that. Um I
think one to clarify that a little bit
is we wouldn't crack seal the same road.
I mean, the crack seal, the way a road
would be treated, um, if we were going
to utilize all the preventive
maintenance techniques and reactive
would be potentially you go in and you
crack seal when the cracks start showing
up. Three years later, the cracks might
be opening up a little bit. They might
be longer. We might crack seal it again
and just touch up those pieces and buy
us another three years. And then we'd
come in and we do a surface seal if it's
not an arterial roadway. um with
patches, patching and then a surface
seal. Um so at that point we're almost
gaining that 15 years of life with two
$1 treatments and one $8 treatment and
then or a4 $50 treatment. Um if we were
to do that overlay, we're looking at
that $35
um 35 to 45 and that gets you the 15
years. So, if we're able to use both
uh on a consistent basis, we're we're
actually going to be a lot cheaper in
the long run um by maintaining by using
both preventative and reactive
techniques on that same road. Um so, I
think I might need to drill down a
little bit further with you on on
exactly what what you're getting at with
that, but that's where that's where I'm
at right now.
>> I think it's like eventually every
street will get an overlay. Yeah. Yeah,
>> just a question of can you buy yourself
an extra 10 or 15 years before you have
to pay the full cost. Council member
Joe,
>> thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Um, first off, uh, I want to thank you
for this analysis. You've put in time.
You've brought in complicated math. Um,
I was, uh, trying to tell my
15-year-old, 16-year-old to, uh, study
their math. They said, "I'm never going
to use math. I'm going to be an
engineer. I had to go into a
conversation a little bit about that.
But you can tell that the amount of math
that you put into this analysis, the
amount of um time you put in to figure
out what's going to work best for us, uh
is something that the citizens don't
see, but should definitely appreciate.
>> In that same regard, uh the streets, as
the mayor points out, are a little bit
mundane. You know, they don't the
citizens don't think about them. They
might see that there's a a flower pot on
the side of the street and think that's
nice, but the underlying function of the
street itself, you know, is is mundane
and something that they just expect. Um,
and I just want to compliment you that
you're doing a great job meeting that
expectation by making sure that our
roads are improved in places like Sunset
that Council President pointed out, but
also maintaining that road for the the
maximum life that you can using those
small fixes along the way and then using
the reactive when it's needed. Um, I I
would encourage you to continue on the
path you're on. Um, the one concern I
have about going to a higher
uh aesthetic standard um would just be a
a a little bit of a an equity uh um
potential problem in the sense that I I
sat down with a council member up north
in Snomish County and he was uh
concerned that his streets weren't
maintained very well in his poorer
district and his park wasn't maintained
very well in his his district because it
wasn't going to be fixed. until 2028.
Whereas some other areas in town because
of um either
the squeaky wheel syndrome or just
better advocates for their uh citizens
had newer parks and better better
streets. So that's just a long way of
saying that if we do go to a higher
aesthetic standard that we make sure
that the higher standard streets are um
distributed in a way so that
neighborhoods do not feel left out.
Neighborhoods do not feel that um uh one
area of the city is being treated
differently because of x y or z factors
along the way. And we just hope that you
keep that in consideration as you're
moving forward with the project. Thank
you.
>> Thank you. that that is a north star for
the pavement management program in
general. Um, you know, there are
roadways where we did a surface seal
last year, for example, in the Woods
neighborhood and there are still roads
in there that need the overlay. So,
they're going to their neighbors might
have an overlay and they have a surface
seal. Um, ultimately I'm just looking at
the network as a whole and what needs to
be done. Um, and that's definitely I
feel that in my heart and that's how I
that's how we proceed in that PMP.
>> All right. Well, thank you very much,
Bennett. I appreciate all your time and
uh I think we did hear a request for a
bus tour somewhere in this whole thing.
And okay,
>> Andrea Leonard,
>> thank you. Okay, last on the agenda for
this evening is a conversation about
Metrlex and the city of Isiqua's
microtransit program.
As uh you recall in the fall uh council
wanted us to come back to talk about
what are those performance expectations
and so that's why we're back here today.
Um some of the specific direction needed
for this evening is uh whether city
council has any changes
uh to the goals for an isiqua
microtransit program.
And given the goals and the performance
data the city collects from Metro, how
does the city council define success for
this program?
And then finally, uh we do have some
comparisons of other options for you
this evening. So which alternative does
council prefer to explore further? Um we
categorize these options really as
changes to the existing metrlex service
to increase wrership or perhaps a
different service option.
Um, in terms of background, uh, for
those who are not as familiar with
Metrolex, microransit is technology
enabled on demand public transportation
service that uses smaller vehicles.
That's where the micro comes from. So,
more flexible vans or shuttles that are
able to go into parts of the city that
are not built for those big buses. and
it provides for more flex flexible
scheduling and routing because it is on
demand.
Metroflex is King County's microtransit
program that we have been piloting for
the past two years and we're now in the
third year of operation. Isiqua chose
Metroflex after evaluating a bunch of
other options. Those options are
reflected in the memo uh in your packet
today.
And as I said before, in the fall of
2025, council had raised concerns about
the cost effectiveness of Metroflex and
directed the administration to return to
define success and to examine
alternatives.
And that's why we're here today.
So, as I said, in 2022, the
transportation advisory board and the
city council provided a few program
goals for this service. Uh, initially
council was very focused on connecting
Talis and Squawk to the valley floor um
and to the transit center as those
neighborhoods were very underserved by
transit.
And uh, TAB provided a little extra
guidance in terms of a goal and they
wanted to extend the service to all of
Isiqua if possible and not just those
two neighborhoods.
Also, part of the original program goals
were to reduce single occupant vehicle
trips and greenhouse gases by
encouraging shared rides and connecting
to transit. This is where the microp
program goals differ a little bit from
what you would consider like a typical
Uber or Lyft service where it's usually
um one person is getting a ride and
generating that ride. And so this
encourages more shared rides.
Also, another goal was to address equity
concerns for accessibility of those with
low incomes and with limited mobility
options. And finally, provide a service
that's compatible with existing city
resources. So, not a service that would
require us to hire additional staff or
to try to um that would be very
expensive for the city to
um provide.
And so this is performance data that we
collect from Metro on a regular basis.
This is data that um most of you have
seen before in terms of average weekday
rides, rides uh per vehicle hour per
van.
King County cost per ride is uh a little
over $20 and so is the city of Isiqua
cost per ride. together. That means that
the total cost per ride is over $40. And
that's the number that city council um
was really concerned about with last
fall. And so I wanted to break those
apart here and really show you um how
that cost is split. Isqua pays for the
cost of one van and uh just really the
driver for that van and King County pays
for the other infrastructure related to
that. And at certain times when demand
is high, we get more than one van. And
so King County provides for that extra
service.
The percent of shared trips is 55%. This
is where we're trying to measure towards
those program goals of shared trips and
reducing SOV trips and GHG uh GS GHGs.
And then percentage of trips in EPA.
These are equity priority areas as
defined by King County. Um,
unfortunately we're not able to get
specific data from King County on who
uses the service, how many have a
reduced ride fair permit, etc. But they
do collect data on trips to or from
areas that they determine to be equity
priority areas. Those areas are defined
by King County with a couple of criteria
including low income
uh and a number of other factors.
And then the average wait time is uh
typically about 23 minutes though of
course that changes depending on demand
um and available vehicles.
And so as we shift to what are some
other options to metrlex and we looked
at a couple of um a couple of other
options as the administration we spoke
with um Uber as well. They're not on
this list because we didn't get a
proposal back from them in time for this
presentation. And so we're just
comparing a city-run circulator that's
more like a typical shuttle kind of
similar to the route 200 if you're
familiar with that um that the city used
to have uh several years ago. Uh we
heard from council that that was
something that was interesting they
wanted us to explore. So um that is an
option here. And metrlex is kind of that
base comparison. And then Circuit.
Circuit is a private provider. So
Metrlex is um operated through King
County by a provider known as VIA. We
did talk to them directly as well, but
they're not willing to provide services
to us outside of the King County
contract. Circuit is a competitor of VIA
and they provide services uh all across
the United States, including recently in
Belleview and also in Redmond. They um
provide services for the bellhop in in
uh Belleview and they're just getting
started in Redmond. And so we talked to
each of these uh uh we looked at we
looked into each of these options to
provide some costs so you can see what
the annual cost estimate is. Um there's
a lot in terms of costs that are to be
determined as you see and that's really
because we would need to look more into
these options and negotiate a contract
and get a lot more detail. So this was
just kind of first blush. How might
these options compare?
In terms of goals, we compared the
options to the original goals as stated.
So as you can see um for uh most of
these options, they fit the goals
because microtransit is more and more on
this ondemand
um model. uh the cityrun circulator
would not be in as on demand uh because
it would have a it would have a fixed
route. So it would only serve a portion
of the city not in the way that circuit
or metrlex would just be able to be
hailed like an Uber or a lift pretty
much to the point of wherever you are in
the city. There's a few exceptions with
Metrolex. Um few parts of the cities
that are not served. Um like Talis for
example, that was changed with the 2025
2026 contract. I'm sorry, the 2026 2027
contract. Forget what year you were in.
Um so, uh
next,
>> Council Member Nichols.
>> So, quick question on uh the greenhouse
gas comparison between the options. Are
are we sure Metroflux reduces greenhouse
gases? It's I mean it's a large vehicle
that has to go both ways and most of the
time it's single occupancy, right?
>> Well, 55% of the trips are shared with
other passengers and so um
>> so half the time.
>> So a little over half the time versus we
compare that to the option of people
just driving themselves in their car.
>> Council member J. Um, just to note to
council member Nichols point, me uh,
Metroflex's own data says the ratio of
passenger miles traveled to vehicle
miles traveled in all Metrolex, not just
Isquin. Isqua, my understanding is like
in the lower performing half. There's
1.5 vehicle miles traveled per passenger
mile traveled because they have to drive
between the different rides. And
especially because the region is so big,
you know, you could have someone getting
a ride in Isqua, then the vehicle has to
like drive to Smamish. And a lot of
these folks maybe aren't folks that have
access to a vehicle. So like there's
that equity aspect, but I don't think
the reducing greenhouse gases is uh I
mean like 55% of rides being shared
doesn't necessarily mean that greenhouse
gases are being reduced.
Um
>> I think in the circuit model it is an EV
fleet. So that was one difference
between circuit and and metrlex. But I
did have an actual question which was um
so I saw in the previous slide the cost
of the cityrun circulator shuttle was
206,000 whereas when we had looked I
mean the previous version that was like
from 2022 or whatever said the cost of a
cityr run circulator shuttle was 400 to
800,000. So what changed because I mean
then the cityrun circulator shuttle is
very competitive with metroflex in terms
of cost.
In terms of cost, it is um I was not
involved in the cost estimate for the
original shuttle. Uh so I did provide a
breakdown of that cost estimate in the
memo uh in the packet for this evening.
So you can kind of check my math and see
what assumptions were used there.
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to dig up
the assumptions from um the previous
time that we evaluated those options.
>> And I would say circuit said they were
indifferent. They're basically like
you're buying 60 hours a week from us
and if you want to have a fixed route
with your 60 hours, you can do a fixed
route. Like they're like we're just
going to charge you the amount of hours
and we don't care how you use them. It
can be pointtooint or fix. Council
member Adair.
>> Yeah. On the cityrun circulator shuttle
cost estimate. Were there actual routes
that are considered in that or is
>> Yeah, I wasn't sure that I saw like what
the actual route
>> there was no route. We would need to
again we would need to dig deeper into
each of these options if we wanted to
pursue them. That's part of the question
for council tonight um is whether we
should pursue any of these alternatives
and which is the preferred alternative
that we should pursue further.
>> So we just did an estimate for number of
miles for a circulator around the city.
So we would need to again refine it. It
was just an estimate to try to provide
some comparisons for tonight.
>> Would you have a higher cost if the
routes were somehow different or
something like that? Yeah, absolutely.
Yeah, I think the assumption I'm
forgetting what exactly the memo said,
but I think it was a seven mile route is
what the um estimate was based off of.
>> Deputy President,
>> um just a a sanity check question, and I
know we've had this number in the past.
I just don't see it here right now. How
does uh a Metro bus or a Sound Transit
bus compare if we're if we're saying
it's 40
50 per trip to do Metrolex. How how does
it how does a bus operating cost
compare?
>> I am not sure. I can ask Metro if they
have a if they have a cost for their
buses.
>> Okay. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I I I like
I said, I think in previous years we've
had that information. We just don't have
it this evening. Thanks,
>> Council Member Jen. I can read your
mind. I know you want to ask something.
Oh, I was I was going to say Metro has
this um number available and I believe
across all Metro buses like $10 per
ride. I think like somewhere in the
range of 10 to 15
>> and that's the total burden cost.
>> Um I believe so, but that includes I
mean you know like across all like the
you know Bellev to Seattle buses would
be included in that as well.
>> Got it. Thank you, Council Member
Nichols.
>> Okay. Sorry, going back a slide. um to
the uh wait time.
How is the wait time for this cityrun
circulator shuttle calculated?
>> Is that is it wait time or headway
between the shuttles
>> for the cityrun circulator?
I don't have a I'm sorry I don't think I
understand there's for the do you mean
for metroflex
>> where you put less than 45 minutes I
think.
>> Yeah, there's a there's a row called
city run circulator shuttle and the
column is wait time.
>> Right. Okay. Thank you. Uh so that was
uh based off of um thinking about it
being a fixed route and what the
farthest point of that route may be. Um
if we were to have a circulator that's
similar to what the route 200 was. Um
the route 200 basically hugged along the
I90 corridor up into the island to serve
Swedish down to the high school and then
along kind of along the I90 corridor
from there to make a loop towards
Costco. And so looking at that, it will
depend on runtime. So I used assumptions
um with uh Google directions to try to
figure out how long such a route may
take at different times. And so um
that's where that wait time came from.
Okay? Because you might be have just,
you know, missed the bus. How long might
you wait for it to come back around and
get you?
>> So it's really it's probably just to
make sure that we're comparing these
fairly though. It's probably the maximum
weight time as opposed to the average
weight time which is what the metrlex
and circuit are probably would be.
>> Yes, that's true. Yes.
>> Council Jane.
>> Um so just so the cityrun circulator
shuttle the cost would be for one
vehicle doing 3,700 hours per year.
>> Correct.
Okay. Um Okay. Thank you.
I think that was your This is our last
slide, right? I think we're just in the
wrap-up slide after this.
>> Okay. I didn't know if Council Member
Adair had a question. All right. Okay.
Sometimes it's hard to tell with the
mics. All right. So, options uh that we
wanted some feedback on tonight. There's
one that you didn't see in those charts,
which is to continue to work with
Metrolex to try to change some of the
service options within the contract.
already um because of council feedback,
we have changed the service area for our
new contract. So, we took out service to
the Squawk neighborhood in favor of
adding service to the Isqua Highlands um
based on the feedback that you know we
weren't having a lot of ridership for
Squawk uh the Squawk neighborhood, but
we could possibly pick up more riders in
the Isiqua Highlands and also reduce the
cost per trip if that was the most
important success marker to council. Um
there's the possibility of us also
looking at the hours for Metrolex. So um
we could extend uh or could change
rather the hours to cover more nights
for Friday night and Saturday night.
That might pick up more riders in that
way instead of just looking at the
daytime for Saturday, for example. And
so we would need to go back to Metro and
negotiate this and possibly need some of
Seamish's buyin since they have um we
have an overlapping service area with
the city of Seamish. So there's some
options within our uh current services
with Metrolex that we could try out and
examine um or we could evaluate another
service or vendor as were depicted in
the charts we just saw.
>> Council member Walsh,
>> thank you. During our last conversations
about this, we were told that any
additional hours, including evenings or
weekends, would require an additional
van, which would basically double the
cost. Are you suggesting there is
another option? I'm suggesting we could
investigate shifting the hours. So, not
increasing the hours, but instead of
9:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturdays, we
could instead perhaps make that window
later. So, it could be, you know, 11 to
7 or noon to 9 or something like that.
>> I would say the circuit people, their
suggestion was to have Monday through
Thursday hours and maybe Friday through
Sunday hours. It's like Friday through
Sunday being you start later and end
later, but Monday through Thursday is
more daytime. But we don't know, you
know, we have to think or we're trying
to get guidance if that's an avenue we
want to pursue. We'd have to find out
from Samish if they're interested in
that since we share cars.
Council member Joe.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, curiosity
question. Uh, you mentioned that either
Lyft or Uber hadn't gotten a proposal
back to you. Um, do you think that uh
with additional
um phone calls and pressing from the
city they would be able to get something
back to us or is that just not in the
cards?
>> Uh well uh not to call out our friends
uh at Uber, but I have reminded them a
couple of times and it's been a couple
of weeks and I haven't heard anything.
So, I would like to think that if we
pressed them enough, we could get
something, but so far um my repeated
requests have fallen on deaf ears.
>> Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that. Um
would like to have that information if
it's available before we uh look at this
again. Thank you.
>> Are there other questions for Andrea?
>> Oh, Council President D. Michelle.
Yes, thank you. Um, I'm very sorry to
keep repeating this, but under options,
I would really like to see if we could
do a much more aggressive communications
around Met Metrlex. And I believe the
last time that Metro uh was with was in
front of us when we were discussing the
contract that they said that the that
the contract for this coming year would
include um Metro's um participation in
better outreach to our community and
which might include mailings and social
media and so forth. Um, I thought we did
a really good job when we rolled out
Metro Metrlex a couple of years ago or
three years ago, but uh that
communications has tapered off and I
think that we need to keep uh reminding
people that this is an option. Um, so I
would hope that we would under options
we would think about a really aggressive
communications program around um around
Metrlex.
>> Oh, Council Member Rder. Oh, and then
we'll follow up with Deputy President
Mart.
>> Um, to the, you know, to the question of
what you do, I'm kind of torn. I'm still
kind of all options seem viable to me.
Um, you know, the cityrun shuttle seems
actually a little bit less in cost. Um,
Circuit is interesting, but obviously
their number, you know, they have this
average cost per passenger of $17 and
all this additional usage, but we don't
really know where they're coming getting
those numbers from. So, I'm curious to
know, is that true? Could it for some
reason using them have all this higher
usage? So at the moment for me all these
options seem like a viable path and I
can't say I have a direction because all
of them depend on so many other
variables that we're waiting to find out
what what this route would look like on
a cityrun circulator what these circuit
numbers really mean. So at the moment I
don't have like a direction to go
because all all three seem potential.
>> Yeah, I think it's that's very valid. I
also think because we just changed the
metroflex service area, it's kind of
challenging because we're kind of we'll
we'll have more data I think at the end
of June or earlier. It's we're going to
have more data on what that geographic
change did in terms of utilization, but
right now today like you say, council
member deer, we don't have that
information. Uh, Deputy President Marks,
>> I want I want to gently push back on the
idea that there's anything wrong with
Metroflex. So, um, being an engineer, I
just like orders of magnitude. King
County uh, uh, Metro spends about $2
billion a year for about 90 million
rides. That's 22 bucks a ride. And you
know, when you have um smaller vehicles
and with with with fewer passengers on
them, you're going to be less efficient.
So $40 a ride for a for a, you know,
ondemand system that has smaller numbers
of riders doesn't seem like necessarily
a problem to me. So I I want to make
sure that we're just coming at this from
the right perspective. Right. I think
people have gagged a little on that $40
number, but I I don't think I transit is
expensive. I I come back to I mentioned
Minnesota's wrestler governor um earlier
in the evening, right? Um he just said
it's all expensive, right? Transit is
transportation is expensive, cars are
expensive, freeways are expensive, buses
are expensive. You just have to do it at
some point because it's something that
you want to have as a community. And he
just said, "We're going to do it in
Minnesota." And so they did. So I just I
want us to be careful, right? I'm not
sure there's anything wrong with
Metroflex at all. And so, um, if it
works and we like it, um, I'm not sure
$40, uh, a passenger is a bad marker at
all compared to any other transit
options that we have out there. Thank
you.
>> I want to be clear and we're not
suggesting I mean, I think one of our
main alternatives is continue to use
Metrflex and just see if we can get
better utilization, but yeah,
>> but I think it was presented I mean, it
has always been presented that it's so
much more expensive than anything else.
And I don't I don't think that's
necessarily true.
>> Council member Walsh.
Thank you. Um I think similar to deputy
council president uh Martz, I am really
comfortable with the idea of continuing
Metroflex and providing the service to
our community. I've loved seeing the
wrership with some of our seniors and
students and people that are unable to
drive. And so from my perspective,
that's the top priority. So I think one
of the things you asked was feedback on
some of the goals. So I would say I'm
not as
thrilled with the goals that we
originally created around greenhouse gas
reduction single occupancy vehicle. I
think those are nice to haves but the
important things for me are um equity
and usage by people who are unable to
drive. I think um providing
um last mile transit to our most dense
neighborhoods and connection to the core
areas is important to me. Uh connection
to transit um is really important. So if
we are looking at circuit their ability
to uh get somebody to the transit
centers um and access for those is
really important. um weight times is
really important for me. And so I think
one of my disappointments um with the
Metrolex program is if there is only one
vehicle um sometimes the wait times for
those could be so long that someone just
couldn't utilize it and then that makes
their next potential usage of that um
more of a risky option for them. So that
is a more important metric to me. And
then the other thing that um has been a
little bit of a limiting factor on
Metrolex is evenings and weekends. Um my
kids have had several times when they
wanted to take it to an event at uh five
or six o'clock but then knew they
couldn't get back um utilizing that. And
so that is an important thing for me. Um
I don't think that transit uh the
ability to have microransit into um
seamish is important to me. So the idea
of a um connecting piece the fact that
we have that with metrlex right now is a
nice to have but not something that I
would necessarily negate a program such
as circuit um against. And so I would
say I'm interested in investigating uh
circuit because uh I think they have
more of an incentive to communicate to
our residents and uh promote the project
um and our residents ability to use it
because they have to maintain a certain
level of service whereas King County
Metro is like hey take it or leave it.
This is what we're going to be able to
do. So, um I think they have a potential
for getting a higher writership. I like
that we could potentially do uh later
hours um modeled after what the
Belleview program um does. And then I
also really like uh potentially their
ability to work with uh corporate
sponsorships or other ways that might
lower um the cost either to individual
users um or for our city's costs. And so
I like some of those variabilities in
there. Um, so I think it's worth our
time to investigate those. Um, maybe
it's worth our time to go back to Metro
Flex, but I don't think
starting later and going into evening
hours would satisfy
my desires there. I think the morning
times are also important. Um, so I just
don't know that we can get out of
Metrolex those additional hours that I
think would make the program um, a
little bit more effective.
>> Excellent. And Council Member Nichols.
>> So, I want to start out by saying um I I
agree with Deputy Council President
Marts that Metrolex itself doesn't
necessarily seem so expensive to me. I
think um it is it's a number that can
seem kind of eye popping when you look
at it out of context but in the context
of
all transport has inherent expenses to
it um whether as was brought up that's a
highway or another type of bus. So I
think we should really be looking at it
in that context and not just be
optimizing solely for things like
dollars per passenger. That seems like a
a potentially pernicious one for me to
optimize based on because a lot of a lot
of the premise here is we're trying to
connect areas that are are transit
deserts. Um they may not necessarily
have the highest volume. So I would be
concerned about you know it's some it's
there's an extreme where I don't know
we're connecting two ends of the Costco
parking lot and they have the highest
volume or something but that's not
that's not what we want, right? Um, so
just being concerned about what metrics
we're actually trying to optimize for.
Um, I will uh disagree a bit on whether
we should keep greenhouse gases in
there. I think we should keep them in
there as a goal. Uh, not keeping sorry,
not keep not keep greenhouse gases in
there as a goal, keep reduction of
greenhouse gases in there as a goal. um
and uh not have it override per se, but
like let's keep it in in part because at
the moment um at least with what we have
on circuit there I mean I'm I'm
skeptical here because it seems like
there's a bit of a have your cake and
eat it too uh side to their presentation
it seems possibly less expensive,
greener, uh longer, more like there's a
bunch of things that seem great. Is that
real? Um, and to that end, I think it
would be nice, and I'm not sure if we've
gotten a chance yet, to see if we've to
to speak to our friends in Belleview,
um, who are already contracting with
them and see what their experiences with
them has been in a bit more detail. Um,
how did their predictions compared to
their actuals? Like, were they did they
get what they thought they were going to
get? Um, how has, you know, how have
their transit customers felt about that
service? Um, I think it's a really
interesting option to look at and uh
based on what it it um has been
presented, but to council member's
point, there's not enough information
for me at least to make any real
decision per se on what my preference
would be. Uh, I think beyond to the
point of the question that you're asking
and should uh other options and
evaluations be continued, I would say
yes, definitely. I think we need more
information here.
>> Yeah, that's helpful. Uh, Council Member
Jen, and I will say the Belleview
example was hard to compare apples to
apples because it's a really it's super
utilized, but it's in that downtown
Belleview core. So, they love it, but we
don't have a very similar core to
compare to what they're offering. So,
they're getting crazy high frequency
usage, but we just don't know if that
translate into this environment.
Um, I mean, I feel I I kind of have a
pre-existing bias going into this, which
is that I I just fundamentally disagree
with the use of the word microransit to
essentially describe Uberpool. I like
that to me is not transit. And I think
one of the things that's really
concerning to me in the way that it's
currently the metrics that we currently
have is a 23m minute wait time. you
know, and the 23 minute wait time is a
function of there being rides that then,
you know, someone has to complete a ride
and then you go to the next ride. And so
we're essentially it seems like the
system that we already have is pretty
well utilized if the wait time is 23
minutes. If the vans are just sitting
around, the wait time would not be 23
minutes. And so I'm very skeptical about
this idea that advertising it more and
getting more rides will somehow get
better utilization because it seems
already pretty well utilized. And that's
what we've heard from the folks at Metro
as well. Um, you know, there's no
economies of scale. If there's another
rider with with a normal bus, if you
have more riders, then you know, the
marginal cost of serving them is
basically zero until you have so many
riders that then you need to get a
bigger bus, but then that's great. You
can have more buses, more service,
that's better for everyone. Um, I would
echo uh Mayor Mullet's point that
Belleview's circuit, I mean, the service
area is tiny. you know, it's like one
square mile and so all the rides the
rides are like three minutes and the
distance between rides is also really
short. So then the wait time is a lot
less. Um
I think in terms of the access piece, I
do think that's something that is
important, but also just going back to
the cost piece, I don't think we
necessarily have to optimize for like
getting the absolute lowest rock bottom
cost. But when we have a situation where
we are paying more for the service per
ride than literally just like giving
people vouchers for an Uber, I think
that's where it makes me think maybe we
should reevaluate. And um
uh Metro does share data on the transit
operating cost per boarding. So the cost
that we're paying is not fully loaded
because it doesn't include Andrea's
time. It doesn't include the staff time
of folks at Metro. It's $10.36
per boarding including dart service
which is like the dialer ride transit in
rural areas where they can go out of the
way to pick you up. So $40 operating
cost per ride. I mean that's kind of
high. Um I've being a nerd, you know,
I've kind of mapped out what are some of
the different ways that we could have
different shuttles serving the areas
that we think are like highest need. For
example, you know, one of the big areas
is Rose Crest Italalis, which um you
know, we could question the land use
decisions to build uh subsidized
affordable housing in an area that's a
transit desert, but it's there. And I
think to me, that's probably one of the
areas that should be a very high
priority. Um, and you know, connecting
that with the transit center with some
other areas like the, you know, Target
shopping center, post office, you know,
Oldtown, even going partway up Squawk,
like it's doable. And I think that could
also get a lot more wrership. Um, this
summer I talked to someone who lives up
in Talis but has no car. And so I talked
to her a bit about Metroflex. I was
like, first of all, I was impressed that
someone would choose to live carfree in
Talis, which is a transit desert. Um,
but she said she uses Metrflex
sometimes, but it's not that great
because it doesn't it's completely
unpredictable. Like, you don't know when
it's going to come until you order the
thing. So, you can't plan around it
versus, you know, even if the headway is
45 minutes, at least, you know, and I
think if we're going to do this shuttle,
I would hope that Circuit has some
really good, you know, way to track
where their vehicles are. So, just
because the the wait time or headways
isn't as much of an issue as
predictability. And I think
fundamentally with Metroflex because it
just goes wherever people call it,
there's just never going to be any
predictability unless you get so many
vehicles that then you know you can just
have them all on demand which is then
also going to be just prohibitively
expensive. So um my strong preference is
to um explore this circulator shuttle
option in more detail. I think some of
the other options is basically like you
know with the on like microransit
service it's just like what are the
different costs and things like that and
service areas. I think with circulator
shuttles, there's so many different
options of like where you could have the
route go that we should start looking
into what those could be, whether some
of them could be more like a dart type
thing where you can go a little bit out
of the way to help kind of serve some of
that. Um, you know, like if someone's
like a little bit out of the way of
where it goes, could we be able to
provide that service as well? But just
fundamentally I think if you can have a
route that's like somewhat more
predictable then you can then you know
if you can have four people that are all
going in the same direction at the same
time then the cost per rider is going to
it's just we can get so much more
mobility for people in our community for
the same cost.
>> Excellent.
I think that this is that's our last
slide right Andrea? Uh yes for for yeah
for the Metroflex or microtransit item.
So overall for the all of the items we
discussed tonight just some next steps
to wrap us up for the evening. Um work
with Sound Transit uh and regionally to
save Isiqua light rail. That's where a
lot of our focus is going to be over the
next six months as Mayor Mullet said
earlier this evening. uh also in our
next steps that we have our
transportation improvement program
update that will return to council in
June. First stop though is going to be
with the transportation advisory board
and also with the mobility and
infrastructure committee. So those
meetings are forthcoming and uh as Mayor
Mullet said, we're looking for a focus
on congestion relief. We've also heard a
lot of feedback tonight um for bike and
pet and safety improvements as well. So,
we'll be looking into those um and using
the bonding capacity of our
transportation benefit district funds.
Also, um look at ongoing implementation
of capital and maintenance plans. And we
just got a lot of feedback for you um
for more work needed on Metroflex and
microtransit in the city. So, we'll have
to return um for more discussion of that
later this year.
Are there any other questions before we
wrap up and adjourn? I mean, I think
that
going back, I think, to council
president D. Michelle's like concern,
which I heard, which is I'm worried
about committing these investments, not
knowing what it's could be taking away.
And I think the goal in this process is
normally budgets grow. Like when Deputy
President Mart and I were on this
council together, it was a $34 million
budget. Now it's a $68 million budget.
We know budgets grow. We also know that
we we pay our staff cost of living
adjustments. So you don't have that much
extra money. But I think the goal here
is whatever extra money we do have, we
want the priority to be maintaining our
infrastructure, specifically this
pavement management program, knowing
that Talison Islands are coming up at
points in their life where we think if
we don't start making some investments,
they could fall behind the curves. We
don't want them to fall behind. And and
that's kind of a fundamental principle I
think we're laying out here tonight in
combination with making an aggressive
push on light rail regionally and
everyone in this room can make can help
with that push. And I think we've heard
loud and clear that we can't make at
this time. It's very clear that we need
to get more information on terms of, you
know, what we're doing with the transit
space and the options to this community
and and so we will continue to get that
information and come back with more
numbers and yes, we can bug Uber for
more information. And I think we can
also look at what fixed route things and
compare and and whether we have options
to change metrlex hours without driving
up cost and and so these are all things
we will continue to get and bring back
to the council. But with that, this
special meeting on transportation is
officially adjourned at 8:51.