Okay, the recording has started. Leslie,
go ahead.
>> Fantastic. Well, welcome everyone to our
joint meeting of the Equity Board and
also the Human Services Commission. Look
forward to a great meeting with lots of
shared information and some great
insights. So, um, I guess with that
being said, we are planning to order at
6:12 p.m.
>> So,
and then are we wanting to um
acknowledge or request if there are any
public comments for this evening?
It looks like we do not have any this
evening here in the audience in person.
Do you have any online?
>> None from me.
>> We're going to do attendance.
>> Okay. Thank you very much.
>> You got it.
>> So, attendance, do we have any um
excused absences uh this evening for the
equity board?
>> We have many excused absences from the
equity board this evening um including
Heather Young's, Oscar Mantano, and Juan
Palmer. And so and as well as our
alternate nichaire um and so both uh
Kelly will be serving as a regular
member this evening.
>> Fantastic.
And then uh for um Hannah the chair I'm
assuming of the uh human services
commission. Do you have um the role that
you like to call for your commission?
>> Yeah, we're just going to call a few
excused absent here. We have
Commissioner Manny Brown and
Commissioner Moyula who is out um for
today and the rest of the commissioners
are here. Thank you all for being here.
Thank you.
>> Great. We have our chair report our
first item.
>> All right. Fantastic. So um in honor of
our very interesting agenda item to
discuss of a central um esqu station
alignment study uh in the draft
evaluation criteria, I thought it would
be very apppropo to have an opening
question regards to transportation. So
tonight's opening question is what's one
small transportation change that you
would that would make a big difference
in your daily life? So let me restate
that again. What's one small
transportation change that would make a
big difference in your daily life?
>> Who would like to start?
>> Go for it.
>> As a parent, I would love easier access
for students to be traveling back and
forth from school and from local areas
within the city. So, as a parent, I
didn't have to do so many trips just
back and forth on school or for certain
um sports or club locations like outside
school district activities. That is um
that would make my life a lot easier.
Less time on the roads, less traffic on
the streets.
>> Absolutely. It's a great answer.
>> Hi, Kazoo. Um I would love to see more
local options um from the transit
centers. So, if I could park at the
transit center on Highway 900 and know
that there was a shuttle to go over to
uh Costco or
medical dental building type thing and
then back to my car um if there was more
regular service.
>> Excellent.
Who wants to go next with our what's one
small transportation change that would
make a big difference in your daily
life?
>> Yeah, I agree with her. Um, I go to
Udub, so I normally take like I either
drive there or take the bus from Isiqua
Highlands to Udub, but it would be nicer
to see like a local bus from Samish or
like one straight from Isiqua to Udub
instead of like stops at Belleview and
such, but
I live right near the as yet unopened
light rail station in the city of
Seattle. um right by uh Judkins Park and
it would change my daily life not
because I would ride it to work
unfortunately for the next 40 years. But
um
it would definitely change like my
day-to-day experience in my neighborhood
and I'm already starting to see those
changes um with Seattle putting in
permanent parking in my neighborhood
which shouldn't exist you know a few
months ago. Um, but just I would hope to
see fewer cars uh backed up along our
street uh during rush hour as a result
of that.
I have an odd one. I live on a on a dead
end street and for some reason Google
thinks it's or and the other mapping
systems think that it's a through
street.
>> So everybody turns around in my
driveway.
buying six times a day. Wow. And of
course, our driveway is sinking. So,
>> you hand
>> Oh, yeah. Couple of people online.
>> There's a few of us. Um, this is Trish.
I'll go because I think I see a number
one by my name. Um, I would like to see
a huge expansion of Metrolex.
That's just a simple answer.
>> Go ahead, Ray. I would say I think you
probably can all see your numbers as
well as we can, so feel free to to
>> Yeah, I'll happy to go next. No. Um, I
do quite a bit of commuting to Seattle
and one thing that would prompt a
transportation change is understanding
my destination and how much parking will
cost me. So,
>> say Ray, you know what? You don't need
to get in your car. You can go take that
bus.
>> Uh, this is my Edwards, uh, Human
Services Commission. Um, I would like to
see uh some kind of a link between the
Isiqua Transit Center down 900 to uh
Reton and the Maple Valley Highway area.
Uh that is that is it's it's not there
now. It doesn't exist and uh there's a
lot of people coming up 900. It would
really make a big difference in the
traffic coming through there.
Uh, hi, my name is Canal and uh, I'd
have to say I have to agree with Varnica
here. Um, to go to Seattle, for example,
only way to get there is a car. Um, and
I know like my parents don't trust me
enough to drive all the way to Seattle.
Um, and even even worse, have to try and
find parking there. Um, so definitely
some kind of bus where they can just um
like more ease of mind. Uh, and then
also I was thinking maybe some sort of
public transportation to like uh like
the summit at Snowquami. Um, I know like
I went to Colorado over break and they
had buses running from cities to uh
Eldora and I think it'd be great if we
could establish some sort of system to
take people up um to the mountains. I
know that's not really a squa but just
something to think about.
So again, Chris,
can you hear?
We can't.
No. Weird.
We'll come We'll come back to you.
>> Looks like Caric has his hand up.
>> Hi. Yeah, this is Caric. Can you hear
me?
>> Yeah.
>> Thank you. Yeah. I'd like to see
sidewalks on all streets in Esiqua. Um I
live on Squawk Mountain and often like
to walk up the the hill uh and there
aren't sidewalks on all streets, so it's
kind of tricky navigating uh walking
versus cars.
>> Um hi, my name is Aaron. uh with
HopeLink Mobility and I know that the
teen uh the garage teen cafe has
difficult time getting their teens to
and from their building.
>> So, I'll go next and just offer
something that it's not it doesn't
affect me, but I always look around in
my my uh my oneperson driver as I go 15
minutes from my house to my office. And
I'd love to see more less shelters here
in in Isqua. Um seeing someone stand
outside when it's raining in the dark
and I feel terrible for them. And I
think that
>> encouraging people to leave their cars
um people like me is making the entire
experience taking public transportation
more comfortable. So that is a you know
covered shelter where I can sit down
with my bags. I know that that's the
experience that most people want to have
as well. So, I like to see that.
>> Awesome. And then, uh, Chris shared he's
having mic issues, but but shared like
what Ray said, would love to know
parking price ahead of time so I can see
if it's better to drive or take the bus.
That transparency is really helpful.
>> I can go next. Mine, the thing that
popped in my head, which is super minor,
is wishing my son wouldn't parked behind
me in the driveway.
Huh? Probably takes 10 minutes to say,
"Can you please move your car?" Then you
have to wait.
>> Might be the last one.
>> I was going to say, is anyone else?
>> Um, well, I super appreciate this
question. This is what I do all day. Um,
so I'd love to hear all these comments.
For me, I live south of Dale
>> um in in Seattle and I would love to
have bike lanes on Reineer Avenue.
>> Um
>> it is very scary. So that's why I do not
bike uh to my light rail station, but I
could. It'd be close enough for me to do
that, but I don't want to do it.
>> But it is very scary. Yeah,
>> it's very scary. Yeah.
>> Awesome.
And you said
>> um I don't know. Like my commute is
pretty short. It's like five minutes. I
don't know. So like it takes me longer
to walk from the parking garage to my
desk than it does to drive.
>> Um but oftent times I'm like it's so
close I wish I could like not have to
drive. Like I could just walk but it's
on the highway so
>> no plans on doing that.
>> Yeah.
like some sort of shortcut like from
Newport Way to Costco would be nice.
Our final attendee of the question.
>> Everyone I want to welcome Manny Brown
Commissioner has joined us.
>> We are doing a fun question. Um do you
mind repeating the
>> Not at all. Hi Manny, I'm Lesie. So uh
our opening question is what small
transportation change would make a big
difference in your daily life
>> that would be
>> um wow
transportation change
I would I'd love to see the light rail
uh come through
>> and be able to uh access it as easy as
possible.
>> For sure.
>> Yeah. Well, probably already said that.
>> Fantastic. Well, thank you everyone for
um answering very thoughtfully on our
opening question. So, thank you. Learn a
lot about everybody through these
questions. Thanks.
>> Excellent. We have one item of regular
business for this evening and I don't
have any preamble for it. So, Thomas,
welcome back.
>> Thank you. Yeah, appreciate
every opportunity I've had to meet with
the groups. Um, see here.
So, you all are the first group I've
taken this to. I guess there's two
groups here. Equity board and human
services. Um, I'm taking uh a version of
this presentation uh four more times.
Um, so and I'm sure this criteria will
um will change in the next two months,
but I appreciate you all being my guinea
pigs for this. Um, so I will be asking
you just a couple questions. I'm hoping
to get your feedback on this evaluation
criteria. Um, Gail has some copies and I
have some massive copies if anybody
wants bigger versions.
Um, but two questions I have are
does the criteria reflect the intent of
the vision and guiding principles
document that was adopted by council
last year and is there anything else
that should be added that you see?
Um so again I think most of you have
seen this before but we are planning for
light rail service uh in central Isiqua
uh specifically in this green area which
is the regional drift center.
Um so
my cursor here this is like Costco
corporate.
Um this is obviously I90.
Uh, and then as we go down south,
there's like the Isqua Transit Center to
the very south. And then there's stuff
like uh uh Target and uh yeah, Safeway
and all that. So, it's a pretty big
area. Um, we're just thinking about this
generally as uh the area that most of uh
the growth in jobless housing is going
to be. Um, so in the next 20 years we're
going to have like something like 3500
new uh uh jobs. Sorry, I'm getting my
stuff. Um 8,000 sorry 8,000 jobs and
then 3,500 uh like housing units. So um
growth is happening in the next 20
years, but it's all basically going to
be here. And that is all uh assuming uh
that we get light rail in 2044. So um
jobs and housing growth is sort of tied
to uh investment in transit
infrastructure to support that.
>> Is 2044 like estimated bundalized or
like starting?
>> Um 2044 is what we've been quoted as of
2020
as the the date that Sound Transit can
deliver it.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. And Thomas just can you go back
one slide and I couldn't tell can you
just kind of go what those boundaries
are maybe around the green area.
>> Sure. Yeah. So this is um like uh
Evergreen Ford kind of area.
>> Um and then this is the it's called
transit center. There's like the fire
department right here. Um, this is
Newport and uh you know there's like uh
uh
Target and Safeway and like REI over
here.
>> Um, and that's kind of like the extent
of where this is. And then this is all
like Costco corporate. There's like
Pickering Place. Um, and then I think
there's like the hotels are over here.
Um, and then there's like more hotels
and office park over here. Um I think
there's like a Microsoft building
actually mix up here.
>> So excuse me when So where would the uh
station be itself?
>> Ah we don't know that yet.
>> Yeah.
>> Um but but we will get there. Yeah. So,
uh, the point of this exercise is to
talk about criteria that we think are
important and then the next time I come
back, we'll have some ideas on uh,
station locations and we'll show you how
those match up with the evaluation
criteria. Um, and I'll I'll just take
another step back to say this is just
like the city's preferred alternatives.
And the goal of this whole exercise is
to have a framework of how we think
about like where a good station would
be. Um, and then have a preferred
concept that we give to Sound Transit.
and they're going to do their own
analysis, but we're just kind of
thinking about uh preemptively what are
no goss for us, what do we like, what do
we don't like, um where are areas that
we've thought would be meeting our goals
and just show sound transit like our
thought process so that they can uh come
up with a solution that will work for
us.
>> That's one of the options um walking
distance to the jazz station. out of us.
>> Yeah, it could be. Um, yeah, we we
could, you know, we're thinking about
all sorts of ideas. So, um, let's maybe
table that. I'd love to get um any like
ideas for locations, but um just want to
think about the uh the evaluation
criteria and like thinking about the the
transit center and sort of what that
means is one of the criteria we're
thinking about um just at a at a very
high level. Yeah.
>> Um so if you don't mind, I'll just keep
cruising through this. Um, I want to
save all the time you guys want to ask
questions um, once I've kind of gone
through this. Um, but again, so I think
most of you have seen this. This is Ski
Link uh, South Kirkland uh, to Isaqua
Light Rail. So, um, we'll be from South
Kirkland uh, station, which is basically
the edge of Belleview. Um it'll come
through uh to the stations that were
built last year. Uh and then there'll be
new stations at Richard's Road, one at
East Gate, um and then one at Central
Aqua at the very end.
So Dale has some criteria that has been
uh provided if you're in the room,
otherwise it's attachment A. Um, so
thinking about the criteria, we're we
want to uh make sure that we're not
spending too much effort if something is
just not going to work for us. So we
have a two-step process. One is just to
do a feasibility screening. Does it even
make sense to build here? And then the
second question to be answered is like
how does it align with the goals that
we've said we have? Um, so we would
filter out
all the ideas that just don't make any
sense and then not spend any more time
on it. Um, so feasibility, uh, can it be
built here? We're thinking about
environmental considerations.
Um, the engineering details. Um, so for
example, uh, Sound Transit, um, has a
goal of having their trains go 55 miles
an hour uh, down uh, yeah. a 90. So if
it can't reach that um because our
alignment is like too squiggly,
>> then we'd want to like straighten that
out. So just like things like that um
there's a lot of examples of engineering
things we would want to look at um that
I'm not super privy to, but we have
consultants on retainer to figure that
out. Um there's also the delivery and
constructibility component. Um, as we're
thinking about ideas, if we have an idea
that sounds great but contains a lot of
unknowns, like the stars would have to
align or it's not like a super slam dunk
option, um, it could be, uh, more
difficult for Sound Transit to choose
that unless like everything worked out
really well. So, we want to just flag it
early on to say like this is a great
idea, but there are some like potential
roadblocks that you'll want to think
about. So, that could um add like
project risk and therefore like be less
likely that they would want to bid. Um
so, we're trying to like flag things
early on to the best of our ability and
just like kind of track things that we
have a reasonable understanding of. Um
there's obviously going to be a lot of
things that we don't know at this point.
So we're not really tracking that. Um
but like things that we know from
previous examples of projects that have
been built and like um other sort of
considerations.
After that we have a suitability
analysis um thinking about like how well
does it align with our goals. Um, so
we're thinking about transit oriented
development and like growth potential in
central Isqua, which is uh something
that we find really important. Um, we're
going to need a density of jobs and
housing to support
just taking a train. Um, you just need
like a lot of jobs and like a lot of
things to do and places to go uh in the
vicinity of where the light rail station
is. So thinking about that now, but then
also like in the future um the I guess
the walkable area around the station
like what could become like a you know a
good area to uh be
um we also have uh just general like
planning and policy consistency. Um so
we have lots of goals that the city has
and there's like regional and like state
goals. So making sure that a location
that is chosen is kind of aligned with
what we've said we want to do and we
have policies that even allow us to uh
get money more easily from the federal
government or like the regional
government. So if we if we choose a
location that is outside of that the you
know that's that's kind of a stick for
us versus the carrot could be um it
would be much easier to uh to build it
here because we already have lots of uh
structures and like policies in place.
And then lastly, I think probably the
most important to most of us, um, excuse
me, we want to make sure that, uh, the
light rail station is actually
functioning as a light rail station,
that it's like really easy to get to
and, uh, people can use it to, uh, ride
uh, pretty easily. So, making sure that
the location is not going to create
traffic jams and bottlenecks and like
make sure that it is walkable and like
accessible.
Sorry, I'm trying to my slide. Okay, so
here's the feasibility criteria. Um,
you may notice that it looks a little
different from what the packet uh had.
>> Is it okay to ask a question?
>> Sure. Yeah.
>> So, is this an it looks like there's an
order? So first it's feasibility in
>> and why why would it be feasibility
first and not
where it's most useful first? Mostly we
want to just vet out uh like it could be
really useful to build it somewhere but
if there are some like significantly
fatal flaws that we can identify ahead
even if we like uh research the heck out
of it like if it's still is not if if
it's like a just infinitely expensive
thing there's no way we we would even
like think about doing it or like um
like for example Sound Transit has a
dollar amount that they've said they
will invest in the community. So, if we
come out and say, "We have an idea that
is four times what you've said you would
invest," like that's that's just a
non-starter. So, like we wouldn't really
want to dig in any further and spend
like resources like uh researching that
kind of thing.
>> So, but it sounds like you have
feasibility and then you have s
>> suitability. Yeah, sustainability. And
then is it useful? And it just fuels. I
mean, I understand the argument, but you
narrow it. You narrow it. And now we get
to pick pick for the three that are
useful. Right.
>> Right. And that
>> I don't know. There's something just my
thought.
>> Yeah. Okay.
>> Any other thoughts on
>> also back to
um investing?
>> Yeah. Is there a percentage or what's
>> So, we're basing our thought process on
what has been like approved by the Sound
Transit 3 voter package. Um, I'm going
to get my dollar amounts wrong, but like
we'll say like
we'll say like 200 million or whatever.
We'll we'll just say that. So that uh
that dollar amount that was like sort of
built into the assumptions in 2016 that
is our starting point. Um so if we go
beyond that then uh we have to think
about like who would pay for that. Um
and that's kind of like the baseline
that they're willing to uh I'll say
invest or like put into the project of
getting people to their light rail
system.
>> So it's a dollar. It's a dollar, right?
>> So, is that 2016
dollars or is it 2040 now? 44. It was
41.
>> Yeah. Right. Right. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Um
>> I I'd have to get back to you uh on the
specifics. Um I think that was probably
2016. So, it' be like whatever it costs
now.
>> 30 years difference in investment and
>> right
>> interest and cost of living and right.
>> Yeah. Yeah. the the cost of construction
has gone up a lot even in the last 10
years. Um so uh yeah definitely
acknowledge that. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Go ahead, Ray.
>> Yeah. I was immediately drawn to that
blue section where it says I90 median
and side running feasibility. I mean,
any of us who've seen what's going on on
405 South and the Freeway is shut down.
Um, is are they leaning towards one
versus the other at this point? I mean,
looking at both options, if it's running
down in the middle of I90 or running to
the side of it, especially in that 405
I90 corridor,
>> what research has been done in in that
are just purely out of curiosity and not
favoring one or the other? I mean,
>> sure. Um so 2016 the
we're calling it the lo the uh sorry the
um the representative project
uh it was going uh along I90 and then it
comes south of I90 into central Isqua.
Um so it it is south of the median.
>> Um so it's a it's a side running uh
station to the south.
>> Side running station. Okay, thanks.
>> And uh the point of looking at both of
these is to uh just provide options. Um
if we are too rigid in our criteria, it
might preclude good ideas. At this
point, we're we're so early on that we
just want to know generally if it would
work to do one or the other.
um the visibility criteria.
Um I saw it looks like environmental
engineering and project delivery, but I
was wondering if one of the categories
you're also considering is like noise
and impact that it will have whether
it's like construction or after the
fact,
>> right? Um because like let's say like
you do have an area that's able to be
built and it also meets like suitability
but then it's actually impacting the
people that live nearby. Mhm.
>> So I don't know if that's one of the
areas to be considered before rather
than oh we identified it and now
>> right
>> or whether it's like new housing like
maybe it's not there right now
>> right
>> um if that would be like considered as
part of the lending and policy but also
like visibility primarily versus
suitability
>> right yeah that's a great great point um
when when projects are in the
environmental phase um of the project
timeline those are all things that are
looked at. Um, and uh, Sound Transit
will be doing a very robust version of
that. We're going to do like a kind of
minor version uh, so that we're not like
kind of double doing double work on
that, but we want to rule out those
sorts of things. Um, so, you know,
example could be uh, if it's an elevated
station and we are like in a valley,
like might people see uh, you know, the
track from from where they're at? Um,
and are there ways to like kind of
mitigate like could we like we cover it
somehow or like could we uh could we
have a a wall to like prevent like sound
from from traveling? So yeah, those are
all great things. Um, and yeah, it might
maybe makes more sense to kind of build
that into the environmental category or
like kind of make that more clear.
>> I want to jump on that. what uh what GD
just said and that is who's getting
displaced is that in this car in this
>> visibility. Okay.
>> Yeah. We want to uh we want to look
that's kind of further down here. Um
we're kind of thinking about uh like who
exists today and then like um as you
know if a station is located uh sort of
like what what uh opportunities might be
um with displacement it's uh you know
depending on the location it could be
like a large property um or it could be
like smaller properties um with like
multiple sort of impact ed people. So,
we want to kind of look at what that
might look like.
So, I'll just go back uh to my
feasibility criteria just to see if
there's any other thoughts on this.
I'm also happy uh after this meeting if
you think of it you can reach out. I'll
be working on this for many months. So
um and you know how to reach me uh
hopefully and if not um last slide on
this has my contact information.
Um so again uh feasibility criteria
looking at envir environmental uh
engineering and then constructability
and then we kind of drill down to
suitability. So, uh, transit oriented
development potential,
um,
things that allow for a light rail
station to be successful is that there's
jobs and there's people around. Um so
jobs density, population density. Um the
uh Pug Sound Regional Council, that's
like our our governing body for the
region. They even have targets that they
like to see um that we abide by. So
that's kind of related to that.
Having lots of land uses was something
that the community uh specified as we
were going through the vision and
guiding principles. Um, we want to have
a lot of like fun things to do and like
places to go. Um, amenities that really
support like just being able to, you
know, walk to the grocery store kind of
thing or, you know, just like all all
the little things that we kind of take
for for granted. Um, we're also looking
at like how much in the uh the walkable
area of the station would be developable
if a station was there. Um, so for
example, if a station is located next to
a hill, probably couldn't build on that
hill, but you could build around like on
the flat area outside of that area. So,
if the station was located elsewhere
where like there was more like area that
you could build, um, that could
potentially be better. Um, but then we'd
want to think about like sort of other
considerations.
growth and development phasing. Uh
that's thinking about like what exists
today and what exists in the future. So
are we solely thinking about an area
that has nothing today and like how long
would that take to become something
versus if there's something already
there and like already supports what the
community needs like how long would that
uh take to like kind of grow even more.
So starting from zero or starting from
like 10 we'll say
>> um then proximity to like community
resources like parks um uh just like
yeah just other things that in the
community that are like not
businessoriented but like are things
that people appreciate um trails and
that sort of thing.
I talked about uh consistency with
planning organizations. Uh we're
actually reaching out uh with all these
organizations. We have a little working
group that we work through. So that's
kind of making sure that they have eyes
on this and they see that this is
consistent with what they've uh been
planning for. Um and then we have zoning
that allows for growth and uh jobs and
housing. So making sure that it aligns
with that. Um and then lastly we have
access. So um you know Manny mentioned I
believe uh talking about the transit
center and like sort of what that means.
Um, so we want to make sure that, you
know, we already have a transit center,
there's parking there, there's buses
there, the bus bays are massive compared
to the actual transit service we have.
Um, there's so many areas to park buses
there. And so thinking about like what
that means, um, could that be useful to
the light rail station? Um, and like
could that be sort of built into
uh how the connective buses are getting
people to the light rail station? Um,
and then we did a I90 crossing study um
kind of finished that up uh recently. So
thinking about like how that might
integrate, how that might be compatible
with any uh light rail station.
I talked about uh with my thing that I
shared earlier about like how it would
be nice to have bike lanes. Um so like
having a low stress bike lane to get to
the light roll station would be nice.
>> Um and then just making sure that uh
there's sidewalks and like you're able
to walk there.
>> Yeah.
Have to bring this up. Um, this country
has a history of misplacing and
displacing um, low income, marginalized
people. And um,
where does that come in on this? Because
>> um, let's face it, you're not going to
take Microsoft CEO's house.
>> Yeah. But um you know people have as
much pride in their home no matter what
the cost is and what they're paying for
as does a microcos.
>> So where does that come in?
>> Yeah. Um for central Isqua specifically
uh we really don't have any housing
units. Um so uh I guess good or bad uh
there may not be that much risk there.
Uh but we do acknowledge that with
better light rail systems and like uh
you know investment in central Isqua
that could lead to renters being
pinched. Um folks that don't own their
property. Um that's something that is
you know we see in other communities. Um
Redmond is a good example. They're
they're trying to be proactive about uh
you know, not only just like uh the h on
the housing front, but also businesses,
small businesses that are just trying to
like hang on as the community um gets a
little bit more expensive. Uh and so
there's a lot of like government uh
actions that could be taken. um Redmond
uh got a grant last year um and like had
a whole study done and they they've
started to uh implement there's like I
think 10 or so uh different policies and
things that they're doing. Um, so we're
we're kind of like in a good spot here
because we can see how it plays out in
other communities and like try to be
proactive. Um, you know, with that uh
yeah, I mean at this point we're just
kind of in the ideation phase. Um
but yeah certain certainly acknowledge
that like with investment
uh can cause uh increases in like home
prices and like cost of living. Um yeah
>> but can it be reflected in the can that
be reflected in the criteria? And that's
exactly what I was thinking, Kelly, that
maybe that can be kind of a a hard stop
in terms of the suitability and
feasibility that if zoning is going to
equal that, they're going to be
displacement of folks that either are
living in apartments that's going to
have an impact on either um um um
minority communities, seniors,
vulnerable populations that that
location likely be rejected. did because
to trade one issue to improve to then
displace people to create a new issue in
a city that's already very high price to
live in and has a der of affordable um
uh rental properties or disaffordable
housing properties. I I think that's a a
consideration that needs to be looked at
very often.
>> That sounds great. Yeah. And I should
have mentioned earlier, so we have in
our feasibility criteria this
environmental justice component, which I
I totally lost my my train of thought
previously, but uh this was this is not
what you saw posted online, but
something that I added because I
realized I forgot it in this. Um this is
a screening that will be done and I have
it later in the slide deck, so I'll just
go there quickly. Um the environmental
justice equity screening ensures that
there's not going to be disproportionate
uh impacts to low-income BIPO
communities. Um so that is part of our
uh environmental review process that
will be done. Um so we're going to
highlight if if it's if one alternate uh
one option uh versus another is like
resulting in unequal access or just uh
disproportionate impacts. Um so
certainly that is very very important to
us um and is kind of built into our uh
initial feasibility screening.
>> I did have a question on that which is
um you mentioned that it would be a
highle assessment for equity envir
environmental justice. So, do you have
any ideas at this point what groups or
community um members or any types of
groups that would be involved in that
highlevel assessment?
>> I I don't but I would love to get your
feedback on that. Yeah,
>> because I think that a cross-section of
um individuals um just purely from an
equity standpoint. So, we're we're
thinking about obviously u minority
populations. We're thinking about senior
adults, anyone that may have a uh
physical uh mobility challenge, any of
those individuals that may not be always
at tables that um are making decisions
about how they move about the city. So,
I think that engaging with those groups
as part of that high level assessment is
very critical.
>> Yeah, that sounds great.
>> And thanks for adding that, but it
wasn't our original.
>> Yeah, I I apologize. I I it was right
after the holidays and like I remember
sending a message to Dale and being
like, "Wow, like this this all came
out." Like,
>> so yeah, when I was
>> I think the three of us were were three
of maybe 15 people who were online
of
>> Yeah, it was it was a skeleton career
for sure. Um
>> yeah, so yeah, I do apologize that that
wasn't in the initial
>> my only concern as less is the
definition of high level
Right.
>> Yeah.
>> Um
again those are not um includ included
in a lot of things or not considered
high level.
>> Yeah I I think so what I meant by high
level is that there is a um there's an
environmental impact uh study that is
done that is like thousands of pages
long. It is it is a huge document and
you can see that in all of Sound
Transit's projects. Um
we just don't have the scope to do that.
So we we want to do like an initial
screening
and we also don't have all the
information at this time. Uh but we do
want to do a thorough job uh to make
sure that we're like to the best of our
ability like understanding what these
impacts will be. Um, so I think it's
great we can we can uh you know come out
to the community and like chat with
people um to try to like backfill
information that we don't have data on.
Um but yeah, we we do have a very
limited budget but we do uh we do have
ultimately at the end of this we'll have
this criteria uh that specifies our
intent. So, you know, locations,
uh, if when Sound Transit is doing their
like their more thorough review, um, if
they catch something that we don't
because they have more budget to do
that, then that's, you know, it it would
show that this is important to us. So,
is is part of their review I'm sorry
I've taken a lot of time, but is part of
their review um taking note of um which
areas and the cost factor of homes as
they move down um this track.
>> I I'd have to get back to you. I'm not
So, you're talking about like cost of
living increases and like um
>> Yeah. I mean, mortgage. Yeah,
>> it' be different than you know um if
they decide to go this route.
>> Yeah.
>> And the whole corridor is low income as
compared to this other route where it
affect medium and
>> Right. Yeah. I I I I'm pretty sure that
that their um study would do that, but
I'd have to double check. So I do want
to get back to you on that. Yeah. Okay.
>> Thomas Ray has
>> Yeah. Go ahead, Ray.
>> Hi, Thomas. I can't remember when you
presented last if there was a um a
survey sent out to residences um who
who' consider this. Um was there one
before I ask my next question, I wanted
to ask that first. Were there numbers
shared about a survey as far as who
would actually use this percentages of
residents in Isqua
at any level?
>> Sorry. So is it you're you're asking if
>> if a light rail station were to be um
built in isqua was there survey sent out
that isqua residences or neighboring
residences whether that be northbend or
others would use would use the facility
for the service
>> there there has not been okay
>> and the reason I asked that is it leads
to my next question I think from a human
services and an equity perspective
there's no argument against this I mean
I you're everything's being done
correctly to assess the environmental
impact. But what I would be wondering is
down the road when the facility is
actually built, what's going to change
somebody's mind from getting in their
car and versus parking at the transit
center and using the light rail. Um so
it's it's those things that would we
would ask ourselves saying, "Oh yeah, I
would use that instead of getting in my
car because one, it's faster, it's more
efficient." Um,
so those are the things that was just
rolling around in my head. If I were
somebody that were going to put the
funding into this, I'd want to make sure
that people are going to use it.
Utilization is going to be there down
the downstream.
>> Yeah. In in transportation planning,
there's like a lot of emphasis on like
the the economic kind of drivers. Um, a
lot of you mentioned that like you'd
like to know how much parking costs uh
so you can think about like if you want
to take the bus or not. um similar
similar things like these uh those sort
of assumptions are built into travel
demand models that Sound Transit will
use. Um and so we kind of as a catchall
we talk about potential transit
writership generally
um as a suitability criteria.
Um,
we have a consultant team that can kind
of qualify what that means. Um, but it
it has to do with all of the uh all of
the built-in travel demand model pieces
like cost of gas, um, how much parking
costs when you get there, like the time
it takes you. Um, there's I'll just uh
get in a little bit of weeds here. So
there's a travel uh household travel
survey that goes out every couple years.
Um previously we had data from like
COVID era. Um but like last year there
was a survey that was done that we are
now squarely outside of like the co era.
So those assumptions um are then built
into
uh the travel demand model that we all
use in the region and like that sort of
feeds into um people's willingness to
like drive versus uh take transit and
some people just will not want to take
transit at all and like we can kind of
model that a little bit. Um but also
we're thinking about in the future 20
years from now maybe people's
preferences change. Um,
>> so kind of thinking thinking about like
how that might affect how we
uh place a station and like sort of what
what parking demand might be for
example. Um, so
>> yeah,
>> and one other comment. I mean, I would
challenge myself and our colleagues here
to start these conversations with with
people that you speak with and say,
"Hey, do you know that Isqua is going to
is thinking about putting a light rail
station here? Oh, how do you get to
Seattle or point A to point B?" and if
we did have one here, would you use it?
And I would ask them a question. Well,
why not? And maybe we can share some of
that feedback with you.
>> Next question.
Thomas, one of my I think I'm just
struggling with one aspect of it is the
feasibility portion feels very much
physical and environmental, but then
there are some human components in it
>> that I'm struggling with because I
almost feel like the feasibility should
be fully physical and environmental like
things that engineers and planners just
have this data geography you know GIS
stuff coming in very
rigid like this is the answer. Boom. And
then the suitability to me is more the
heart, the human impact which is also
part of the environ environmental
justice part. And so by the suitability
there are some things that are kind of
more checkboxy that's not a discussion a
heart or how are we how are we going to
um adapt or change for them.
>> Yeah. And so I'm just wondering so I'm
just having a hard time because I'm
looking at suitability. I'm like
>> I feel like some of it is not enough
heart in there to see how are humans
going to be impacted on their
>> uh you know the price of housing the how
are we driving away some of the um more
affordable housing all that I'm sure
it's in there embedded.
>> I'm just not seeing it clearly. And so
if I'm not seeing it clearly, it feels
like I don't know how much I expressed
it. So
>> I think maybe if we clarify some of the
wording
>> Yeah.
>> in there just to make it more accessible
to all. So then
>> it feels like okay, this was built for
all people in Isa rather than there are
certain things hidden and not as
transparent within this plan.
>> Okay, that sounds great. Yeah, thanks
for that feedback. and tell us I say I I
personally think it's needed. I and I
agree that there needs to be a a human
side to it because when we talk about
high levels, we are talking about
engineers, we're talking about surveyors
that don't take I don't believe that
they take into effect what happens to
the people.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. It's you know I'm thinking about a
couple of things as well. Um,
I think the why it matters section
throughout here is really important and
um, I I appreciate that you've talked
about equity being crosscutting
throughout things, but I worry that if
it's crosscutting and it's not the words
aren't here, it's going to become
invisible. Okay.
>> So, we're not there yet in terms of just
accepting. I think cross cutting is I
mean, so I would try to weave it into
why it matters.
>> Yeah.
>> A lot more. Um, and then I think what
I'm hearing come up, you know, around
the I feel like there's this time
horizon component that might be in some
of these categories. Like if we're if
we're thinking about
differential impacts or differential
harms, benefits, things like that.
There's like the current state and then
there's projecting out okay you know in
20 years you know I'm thinking about
gentrification and the inequitable
impacts of gentrification over time so
is there any modeling around what might
happen there and I think yeah it's
around like small businesses if it's not
housing but it could be housing
affordability and pricing out you know
certain people from being here uh the
businesses might be you know appealing
to certain uh uh members of the
community or other reasons and that
could have long-term impact, diversity,
inclusion, things like that. Um so just
I'm curious like gentrification was the
thing that really popped out to me. What
does this mean in 20 years time? And and
some of this is a little bit like you
make the siding decision, you build and
then you try to mitigate things about
mitigation. Who knows if it's going to
happen?
So I don't necessarily trust that
mitigation is going to be uh equitable.
>> Yeah. Um the other one just an
observation that I noticed is in the
guiding principles equity isn't in
there. There's like diversity diversity
inclusion maybe belonging but I I didn't
see the words equity there. But I I
think we the more you can build it into
the criteria of the description,
it would be more reassuring.
>> Sure.
>> Um can I ask a follow-up question?
>> Would you like to see an equity
criteria? It sounds like Yes. Right.
like so that we're making it I just I
I've come to this group before and I've
heard not to do that um because it we
don't we don't want to have like a very
like performative kind of
>> situation but I also acknowledge that
like equity is related to
you know making sure that uh people can
walk to the spot and that like uh the
communities that are within walking
distance and beyond have good options.
So, you know, that's kind of like where
I'm where I'm getting at. It's like it's
crosscutting.
>> Yeah,
>> I agree with the spirit of it because I
don't think it should be a separate
stream,
>> you know, on its own.
>> Yeah.
>> Because it it needs to be embedded in
>> how we do our work,
>> right? Um that's where but you know in
that sense like job density, population
density
there is a like each of those categories
has some sort of uh analysis around like
differential impacts,
>> right?
>> Carbs, things like that. So it should be
in everything. And that that's where I'm
wondering if in or why it matters like
if you're very explicit about those
things so that way when uh these
analyses are happening pe people you
don't know who all is going to be
involved are making sure that they're
looking at so it doesn't get away
>> across the different categories. Yeah,
>> would you be okay if it didn't say
equity but it said what it what it meant
like who is being impacted what job
density or that defining because for me
then the next step is going to be how
are we evaluating
>> and so the creating the tools so I'm
wondering if if why it matters as for
each of those sections has something
about what are we thinking about so that
when we're creating a a tool a rubric to
see how is job density or population
density being impacted there's something
as to what are we looking for like look
for section
>> I think so it may be highlighting what
are particular you know
populations of interest or something
like that
>> because I don't think I I'm I care as
much as having the word equity it wore
off to What are we looking at? Because
to many people Yeah. Yeah.
>> And so I think for me I'm looking more
for the look fors maybe and maybe that's
just a different column one more column
that we'll eventually and maybe you're
not yet
>> but um I think my main thing also is the
human impact for sustainability and
being very clear that that
for me I see feasibility as more
engineers and all of these people are
going to deal with it whatever sound
transit and then they're going to give
us areas that's possible feasible and
from there we're going to look at how is
it impacting humans to build it in
certain locations and then we're going
to be doing a lot more why it matters
and look for the matter for the rubric.
>> Yeah. And it could be you know like why
it matters for these different students
you know and who who would benefit who
would be harmed you know what's the
magnitude
of Yeah.
I was going to say, yeah, Commissioner
H, in terms of you mentioned like
Redmond already kind of having some like
ways to kind of learn and grow, right?
That might be a good opportunity to say,
you know, what are some of the
inequities they've kind of already kind
of seen, heard, right? They've kind of
went to the community and, you know,
that might kind of assist to kind of
drive some of the criteria. You know
what I'm saying? And so when you come
back say hey actually let's say Lynwood
for instance too right you can say hey
here's some things that kind of have
risen to the point that have caused a
lot of inequities I think for audience
purposes you'd be like and we've kind of
vetted this through a couple of groups
here are some things we're doing to kind
of mitigate um those inequities
as a group as a collective and we're
being mindful as we move forward and
present to different audience to the is
it sound transit
>> um and then they you not actually even
put on them a little bit like, hey,
here's some things that kind of we kind
of talked about and ways we can kind of
mitigate um
um I'm just thinking about tangible, you
know, in terms of, you know, reaching
out to other folks.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Part of my part of my struggle
here is that this criteria is um
it is meant to help us sort
alternatives.
Um,
so part of my struggle and like I I
agree with everything that's been said
about uh, you know, making sure that we
sort of identify who's benefiting, who's
potentially harmed, and like um, like
downstream effects and all that. Um,
where we're at with this criteria is
like how do we
it's going to take some thinking on my
end to see like how this would be like
helping us choose one or another um
>> with the sea of options if
if we acknowledge that like some things
might happen and like um
yeah, I just yeah, I'll need to think
about this a little bit like how to how
to build into this criteria. It could be
that this is like a standalone thing
that is sort of uh like
not only woven through here but yeah
includes uh discussions on like the the
why it matters um outside of this uh
table format. Um so I'll need to think
about how to like kind of structure all
this but I I super appreciate these
comments. They're they're very important
and um we want to get this right. So
yeah,
>> Thomas, um with the feasibility side of
it, how many
feasible sighting options do you expect
would emerge? Like is there going to how
what are what are the alternatives to be
evaluated?
>> We are we have a very limited budget.
Um, we do appreciate that city council
gave us some money for this. Um, but
we're going to look at like about six
alternatives total. Um,
yeah, we're if there's some things that
are just like completely non-starters,
we want to like eliminate those early so
that we can do the suitability analysis
and really dig in more. There's a lot
more criteria here that we want to like
really focus on. So,
>> so is there a cost factor as far as
what's expected to run through today's
dollar?
>> Yeah, I can I can look into that. Um,
and I will acknowledge that like Sound
Transit uh is currently facing some like
financial issues. Uh many of you may
have heard this. So, um
we're kind of in this like holding
pattern a little bit. We're like kind of
wait it's a wait and see. Um, but I I
can at a minimum I do plan on getting
back to you on like
>> uh what that cost figure was assumed
from ST3 and if that was like today's
dollars or not. Um
he moved it from 41 to 44
>> which makes me a lot older then. Right.
>> Yeah.
trying to take advantage of already.
>> My kids probably take my keys away, so I
probably use
>> Yeah, 44 is what they said would be like
um the affordable time frame. Uh that's
what they said in 2020, but since then
there's been um
additional discussions. Um, yeah, our
our goal is to get it as soon as
possible and like that's why we've spent
so much effort doing this. Um,
we're vetting out options so that they
don't have to. We're having these
community conversations so that we have
a like pretty clear framework of what
we're thinking about. taking away lots
of like the risk involved. Like so many
of these projects have been delayed
because like people just aren't talking
to each other and like there's new ideas
that come out. Like if we can just get
this all out and like take care of it
now, we won't be the issue like why it's
taking so long and like we'll make it
super easy. That's why like Redmond got
their station. Um, they made it super
easy for Sound Transit
>> and like obviously the issue on like the
bridge is not Redmond's fault, but like
>> Redmond did what they could and like now
they have a station and there's like
decent amount of riders and once it
opens there's going to be a lot more. So
yeah,
>> honestly nearly everyone I've spoken to
and even at other meetings that I've
seen people are super excited about. So,
we are very happy to be part of the
group to help
>> help this along and we don't want to be
part of the problem to slow this down. I
just want to make sure you recognize
>> Oh, definitely. Yeah. I I love talking
to everybody and like this group
especially um both both groups. Um yeah,
I get a lot of good feedback and like
this really like puts wind in my sales.
Um I really enjoy this project. So,
yeah.
Um cool. So, I did have two questions.
Uh I think we kind of covered this. Uh
and it sounds like Okay. So does the
eval does the evaluation criteria
reflect the priorities outlined? Um it
sounds like uh sort of weaving in uh
equity throughout this um highlighting
uh sort of like the why it matters more.
Um it sounds like some more work needs
to be done on this. Um there was a
discussion on sort of the the human
element. Um and something I should
mention that I didn't what's not
included. Uh there's some like design
and placemaking things that are uh
within
my cursor. Yeah. So within the community
connection and values. Um a lot of these
things will be sort of uh designed as a
station is located. um thinking about
like where the entrance of the station
actually is and like what amenities if
there's like a pedestrian plaza or like
if there's like other sort of things
that allow for like community gathering.
Um these are all details that like will
be much further down the line that we
still think are important. So we're
going to you know keep them in the
vision and guiding principles. Um but at
this stage like we couldn't really
meaningfully differentiate one location
or another um at this stage. Um but just
things we want to take care of. So um
all that to say I think there's uh you
know you've mentioned a lot of things
that we can uh add back to this
criteria. I have a lot of notes here. Um
and yeah I think you've mentioned what
should be added. So
>> um are you going to be on the higher
level with this decision making?
>> Well Ivy um what what do you mean by
that?
>> Yeah. I mean when it comes down to um
you know you have a boat on which
direction this is going
>> I I am at the staff level so uh I can
recommend and I can share as many
details as I have um but I'm not the
decision maker. It's going to be up to
the city council on this. Um what we
decide is the preferred alternative. Um
and then what we decide is the
evaluation criteria but on top of that
sound transit board is the actual
decision maker. So um we are we are here
to uh sort of filter community thought
on the best idea. We're going to kind of
champion that idea and then our like our
brain our like thought process will also
be provided. Um, and then it'll be a
matter of kind of influencing and like
uh making sure that Sound Transit knows
where we stand on things.
>> Yeah.
>> So, you're the messenger. We won't shoot
you, right?
>> I would appreciate if you didn't.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Thomas, is there a a day
that we are trying to get this
information ready to the city council so
they can vote and pass it on so that
we're on schedule for the 2044 date
>> for the evaluation criteria or for the
final product?
>> Yeah. So, uh, as of what we know now,
uh, we're still shooting for the end of
this year. Um, that could change, but
yeah, that's, uh, we're, um, we're
rolling with the information that we
have at this point. uh were having
constant contact with Sound Transit. Um
they just to be totally transparent,
their ST3, their Sound Transit 3 package
that includes this project uh will be
updated
based off the new financial realities
that we have. Um and that'll be sometime
in uh Q2 of this year. So, uh, we're
kind of in in real time trying to figure
out what timelines are for things. Um,
and
once we know more information, we might
adjust the schedule of this project. Uh,
but at this point, uh, what we're doing
today has no bearing on like their
timeline. So, um, yeah.
>> Yeah. What about a time there to
finalize this criteria and for um your
group to decide like between the six
locations?
>> Yeah. So, because we know that Sound
Transit is going to update their uh uh
plan by the end of Q2,
uh we should
definitely be finished up with this by
the end of Q2. Um if if anything
changes, we want to make sure that our
criteria is like in lock step with those
changes. Um if not that much changes,
we'll be in, you know, we'll be in a
good spot to like continue this. Um but
yeah, ultimately like this whole package
that we provide should be evergreen and
it should like kind of match like the
latest knowledge that we have. So we'll
just um if they change anything, we'll
change alongside it. But yeah, at this
point those changes have not been made.
Nothing's changed in our strategy. So,
we're just going to keep moving.
>> So, I'm thinking like midsummer, by June
or something.
>> Yeah. So, and uh yeah, like probably
like
Julyish um for this at the latest, I
would think. Yeah.
>> Yeah.
>> And right now Thomas is scheduled to be
back with us in June.
>> Yeah. So,
>> yeah.
and I will be going to four other boards
and commissions. Um there'll be a lot of
opportunities if anybody wants to go to
those meetings to um provide public
comment. Um and I'm also
here's my contact information and I've
been meeting with so many people and I'm
happy to meet with any of you one-on-one
if you want. um really enjoy all the
chats we've had and it really does uh it
does help uh provide context and like a
lot of group knowledge for this. It's
it's a group project I'd say. Yeah, it's
a group project.
And then just like some small fights I
just wanted to go over like Ray
mentioned before like I see like
aligning station locations with like
community goals related to like this
this and this but like I'm not seeing
like where those community goals are
coming from or like community input
>> um with things like that. And then
another one was like um in the
suitability assessment it talks about
like station locations can influence
like housing and services over time or
like urban centers over the long term.
But I'm not seeing like the difference
between like how it would affect
long-term versus like current residents
or like lowinccome residents um and like
services today versus like 2020 or 2044.
>> But that was just like something.
>> Okay, sounds good. I'll try to be more
explicit. That was a theme that we've
heard is like it's not giving enough
human uh human impact. So, um, when I
come back to future groups and when we
finalize this, we'll just want to like
sort of detail more about like sort of
what that means. Uh, and like making
sure that like it's clear that equity is
like interwoven and and all that.
>> I think it was Laura, was it you that
said like a almost like a what it looks
like column?
>> Look for Yeah. Look for
>> you. One one thing I'm the the geography
here that central inqu
>> I don't know how sensitive some of these
things are going to be to that small
geography anyways. Yeah. So
>> yeah, that's I mean as we kind of look
at this area, it's a lot of big box,
lots of parking lots,
>> wetlands,
>> lots of wetlands, which obviously
>> yeah, a lot of areas that we just simply
cannot touch. And we'll know that
through the feasibility criteria. Yeah.
>> Um and so beyond that, we're going to
think about like, you know, the walkable
area will probably be outside of this
box. And so that's going to be
interesting. I think probably more
interesting um to think about like
the sort of sphere of influence outside
of where the station goes. So we we'll
want to look at kind of
wherever the station ideas are like kind
of
call it a buffer around that and kind of
what what impacts I might have. So
>> the lower left hand corner is that Talis
already
>> uh sorry
>> yeah I think that would be Talis and
then to the right would that be the
woods? Yeah.
>> Yes. Valley. Um and then like this is
like old town down here.
>> Okay. Okay. Awesome. Yeah.
>> Great.
>> Great. Thanks everybody. I really
appreciate it.
>> Thank you. Thank you.
>> We have one more agenda item which is
our closing thoughts. So I'll hand it
back over to our chair.
>> Absolutely. Thank you so much, Dale. I
want to thank Thomas very much for the
great visitation and um answering a lot
of uh very uh detailed and appointed
questions in a very thoughtful way. Um
we certainly appreciate it and it seems
like um I think this is a great meeting
between uh um equity and the human
services commission in that I think
we're pretty sympatico on the issues
that I they really have come to the four
which is we want to make sure that we
have the human considerations um being
considered as part of the the central
isqua transportation plan and we also
want to have a running theme of of
equity through everything that's done in
uh support of this uh program. I mean,
when it comes down to it, the the
transportation plan is about making sure
growth, mobility, and opportunity to
move together so that everyone in
Isiqua, regardless of age, ability, or
income, can safely and reliably access
the places that matter in their daily
lives. Um, I think one of the the
greatest parts of this conversation
tonight is we don't want, I think, as a
commission and as a board to create any
unintended negative consequences. And
those can be displacement of either
small businesses um doing anything to
move the affordability uh numbers up on
um housing and also the consideration of
you know we don't want to displace any
type of um either BIPO communities um
vulnerable communities um I'm a strong
advocate for senior communities just by
virtue of what I do for a living. So um
we want to be in consideration of um
equity human services and understanding
that um central ESQA transportation plan
is super important for our future
growth. But we want to make sure that um
we always are thinking about what equity
looks like in service to and also the
human services aspect uh looks like in
the future of moving this project
forward. So thank you. Thank you.
Appreciate you.
>> Thank you Thomas.
with that.
>> Okay. Well, it looks like um our joint
meeting of the Human Services Commission
and the Equity Board um has concluded at
7:28 p.m. on Wednesday, January the 7th,
2026.
>> Yeah, I got all that in.
>> Okay.
>> Thank you very much. It's a wonderful
meeting. Thank you all.
>> Thank you. Thank you.