← Back to City Council Digest

City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee Auto captions

Tuesday, June 13, 2023

6:30 PM · Council Chambers, 135 E. Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
Topics tracked across meetings:
Street Standards Update ID 1414 3/3
Transit Study Gaps Analysis ID 1353 2/2
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3a
Minutes of May 9, 2023
packet pp.5–6
Staff report:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 05-09-23 City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Page (1) Committee Minutes CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee 6:30 PM Council Chambers, 135 E. May 9, 2023 MINUTES Sunset Way, Issaquah WA
4. AGENDA ITEMS
4a
Transit Study Gaps Analysis ID 1353
Carried 3-0
45 min · Thomas Valdriz, Senior Transportation Planner · packet pp.7–142
Topics: Transportation
Staff report:
Over the last 20 years, the City’s population has more than doubled, bringing about new transportation opportunities and challenges which require new strategies to meet the City’s goals. In light of this growth, the City seeks to take a proactive, transit-supportive approach to ensure that anticipated future roadway improvements support the long-term transit network. This Study will coordinate with the City’s vision to balance multimodal principles with community values. In March 2021, the Council adopted the Mobility Master Plan (MMP), which provides the policy framework defined within the Transportation Element of the City’s 2020 Comprehensive Plan (adopted on December 16, 2020). The MPP also provides implementation strategies to guide City investments to develop a stronger
4b
Street Standards Update ID 1414
45 min · John Mortenson, Transportation Engineering Manager · packet pp.143–350
Topics: Transportation
Staff report:
The Administration recommends the Committee support adopting the proposed Street Standards at the Regular Meeting on July 10, 2023. Background The City of Issaquah Street Standards are adopted by reference by Issaquah Municipal Code 12.04.010. The Street Standards provides standard guidance for design and construction of municipal streets, private streets, and public and private parking lots within the City of Issaquah. They are founded in City policy, codes, and standards of industry practice for transportation engineering design and construction. The City of Issaquah Street Standards allow the City Engineer to make changes to the Street Standards if the changes are consistent with the WSDOT Design Manual, Issaquah Municipal Code for landscaping, and the Issaquah Comprehensive Plan. All other amendments to the Standards/Requirements Section of the Street Standards require review and…
0:02 um good evening I'm council member Chris
0:04 Ray and with me as Deputy council
0:06 president uh Hall and councilmember D
0:08 Michelle
0:09 uh I'm going to call the June 13th 2023
0:13 city council mobility and infrastructure
0:15 committee to order
0:17 there are multiple public comment
0:20 opportunities at tonight's meeting there
0:22 is a general public comment opportunity
0:24 at the beginning of the meeting or you
0:27 may make comments after the presentation
0:28 and counsel question answer period on
0:31 tonight's agenda items
0:34 members of the public May address the
0:36 council at this time in person or
0:37 virtually those who've signed up in
0:39 advance will be called on first
0:42 if you are joining us virtually and
0:44 would like to make comment please raise
0:45 your virtual hands
0:47 uh if you're in the room and did not
0:49 sign up I'll ask for speakers before
0:50 closing this portion of the meeting
0:52 I'll wait to see if anyone has raised
0:54 their hand
0:56 clerk is anyone joining us online
0:59 we have one virtual attendee but I do
1:02 not see a raised hand at this time okay
1:05 all right and no one in the in the room
1:08 okay
1:10 there will be other opportunities after
1:13 each of the agenda items for public
1:16 comment
1:17 so with that let's get into the agenda
1:20 today
1:21 we have two agenda items today ID 1353
1:25 the transit study Gap analysis and ID
1:28 1414 Street standards update
1:33 um so the first thing on the agenda
1:34 though is approval of the minutes from
1:37 our May 19 our ninth meeting
1:44 uh I believe we accept the minutes from
1:46 the May 19th meeting
1:49 all right all those in favor of
1:50 approving minutes from May 9th meeting
1:53 say aye aye opposed
1:56 that minutes have been approved
1:59 all right on to our first agenda item
2:02 today which is uh the transits study Gap
2:05 analysis presented by Thomas Valdez
2:10 Valdez aldres sorry our senior
2:13 Transportation planner Thomas take us
2:15 away
2:22 great thanks very much uh yeah I really
2:24 appreciate your time tonight
2:26 and uh yeah good after good sorry good
2:29 evening my name is Thomas valdrez and
2:31 I'm the city's senior Transportation
2:33 planner
2:35 um today I will be asking for your
2:38 feedback uh related to the transit study
2:41 gaps analysis and so to begin I'll
2:44 briefly uh start by sharing some
2:46 background information on the existing
2:48 conditions analysis that we've done for
2:51 this study
2:52 and we'll talk about what the transit
2:55 Network looks like today and what we can
2:58 expect in the future
3:00 I'll then walk through a subset of the
3:03 deficiencies that were identified as
3:06 part of our gaps analysis and then I'll
3:08 ask for your feedback
3:11 so as we go through this presentation
3:13 tonight I just wanted to pause here and
3:15 share with you the two questions that
3:18 I'm hoping to get your feedback on
3:21 this first question is should the city
3:24 consider providing alternative bus stop
3:27 amenities or a local high priority stops
3:31 if Metro has determined
3:33 that improvements are not justifiable or
3:37 a low priority per Metro criteria
3:40 and the second question that I would
3:43 hope that you would consider is where
3:46 meaningful improvements can be made to
3:49 enhance the speed and or reliability of
3:52 high quality Transit service
3:54 should the city consider the Strategic
3:57 use of Transit priority treatments near
4:00 signalized intersections
4:03 so again just consider those as I go
4:05 through and please feel free to
4:07 interrupt me if clarification is is
4:10 needed
4:11 um as I progress through this
4:15 uh just to again to provide a little bit
4:17 of background information just to sort
4:19 of ground our conversation attachment a
4:21 in your packet contains the existing
4:24 conditions analysis that was conducted
4:26 for the transit study and so there's a
4:29 whole lot of information lots of good
4:31 stuff here but briefly I just wanted to
4:33 share some of the more uh important
4:37 topics that sort of came out of it just
4:39 to sort of facilitate this conversation
4:42 and so as you can see this first key
4:44 takeaway is that the average Issaquah
4:48 commuter tends to drive to work alone
4:52 but there are several commuters who have
4:56 jobs that allow them to work from home
4:59 or many others are choosing to take
5:01 alternative modes of transportation such
5:05 as writing Transit carpooling walking
5:07 Etc
5:11 and some more background information
5:13 this is a map of the current uh Transit
5:17 Network here in isquot today
5:19 we have nine routes three of them the
5:23 269 the 271 and the 554 these run all
5:29 day and provide frequent service this
5:32 means that buses come every 30 minutes
5:34 or better
5:37 uh five of the other routes they they
5:40 operate only during the weekdays during
5:42 the peak commute hours so these are
5:44 really meant to just hit uh when when
5:48 there's more ridership making sure that
5:50 there's
5:52 um you know space on buses making sure
5:54 that people can get to and from uh
5:58 typically their work and and their home
6:00 and then this other route is the 208
6:03 this runs all day but headways are about
6:06 two hours and this one goes out to North
6:08 Bend area
6:10 so other services that are provided
6:12 currently there's the trailhead connect
6:14 direct route this operates seasonally
6:17 and on weekends a lot of folks from the
6:20 area take this to go hiking
6:23 um and there's also Paratransit and
6:25 specialized transportation services that
6:27 are offered by some providers in the
6:29 area
6:31 another Insight from the existing
6:33 conditions analysis that I wanted to
6:36 share is related to access
6:38 and just to provide a little bit of
6:41 background information on how we're
6:42 defining access
6:44 so uh Transportation planners
6:48 Transportation Engineers
6:49 rely on this idea of a walk shed a bike
6:54 shed and a drive shed so what is that
6:57 essentially a walk shed is defined and
7:01 this is based off of studies that have
7:02 taken place over the last 40 years
7:05 so a a Transit Rider is generally
7:08 willing to walk about a quarter mile to
7:10 access a bus stop or about a half mile
7:13 to access Light Rail so in North America
7:16 these are just generally accepted
7:18 standards so that's sort of what we
7:22 consider as the walk shed
7:24 uh Transit Riders are also willing to
7:28 bike about a mile to access Transit and
7:32 Transit riders that are driving to a
7:36 Transit stop typically are willing to
7:38 drive about two and a half miles to
7:41 access Transit
7:42 so all that to say these these distances
7:46 can be used as proxies for measuring
7:48 accessibility this is sort of the the
7:50 industry standard for how things uh are
7:52 done in a very quick and efficient way
7:56 so considering these uh you know high
7:58 level metrics uh currently about 17 of
8:02 households in Issaquah and 19 of jobs
8:06 are within walking distance of Transit
8:10 and so this is also it's also worth
8:12 noting that these very simplified
8:14 metrics for measuring accessibility they
8:18 really don't take into consideration
8:20 um you know barriers that could exist
8:22 accessing Transit so if the sidewalk is
8:25 incomplete for example or if
8:29 or if there's some terrain issues so
8:31 like you know if it's a very steep
8:33 direction to get from say your home to a
8:37 Transit stop those would not be sort of
8:39 considered in this simplified version
8:41 but all this to say we we can glean from
8:45 this analysis that for the most part
8:48 folks in this quad don't currently have
8:50 uh they're they're not within walking
8:52 distance of a bus stop so that's sort of
8:56 not very surprising but the numbers do
8:59 do tell us that
9:01 and so again uh more more background
9:04 information to Anchor our conversation
9:06 tonight uh
9:08 we also uh you know we took a look
9:12 at holistically where people are
9:14 traveling
9:16 um today our analysis found that the
9:18 majority of trips are starting and
9:21 ending in Issaquah so lots of Intercity
9:23 trips
9:24 um over 50 percent
9:27 uh the second and third most common
9:29 trips are occurring between Issaquah and
9:32 Bellevue and between Issaquah and
9:35 Northern East Side cities so places like
9:38 Sammamish Redmond Kirkland et cetera
9:43 and currently uh traveling by public
9:46 transit is no surprise uh it you know it
9:48 takes significantly longer than it does
9:51 to drive
9:52 however as you can see in this
9:55 infographic if you see there's some
9:58 lighter lighter yellow bars indicating
10:01 that the transit and auto time ratio so
10:06 considering the time it takes to take
10:08 Auto versus Transit is actually quite
10:11 competitive so that's kind of cool to
10:13 see
10:15 so there are there are some routes that
10:17 are very competitive when you're taking
10:18 a bus and that uh narrowing that Gap is
10:21 really important um it's it's one of the
10:24 more important factors when considering
10:26 um if folks are willing to
10:29 take a bus or or if they will drive
10:32 which is typically the default so
10:34 knowing that Gap is really important uh
10:36 when uh trying to get folks running
10:39 transit in the city
10:43 so looking towards the future
10:46 the city is anticipating most of its
10:49 growth to occur between now and 2050 in
10:53 central Issaquah
10:54 and we're anticipating that travel
10:56 patterns will remain about the same as
10:58 they are today so again the majority of
11:00 trips being inter-city and then we also
11:03 expect trips between East Side cities
11:06 and Issaquah to remain the second and
11:09 third most frequent Origins and
11:10 destinations
11:15 and as we look to the the near term uh
11:18 I did want to mention so last month
11:20 Metro has announced that there will be
11:24 cutting service to three of the nine bus
11:27 routes that I described and this will
11:29 begin in September
11:31 uh the routes are the 214 the 216 and
11:37 the 217.
11:38 and sort of the reason for this is that
11:40 Metro has explained uh they're they're
11:43 dealing with some some significant
11:45 Staffing and labor shortages which is
11:47 resulting uh in lack of bus drivers lack
11:52 of staff to sort of help with the routes
11:56 that we have
11:58 um and so obviously we we really don't
12:00 uh we don't want to see our services
12:02 being cut in Issaquah we we really value
12:06 our Transit service however the three
12:09 routes that they are cutting
12:11 ridership is currently very low and
12:14 there are some alternative transit
12:16 services provided these routes and I'll
12:19 just go back in my slide deck a couple
12:21 slides
12:24 um these routes are the peak only routes
12:27 so they are of those five routes that
12:30 run on weekdays during the peak commute
12:33 hours three of those five are the ones
12:36 that will not
12:38 um be returning
12:40 after September and so we we certainly
12:43 don't want to see that uh them being cut
12:46 however ridership is currently low and
12:49 uh there are quick question for you
12:51 um do you have any data on what um
12:54 Metro ridership from Issaquah is day
12:57 versus pre-pandemic levels
13:02 you know on top of my head I don't have
13:03 it but I can tell you it is lower than
13:05 it was pre-pandemic yeah I'm certainly
13:07 lower I mean is it yeah I mean and I I
13:10 we can get the number later but you have
13:12 a sense is it 10 lower is it 50 lower is
13:15 it a big number Stephen
13:18 jump in it's um seem to do a long-range
13:21 planning managers I work with
13:22 Thomasville trying to study the data
13:25 that we've seen it kind of depends on
13:27 the route so the 554 experience
13:30 significantly less drop of ridership
13:33 compared to a lot of the other smaller
13:35 routes that don't provide the same type
13:38 of service so it kind of depends on
13:40 which route we're looking at
13:42 all right thanks Andrea did you wanna
13:45 I do believe that overall it is
13:49 um somewhere around 15 decline overall
13:54 thanks sorry thank you Thomas
13:58 that's great thanks for that
13:59 clarification
14:01 um yeah so you know again uh
14:06 these routes are uh
14:08 as as much information as we know at
14:11 this time these routes will not be
14:12 coming back and you know we certainly
14:15 don't want to see them being cut however
14:19 you know
14:21 there are some significant Staffing
14:23 shortages so Metro's trying to do the
14:25 best that they can
14:26 um to sort of combat this and so uh the
14:31 cities you know we find that this is
14:33 very important to uh you know everybody
14:35 that you know comes to the city folks
14:37 that are currently using it and we
14:40 really want to help Metro uh make sure
14:42 that they're communicating these service
14:44 Cuts so you know City Community the
14:48 city's communication team We're working
14:50 directly with Metro to ensure that you
14:53 know that these changes are going to be
14:56 communicated to those who are affected
14:59 um some of the things that Metro will be
15:00 doing is posting notices uh on the buses
15:05 that are affected as well as at the bus
15:07 stops as well so physical posting of
15:11 signage the city also is working
15:13 directly with them to communicate this
15:16 via you know our typical Communications
15:18 channels we also work directly with a
15:22 lot of
15:23 you know community-based organizations
15:25 and this information is being related to
15:27 them as well so we're doing what we can
15:30 to communicate these changes and that's
15:33 sort of um where we're at with
15:35 these uh service suspensions and so I
15:39 just have a question here
15:41 president Hall oh thank you yeah just
15:44 just to clarify then for the community
15:46 watching so we should be interpreting
15:48 this as complete as it cuts like will
15:51 not be coming back because the packet
15:52 used the words temporary reduction in
15:54 service or suspension and even the word
15:56 suspension makes it seem like
15:58 maybe they did something wrong like in
16:00 school and they'll be coming back
16:02 um so just for the sake of transparency
16:04 for the community this we should be
16:05 interpreting this as complete a complete
16:07 cut right
16:10 yeah great question and I I can clarify
16:12 with the very next slide if you don't
16:15 mind I can I can I can come back to this
16:17 if there's additional clarification
16:19 perfect
16:20 um great okay
16:24 um and so to sort of uh follow through
16:27 on what I was just saying uh East link
16:29 connections this uh this is the planned
16:33 implementation of the service changes
16:35 that will be happening as as Light Rail
16:38 comes uh to to Redmond right so uh Light
16:43 Rail will be coming from Seattle to uh
16:46 through Mercer Island uh connecting
16:48 Bellevue and Redmond
16:50 um Metro is teeing up the bus service
16:53 that will be facilitating uh connections
16:56 to each of those Light Rail stations and
16:59 so uh the the idea is that in 2025
17:03 um these routes were actually going to
17:05 go away already
17:07 um so what we're seeing here uh through
17:10 this announcement is essentially a
17:12 premature cut of three routes that would
17:17 reconsolidated and the the funding the
17:22 Staffing all that all the resources that
17:25 would go into that the idea is that that
17:27 would go back into the system
17:29 we are anticipating that the routes that
17:32 we will have so we'll have six routes
17:34 after
17:36 after this uh the routes that we will
17:38 have come 2025 Metro has uh has promised
17:43 that uh the service that we will have
17:45 will be significantly better headways
17:48 will be shorter on many routes they'll
17:50 be more buses running uh it'll be faster
17:54 they're um I think they're they're
17:56 making some measures to make overall the
17:58 the transit system uh in the 2025
18:01 Network should run smoother than it is
18:04 today so those those just sort of
18:08 wrapping up that thought those three
18:10 routes will be going away as part of
18:12 Eastlink connections however they're
18:15 just sort of prematurely cutting it
18:17 before we get light rail so in in the
18:19 interim that is the rub there and and
18:24 thank you Thomas and I just want to uh
18:27 also say this is Andrea Snyder I also
18:30 say that Metro was calling these uh
18:33 suspensions they're not calling them
18:35 permanent Cuts so that's the terminology
18:38 they're using we're looking ahead with
18:41 our crystal ball understanding the
18:42 challenges that Metro is facing
18:44 regarding personnel and other resources
18:46 understanding these uh Transit changes
18:49 that will come with Eastlink and we're
18:51 thinking that
18:52 we these these routes will probably not
18:56 come back in the form that we're used to
18:58 we will be getting other Transit service
19:00 so Metro's calling it suspensions
19:03 they're not saying they're Cuts uh but I
19:05 think it would be wise for us to look
19:07 ahead and and consider them as
19:09 essentially cut but knowing that we will
19:12 be getting a better Transit service once
19:15 the East link connection is up and
19:17 running
19:21 are you good there Deputy Council
19:24 um how realistic is that we're going to
19:26 see East Lincoln 2025 given recent
19:28 developments on the Mercer Island
19:30 Floating Bridge
19:36 so you're asking City of Issaquah
19:38 employees uh we uh we are not Metro
19:42 employees we are not sound transit
19:43 employees uh if we were to ask Sound
19:46 Transit and Metro they would say this is
19:49 their best plan I think
19:52 you know I think that there's ongoing
19:55 challenges they have not only with the
19:57 construction of uh the light rail itself
20:01 but also certainly the Personnel that is
20:04 required to really fully Implement all
20:07 of these service changes
20:10 some things and I and I think it quite
20:13 honestly I it's an unfair question to
20:14 ask you but I think it's a significant
20:16 data point for us in in figuring out how
20:19 we go forward so thanks for that
20:22 Thomas you're back on
20:25 great thank you
20:28 um so just to look even further into the
20:30 future
20:31 um from what we were talking about today
20:34 um you know as we as we do look out uh
20:37 Sound Transit has uh sort of quoted us
20:40 on um a timeline of about 2041 uh
20:45 to 2044 for light rail coming to
20:48 Issaquah and so 2044 is sort of like the
20:52 the the budget friendly one versus 2041
20:55 is a more aggressive timeline obviously
20:58 um so this is sort of the the timeline
21:00 that we're looking at for um
21:02 we're bringing Light Rail to Issaquah
21:04 with the four line which is that purple
21:06 line
21:07 um and so you know you can see it's
21:09 connecting South Kirkland through
21:10 Bellevue and uh to the central Issaquah
21:14 area
21:16 and so in this timeline the the four
21:19 line would be connecting uh also three
21:21 stride uh bus Rapid Transit lines
21:25 um and so that's the S1 the S2 and the
21:28 S3 which are connecting from Linwood
21:31 um over through like Kirkland Bellevue
21:33 and all the way to Burien so lots of
21:36 really
21:37 um really strong Transit connections
21:39 coming in the future and so we're sort
21:41 of um you know just just providing uh
21:44 this background information as we
21:46 consider uh what we're talking about
21:48 tonight
21:51 and to support the future Transit
21:53 Network that is expected we really need
21:57 to uh be talking about
22:00 where where people will be will be going
22:02 and so the expectation is that half of
22:05 Issaquah residents and the majority of
22:08 jobs in isqua will be within walking
22:10 distance of Transit by 2050 that is
22:14 because we are anticipating uh growth in
22:17 the central Issaquah area
22:19 and we also anticipate
22:23 um you know the majority of jobs the
22:25 majority of households will be within
22:28 biking and driving distance to Transit
22:32 um and so this is sort of uh using land
22:35 use projections and uh Transit demand
22:39 modeling so this is uh this table sort
22:42 of encapsulates uh what we assume will
22:45 be in terms of growth in the central
22:47 Isco area and the the city uh as a whole
22:51 uh by 2050 and sort of the the watcha
22:55 the bike shed and the drive shed that we
22:57 can uh assume it's a good question about
23:00 this table
23:01 um and I'm not questioning it well I
23:03 guess I am questioning it but are there
23:05 really 31 000 jobs in Issaquah
23:08 because that's the way I'm reading this
23:09 number
23:12 because that seems really high to me
23:15 no that is the number that is the number
23:19 that we have for 2019. I think that also
23:21 is um folks that work from home
23:24 um yeah I this is straight from the U.S
23:27 census so I can't really speculate on
23:29 okay uh you know how this how this
23:31 breaks down but yeah yeah that just
23:33 seems like like
23:35 order of magnitude High to me
23:38 no uh certainly not order of magnitude
23:42 uh back when I was in Economic
23:45 Development and keeping a close eye on
23:46 these numbers several years ago we were
23:48 at 25 000 jobs
23:50 uh so I'm not surprised that a few years
23:52 later we're up at 31 000.
23:55 okay
23:57 learn something new every day it's good
24:04 okay I think I'll keep going
24:07 um and so now uh you know all this
24:09 background where I think we're now ready
24:10 to talk about the potential gaps that
24:13 were identified through this analysis
24:14 but again feel free to um you know
24:18 interrupt my my uh
24:20 my presentation I'm you know happy to
24:22 field any additional questions as we go
24:24 through
24:28 um so to reiterate a point that I think
24:31 I've made in this presentation and I
24:32 think you know we all know this but just
24:34 again to ground us
24:35 um the city does not provide Transit
24:37 Service uh however there are some stuff
24:40 there's some things that the city can do
24:42 to improve Transit service that is
24:45 provided by uh Metro and Sound Transit
24:48 and so one of the gaps that we've
24:50 identified uh is the lack of essential
24:53 uh you know very basic amenities that
24:56 are provided at bus stops and to sort of
24:59 speak generally on this matter
25:01 Metro has criteria that dictates whether
25:04 or not they would be willing or not to
25:08 for instance install a bus shelter and
25:12 so 25 daily writers uh you know on the
25:16 average
25:17 is sort of the threshold for if a if a
25:21 bus stop is uh
25:23 is capable of having a metric provided
25:26 bus shelter
25:28 and
25:30 so you know as you can see here this is
25:32 over uh in the The Very Room that you
25:34 all are in this is the the bus bus stop
25:37 there's currently you know very little
25:40 uh for folks that are waiting at that
25:43 bus stop so that's sort of just you know
25:45 one example of what some bus stop
25:48 amenities are provided
25:51 and
25:52 you know the city hasn't done a whole
25:54 lot of thorough analysis to determine
25:56 you know which bus stops would be uh you
25:58 know potentially within Metro's criteria
26:01 or not but um just as an example uh
26:05 county-wide we are told by Metro that
26:08 over 375 bus stops would qualify for a
26:13 Metro provided bus shelter and currently
26:16 Metro is only installing 25 shelters per
26:20 year
26:21 uh so one could do the math and you
26:25 would see that there is a significant
26:27 backlog of shelters that currently meet
26:31 uh you know Metro's criteria however
26:34 they they don't have the the resources
26:36 to go out and
26:39 um you know provide the shelters that
26:41 they've determined are are worthy of of
26:45 being input
26:47 and so some of the upgrades uh that they
26:52 have put in uh they're they're really
26:54 prioritizing because they they do have
26:56 limited resources uh these
26:59 prioritizations are typically based on
27:01 things like demographics Equity access
27:05 to community services and other sorts of
27:07 considerations
27:09 um so all this to say uh the question
27:13 that we have for you today and is that
27:15 you know considering the need for but
27:18 basic amenities at bus stops should the
27:21 city consider alternative needs of
27:24 providing bus stop amenities for local
27:27 and I'll call them high priority stops
27:30 if Metro has determined that
27:33 improvements are not justifiable or are
27:35 a low priority per Metro criteria
27:40 um and so some of the things that the
27:42 city can do to improve bus stops could
27:46 include coordinating with Metro on
27:49 Capital Improvement projects near bus
27:50 stops we can make these bus stops
27:53 shelter ready so you know Metro would
27:56 have the the concrete footings available
27:58 to them and they could simply throw a
28:01 you know standard uh you know they have
28:04 multiple standards for for bus shelters
28:06 they could just swap it in when
28:09 um you know after after that work is
28:11 done
28:13 um this would be a very cost effective
28:15 way of doing it um you know if if the
28:17 city is currently out there um you know
28:20 for example uh you know in this photo if
28:23 if we were redoing for example uh the
28:25 sidewalk and the the
28:29 um the concrete is already wet we could
28:31 you know install some footings we could
28:34 sort of streamline the permitting for
28:36 them uh in a way that you know if the
28:38 city is already doing it we would
28:40 already know the processes we could sort
28:42 of work with them to get it done so
28:44 there's there's some efficiencies we
28:46 could do with that another example uh is
28:49 that you know through uh
28:52 through uh development projects we could
28:56 support buildings having awnings that
28:59 would you know have like a waiting area
29:01 for for Transit passengers um that's
29:04 fairly common in my neighborhood
29:06 um it's just like a quick way that uh
29:10 some some cities are able to provide
29:12 rain coverage without like a physical uh
29:15 Transit shelter so there's there's quite
29:18 a few things to consider we haven't
29:20 really done a full analysis on this but
29:22 these are just sort of like some of the
29:24 thoughts that we've had very preliminary
29:26 thoughts at this time right I've got a
29:28 question for you councilmember Hall
29:30 thank you
29:32 um so with the idea be that we could
29:34 shelter ready some of these
29:36 opportunities or some of these bus stops
29:38 and would we jump higher in the list of
29:42 qualifying stations for Metro or would
29:45 we still be waiting
29:47 a while for that to end up
29:49 I mean making some nods here in the room
29:52 hold on Thomas
29:55 uh let me attempt that and and Thomas I
29:59 just also want to take the opportunity
30:00 to note that there's a lot of slides
30:02 still left in the presentation and time
30:05 is is taking so as you consider your
30:08 remarks for the next few slides perhaps
30:09 we could
30:11 um uh summarize them and go a little
30:13 quicker so uh the city would still be
30:16 responsible for the costs of these uh
30:19 Transit amenities until Metro until they
30:22 meet Metro's criteria so we can make it
30:25 easier for them to install
30:27 um but Metro has some pretty strict uh
30:29 criteria for putting in these amenities
30:32 as Thomas was saying there's a large
30:34 backlog a lot of communities want them
30:36 and so we can we can make it a little
30:38 bit easier for them we can make it a
30:40 little you know but we can make it a
30:43 little bit less expensive for them but
30:45 overall we might be waiting a long time
30:52 good yeah thanks all right
30:57 great I'll keep going then thanks
31:02 and so yeah just to provide more
31:04 information uh this is what the tab said
31:05 about it and to summarize the tab was in
31:08 favor of considering alternative means
31:10 they also recommended that the city be
31:13 more specific developing eligibility and
31:16 prioritization criteria if we were to
31:19 consider pursuing alternative means of
31:22 getting bus stop amenities
31:24 they also recommended considering ways
31:27 that we could
31:30 provide the bus shelter using means that
31:32 was not City funds if there's ways to
31:34 have Partnerships or to sort of think
31:37 outside the box for ways to uh you know
31:40 get um
31:42 get amenities that would be great they
31:44 also recommended that we could consider
31:46 Place making some sort of design
31:48 features that would make it more of an
31:50 issqua feel for Metro
31:53 uh shelters and amenities so those are
31:57 just sort of uh what the tab had um had
31:59 mentioned at a at a very high level
32:03 so next I wanted to
32:06 ask you about Transit speed and
32:09 reliability projects
32:12 and so for our second policy question
32:14 for you uh you know as you know buses
32:18 can become significantly delayed at or
32:21 near signalized intersections
32:23 and although the city doesn't provide
32:25 Transit service there are some things we
32:27 can do to make strategic Investments to
32:31 make Transit uh you know flow easier
32:34 through intersections Transit priority
32:37 treatments can reduce Transit delay
32:40 improve Transit reliability and can
32:43 reduce Transit travel time
32:46 and so one example of this is provided
32:49 in your packet is a business access and
32:52 transit or bad Lane these are very
32:56 common in the area an example of this
32:58 you may have seen it is on sr900 near
33:02 the uh
33:03 near the freeway
33:05 there's also many examples on the east
33:07 side and these these Lanes typically
33:10 allow for right turning vehicles to
33:12 access businesses and sometimes bikes
33:16 can use them depending on the context
33:17 but it's really providing a priority
33:20 Lane for buses so that they can flow
33:24 through
33:25 intersections and potentially congestive
33:28 areas a little bit quicker
33:31 another common type is called a q jump
33:34 and these are these can be used
33:36 essentially with the bat Lane as well so
33:39 these are not sort of uh you know they
33:42 can be using with other treatments
33:45 and this basically gives a bus a head
33:47 start through an intersection and you
33:50 can see on the graphic passengers are
33:52 able to get on the bus the bus gets an
33:54 early green a couple seconds before
33:56 traffic just gives them a couple extra
33:59 seconds to get through the intersection
34:00 before everybody else the delay is
34:02 really not that significant and it
34:05 allows a bus to significantly reduce
34:08 their travel time through especially
34:11 really congestion corridors
34:14 uh lastly I wanted to talk about Transit
34:17 signal priority you may have heard this
34:19 as we were talking about the intelligent
34:22 transportation systems or its this is a
34:25 pretty typical application of that and
34:28 so as you look through the numbers on
34:30 this slide you can see you know the bus
34:33 comes through the intersection it sends
34:35 a a message to the hardware so that's
34:38 like number three it sends a message uh
34:41 telling the hardware that it's currently
34:43 there and then the intersection it can
34:46 give the bus like an extended green or
34:49 it can dynamically adjust the traffic
34:50 signal to allow the bus to make it
34:53 through the intersection so it's not
34:55 stuck right there and this is a map of
34:59 where they're currently located I think
35:01 this is maybe an older map but they're
35:03 all over Bellevue along the um the brt
35:07 line that goes out east so that's like
35:10 the the line B so very common in the
35:13 area it's another way that buses are
35:17 prioritized through some intersections
35:20 and so you know understanding that the
35:22 city isn't providing the transit service
35:23 but we have the ability to make
35:25 strategic Investments uh to
35:27 significantly improve Transit service
35:29 that we do have
35:31 um and you know knowing that the
35:33 proposed Solutions uh would be uh we
35:36 really only look at this from a holistic
35:38 analysis and so that we don't want to
35:40 necessarily uh impact any other travel
35:43 modes below what we consider as being a
35:45 reasonable the level of service the
35:49 question that we're proposing to the
35:50 committee is um you know where
35:53 meaningful improvements can be made to
35:54 enhance the speed and reliability of
35:57 high quality Transit service should the
35:59 city consider the Strategic use of
36:02 Transit signal sorry of Transit priority
36:05 treatments through signalized
36:07 intersections
36:10 and the same question was posted the tab
36:12 last month and to summarize the tab was
36:15 in favor of using priority treatments
36:17 they recommended that the city consider
36:20 rolling out improvements along
36:22 alongside future its projects it's a
36:26 pretty typical application they also
36:28 recommended starting with low hanging
36:30 fruit treatments first so things that
36:32 are you know easier to implement
36:34 uh and also to consider ways to mitigate
36:38 potential impacts so that we're assuring
36:40 that these improvements wouldn't degrade
36:43 the level of service of other
36:45 Transportation modes below what we're
36:46 considering acceptable
36:50 so I will pause here uh to receive your
36:55 direction thank you well let's uh let's
36:57 see if we have any additional questions
37:02 councilmember Hall
37:04 um yeah a couple more um first thank you
37:06 for answering my questions over email I
37:09 might ask a few of them in this format
37:11 too just so they're shared on camera as
37:13 well but
37:14 um one clarifying question I had was um
37:16 so part of tabs feedback the
37:18 transportation advisory board's feedback
37:20 was to consider low-hanging fruit
37:22 treatments I'm just curious if we
37:24 thought about what what our low-hanging
37:27 true or low hanging fruit treatments
37:29 have we kind of thought through what
37:30 those might be already or is that that
37:32 work to come
37:34 yeah I would say that's more work to
37:36 come I think when we're developing
37:39 projects those um
37:41 those would become apparent uh
37:43 I I really I would imagine a low hanging
37:46 fruit uh opportunity would be paint on
37:50 the ground versus like a traffic signal
37:52 sort of thing
37:54 um if that makes sense that's that's
37:56 what I would imagine that would be a low
37:58 hanging fruit yeah no
38:01 um also what kind of um have we thought
38:03 through like the kind of resources that
38:05 we have or willing to kind of dedicate
38:07 to do these kinds of
38:09 efforts yeah or is that also work
38:13 yeah I would say at this point Thomas
38:15 let me get this one thank you uh so this
38:18 is Andrea Snyder Deputy council
38:19 president Hall uh that is really a
38:22 question that we are we are asking uh
38:24 the policy question first and so if we
38:26 if Council tells us this is a priority
38:29 that it's a something that the city
38:31 should be doing then we would return to
38:33 council with our resource requests in
38:35 order to get this done but certainly uh
38:38 maintenance of Transit stops is going to
38:40 require ongoing staff time ongoing
38:43 resources
38:45 um so some something to consider as you
38:47 consider this policy question before you
38:49 tonight
38:54 okay thank you that's very clear
38:58 can you talk a lot I asked you this over
38:59 email can you talk a little bit more
39:01 about like what kinds of public-private
39:04 Partnerships we can explore like kind of
39:07 what's our lane here that
39:09 like I'm envisioning a stop brought to
39:12 you by Costco chicken bake or something
39:14 like that but like I mean are these
39:16 kinds of things available to us or are
39:18 there kind of stringent guidelines from
39:19 Metro in terms of like the kinds of
39:21 Partnerships we can do
39:25 yeah that's a great question again
39:28 my understanding is that Metro has uh a
39:32 advertising firm that they work through
39:34 and so some of the considerations that
39:37 you know this is kind of getting into
39:38 the weeds a little bit but
39:41 providing a metro
39:45 uh providing amenities that are like
39:48 Metro spec is really important because
39:50 they will not maintain anything that is
39:52 not what they currently have
39:56 um they have standards for everything so
39:59 we would want to put things uh that they
40:03 are comfortable maintaining or that
40:05 thank you you know that makes I'm glad
40:07 that I asked the question there because
40:08 we don't want to create any
40:11 liability that we have to to maintain
40:14 into the future so okay that's that's
40:16 really good to know
40:21 yeah and just just to add my thought and
40:24 to answer your question so that that is
40:26 one main consideration
40:28 um I do know that they do advertising
40:30 that is something that you know they
40:33 have on the buses and they have at the
40:35 shelters they also have um artwork that
40:37 they do at some shelters so there are
40:40 ways to customize
40:42 the amenities are provided but certainly
40:45 uh we would want to know what Metro was
40:48 comfortable with
40:50 again to just make sure that uh
40:54 we are we are not uh you know receiving
40:57 something that we don't want to uh
40:59 or maybe that we don't uh want to um you
41:03 know add an additional effort to
41:05 um we certainly want to you know if we
41:08 were to go down this road uh we would
41:09 want to partner with Metro
41:12 um so that it's a it's a good uh working
41:14 relationship
41:18 some other ideas that were you know
41:19 passed around by the tab is working with
41:21 community-based organizations
41:23 um but again that's sort of uh
41:26 it is it is possible that uh you know we
41:29 would just want to make sure that Metro
41:31 is on board with whatever we're doing so
41:33 just
41:35 yeah hopefully that answers your
41:37 question and there's some coordination
41:39 efforts that could be done with the city
41:41 um just you know through Capital
41:43 Improvement projects
41:46 um but yeah again like the advertising
41:48 bid uh I don't know what the city what
41:53 level of uh
41:54 of information the city would need to
41:56 provide for that and I think we would
41:58 need more information to um to fully
42:01 answer that question let's move on from
42:03 that one uh council member D Michelle
42:05 you have a question oh well just moving
42:08 on from uh the previous question
42:12 when we were talking about Partnerships
42:14 I had different
42:16 um idea in mind and that was the
42:18 placement because some businesses might
42:20 say we'd love to have a bus shelter like
42:23 QFC for example or some major business
42:26 that's doing uh retail would say we'd
42:29 love to have a bus shelter in front of
42:31 our door now can you make the bus come
42:35 down the road to us and and actually
42:38 when I was on the board and at work and
42:40 this was many many years ago but they
42:44 did work with Metro to not only get a
42:46 bus shelter uh close by for their people
42:50 with disabilities that came to outwork
42:53 but Metro actually did change the route
42:55 in order to bring the bus there so
42:59 that's kind of the working Partnerships
43:01 that I was envisioning and that that we
43:04 may have some businesses in town that
43:06 would very much appreciate having a bus
43:08 shelter right in front of their business
43:11 and and again that would be a lot of
43:14 negotiation with with Metro so
43:19 right any other questions
43:22 that's okay we're going to let you go
43:24 this time because it's been that kind of
43:26 day
43:28 all right
43:29 um so I don't have any questions myself
43:31 so we have another opportunity for
43:34 public comment uh clerk do we have
43:36 anybody online who's
43:38 expressed an interest in making uh
43:41 public comment you can
43:44 um press star three or look for hand
43:46 icon on your device to indicate a desire
43:49 to speak
43:52 we have no virtual attendees at this
43:53 time well that probably means no no
43:55 virtual hands no no okay so we're gonna
43:58 move on and uh just let's get to the two
44:01 questions which is should we consider
44:03 alternative bus stop amenities and uh
44:07 uh where meaningful improvements can be
44:09 made to enhance the speed end or
44:10 reliability of the transit service
44:12 should we consider those sorts of
44:15 treatments so I would like to get us
44:16 started
44:19 we can
44:22 I know
44:25 I have lots of notes in here but
44:28 not the day that we get to do that
44:32 um so for the first question I would yes
44:35 I would love to have us move forward to
44:38 consider the possibility of providing
44:42 um uh you know bus stops and and other
44:44 amenities for our bus riders
44:47 we are unfortunately far below Metro's
44:51 criteria for providing those kinds of
44:54 things and it will be a long long time
44:56 before we begin to get even at the
45:01 bottom of their list so I think we have
45:03 to start looking at how do we as a city
45:06 encourage people to take transit
45:09 and I've used the bus stop out here and
45:14 um you know the one without the without
45:16 the shelter and yeah it's difficult when
45:20 you're standing there and it's raining
45:21 and and you're thinking I've got a car I
45:24 could just hop in my car and and go
45:26 where I want to go so however there are
45:29 I mean a couple of things I think we
45:31 need to think about is uh is the cost it
45:34 would be
45:36 how much money are we willing to sink
45:39 into this
45:40 um I think the design I'm thinking of
45:43 all the different neighborhoods we have
45:44 we certainly want to be be looking at
45:48 how each bus shelter fits into its
45:51 community and its neighborhood
45:53 and then the other thing and again this
45:56 is an example from a long time ago but I
45:59 am aware of communities that have
46:01 provided bus shelters and then
46:04 the good thing about bus and Transit is
46:07 that it is flexible and it can move to
46:10 meet the needs changing needs of a
46:12 community and when you've placed a bus
46:16 shelter that makes a little bit more
46:18 difficult to change the route it's just
46:21 one of those those things so we have to
46:23 think about is the location that we're
46:26 choosing and that would be one of the
46:28 criteria that we could consider when
46:30 we're looking at at getting into this uh
46:33 is are we sure that that location is
46:36 going to be a location that's going to
46:38 be used for it makes sense that it's
46:40 going to be used for a long long time
46:42 into the future so those are just some
46:45 of the things that I think we should
46:46 think about the other thing is the
46:48 public nuisance part of bus shelters and
46:51 I think Metro's made some really good
46:53 strides in designing their bus shelters
46:56 so that people can't sleep in them
46:58 overnight if you'll notice the benches
47:00 have gotten narrower and narrower and
47:01 narrower narrower so that it would would
47:04 be very difficult to sleep on them I
47:07 I've even had I was in one bus shelter
47:09 where the seat was actually sort of a
47:12 lead to you got to lean against the back
47:14 of the bus shelter there really wasn't a
47:16 seat for anybody or they have a little
47:19 shelf where you can put down your
47:21 packages and things like that but you
47:24 don't provide people with a place to
47:26 sleep at night and then there are it is
47:29 a place where garbage collects and
47:31 things like that so
47:33 um the uh the issue of Maintenance I
47:36 think would also be something we'd have
47:38 to think really carefully about is that
47:40 going to be our responsibility metros or
47:43 how are we going to split that or or in
47:46 some cases again do we get the community
47:48 involved in making sure that those
47:49 shelters stay clean there's all kinds of
47:52 options but I think we don't want this
47:55 to be something that actually
47:57 turns people against Transit youths and
48:00 a bus shelter that's always a mess and
48:04 always has garbage is not going to be
48:06 the thing that we want in our
48:08 neighborhood so
48:09 overall yes very much in favor of uh
48:13 pursuing this idea and providing our
48:17 community members with more incentives
48:20 to ride the bus
48:21 so those are my comments on number one
48:25 we do number one let's do number one
48:27 yeah
48:30 thanks
48:32 um yeah I mean ditto everything from
48:34 councilmember Michelle
48:36 um I think my uh
48:39 you know I'm glad I asked the questions
48:41 about advertising so I mean it's good to
48:43 know that we we'd want to meet their
48:44 standards also it sounds like we're
48:46 relatively low on the list too so like
48:49 the timing would need to be an important
48:52 factor for me so I wouldn't want us to
48:55 do any of the surfacing and the plugins
48:58 for a shelter and then years go by
49:00 before a shelter is actually installed
49:03 perhaps that's just coordination with
49:05 Metro letting them know that you know we
49:07 have potentially we have resources ready
49:10 to go like it can be queued up whenever
49:12 we understand that it's been added to
49:14 your work plan or something like that
49:16 so yeah for question one the timing
49:18 would be an important factor for me and
49:20 then yeah the what um the trans
49:22 Transportation advisory reports feedback
49:24 I thought was great too so exploring
49:26 kind of opportunities for for cost
49:29 sharing their um be great to look into
49:31 and if honestly if we have a lot of time
49:33 before we imagine a shelter actually
49:37 coming here it sounds like we have a lot
49:38 of time to do some of this explorative
49:40 work anyway so
49:43 I think
49:46 yeah those are all my comments on
49:47 numbers
49:50 um thanks um I have a couple of thoughts
49:52 um unlike my my colleagues I'm not
49:54 really excited about investing heavily
49:56 in amenities and and uh councilmember D
49:58 Michelle talked about the public
49:59 nuisance and I know there's things we
50:01 can do but that concerns me
50:03 um but mostly I'm concerned about cost
50:05 and if we had an infinite amount of
50:07 money to spend I would I would be kind
50:09 of a different place but we have so many
50:11 needs right now in this community
50:13 um that I
50:16 the cost to deploy them and then the
50:18 cost to maintain them caused me to pause
50:21 and then also I'm not sure that we've
50:23 established a really clear link between
50:25 our goal which is to drive ridership and
50:28 deploying amenities so if we did want to
50:31 move forward with that I would really
50:32 like to see us some strong
50:36 correlation between boy people are not
50:39 taking the bus because there's a lack of
50:41 amenity I'm not sure that that's that's
50:43 the case so
50:44 um I'm less excited about
50:48 in taking on the cost of many
50:54 uh councilmember I just wanted to
50:56 actually I thought those were I think we
50:57 should take on the cost but I thought
50:59 those were excellent points so I just
51:00 want to ditto that in terms of making
51:02 sure we kind of explore those those
51:04 questions before we actually do think
51:07 about something more concrete
51:11 okay
51:13 um uh Thomas Administration is everyone
51:15 do you have what you need in terms of
51:17 direction for us on number one
51:20 we do thank you all right well let's go
51:22 on to number two and that's uh
51:24 where meaningful improvements can be
51:25 made um to enhance the speed and or
51:27 reliability of high quality Transit
51:30 should the city consider strategic use
51:32 of Transit priority priority treatments
51:35 your signalized intersections
51:40 Deputy council president Hall would you
51:41 like to go first this time sure
51:44 um yeah I think so honestly this is this
51:46 seems really exciting in terms of
51:48 something that we could pursue and
51:49 potentially a very low cost
51:52 um low-cost initiatives to consider I
51:54 think
51:55 um I was about to say deputy council
51:58 president right council member Ray
51:59 brings up a really good point about
52:02 um considering this amongst all our
52:04 various needs too so you know if we
52:05 start to go down this path it'd be good
52:07 to actually get it into well actually if
52:09 there are any Capital costs it'd be good
52:10 to get into the CIP but if it really is
52:12 just paint on the road I suppose that's
52:13 different
52:16 I I think this is a interesting and
52:18 creative idea I would actually
52:19 prioritize this over bus stop amenities
52:23 um just because there's so much timing
52:25 that impacts bus stop amenities also
52:27 this is a way for us to show Metro that
52:31 we are committed to Transit here in
52:33 Issaquah and we want to make it easier
52:35 for buses to get around
52:37 um actually I think some of the bus only
52:39 kind of treatments that I've seen before
52:41 also allow bikes
52:43 um if I remember right and if we're able
52:45 to do that I would be supportive of that
52:47 too because then you know
52:50 rocks one stone that's not it one stone
52:52 two birds two phones whatever the phrase
52:55 is yes
52:59 um would like to see yeah how that pairs
53:01 with our bike supporting our bike
53:03 initiatives as well
53:06 definitely
53:08 um seeing how this you know its it'll be
53:11 good to kind of deploy this with its but
53:14 also its will inform where it would best
53:16 fit in our Transit Network here in
53:19 issquad too so I would just defer to
53:21 staff in terms of kind of what comes
53:23 first there the chicken or the egg
53:25 um and then
53:28 yeah those are my comments on
53:30 did you have anything
53:33 um councilman show
53:35 thank you um I'm I'd like to comment on
53:37 number two and then when we're all
53:39 finished commenting could you I would
53:41 appreciate uh you're coming back and I
53:44 have a general comment I'd like to make
53:46 so number two
53:48 um yes I support uh the idea of looking
53:52 um helping uh to improve our speed and
53:55 reliability especially today having sat
53:59 on Front Street
54:01 and trying to get to this meeting
54:04 and moving one car length forward every
54:08 uh you know change in the in the lights
54:14 and and that made me think however how
54:17 the various options that we have might
54:20 be rather limited as given the geography
54:24 and topography that we're working with
54:26 in downtown in the valley uh when it
54:29 gets to be a traffic jam there there's
54:31 nobody's going to go fast including the
54:33 the bus so but out on sr900 I think
54:36 there are things that we could do for
54:38 for sure
54:40 um I've experienced uh the
54:43 um the uh what do they call that the the
54:46 Frog the leaping
54:48 um in down yeah Q jumping in downtown
54:51 Seattle that seems to work really really
54:53 well I think it depends on what we're
54:56 whether we talk about sr900 or Front
54:58 Street whether we're talking about
55:00 really viable systems
55:02 um the um another good place to be
55:06 looking at though would be up in the
55:07 highlands uh going on the drag through
55:09 there would be a really good place to be
55:11 exploring what we could do there to make
55:14 the trail that's it a little faster so I
55:17 think all of these uh are really good
55:19 things for us to explore explore we're
55:21 in the situation right now of looking at
55:24 these things in the bigger picture and
55:26 figuring out our policy on them
55:28 um and when we get down and then
55:31 and look at them in a lot more depth
55:33 we'll understand a little bit more about
55:35 how much you have cost and those kinds
55:37 of things I did like the idea from the
55:39 tab about looking at the its that we're
55:43 going to be doing and seeing how we
55:45 could work that in at the same time with
55:48 the signalization I think that would be
55:50 a great uh time to be doing that and
55:53 something that we could probably do at a
55:56 reasonable reasonably low cost so I
55:59 support I support number two very much
56:04 thanks
56:05 [Laughter]
56:07 I'm pretty much aligned with my
56:09 colleagues
56:10 um primarily as it relates to aligning
56:13 with the its project I think the
56:15 incremental cost of of doing some of
56:17 these enhancements when we're putting
56:18 its in will be very small so we can get
56:20 bang with a few bucks
56:23 um I think the one thing that Thomas
56:24 said that would really resonated with me
56:26 is that whatever we do doesn't have a
56:28 significantly an adverse impact on other
56:30 modes of transportation so I think
56:33 that's kind of also needs to be called
56:35 out and that kind of limits where we can
56:37 do it now what's interesting is a lot of
56:39 things that we're talking about here
56:40 have been done on sr900 they've got the
56:43 HOV lane
56:45 and which looks like a lot like a bat
56:48 they've got cue jumping
56:51 heading southbound and they've got
56:53 Transit signal prioritization to turn
56:56 into the park and ride so
56:58 um there's also I mean we have we have
56:59 instances of this in the in town
57:02 um and they work really well so um but
57:05 that's also sr900 which is a little
57:07 different Beast
57:09 um so but I think there are places that
57:10 we could consider some of these things
57:12 if it if it was practical from a
57:15 physical perspective
57:18 and and they work really well I mean
57:20 I've spent uh when you're in the big old
57:23 articulated bus and you are in the far
57:26 right lane and then you got to get over
57:28 four lanes of traffic to turn into the
57:29 transit center you are really happy for
57:31 that uh cue jumping to get through
57:33 traffic so
57:35 um it really does make a world of
57:36 difference and
57:37 those
57:39 um I think we're pretty aligned on that
57:42 all right uh Thomas anything else you
57:44 need from us on this one that I'm going
57:46 to give councilmember D Michelle a
57:48 couple minutes to
57:51 okay
57:53 oh okay and I never turned off my
57:56 microphone so
57:57 so I didn't have to think about that
57:59 um so in their packet
58:02 um in the gaps analysis there were
58:04 actually three items that were listed in
58:08 there and I did send Thomas a an email
58:11 to Broach this topic and the third one
58:15 was the e-bike and the e
58:18 um scooters uh project and that was part
58:21 of the Gap analysis and
58:25 um I sent Thomas an email and just to
58:28 kind of hope I characterized this
58:31 correctly but well we're not looking at
58:33 that because
58:35 um you know a year ago you guys said no
58:37 and so I just wanted to come back and
58:40 say well we said no but if if I remember
58:42 incorrectly
58:44 that idea was brought to us around May
58:49 time and with the idea that the pilot
58:52 would start in July and I remember and I
58:54 voted no on it because I didn't think
58:57 that there was time enough there to work
59:01 out a really good answer to all the
59:03 questions we had in time to really do a
59:05 pilot and make it successful and I think
59:07 I my know was I didn't want a program
59:11 that was going to fail because we really
59:13 hadn't put the thought into it so I I
59:16 just wanted to bring it up again that
59:17 was one of the recommendations in this
59:20 gaps analysis and I would like to look
59:23 at e-scooters and uh is it e-bikes again
59:28 and I'd like to start that conversation
59:31 you know early so that maybe by the
59:34 summer of 24 or the summer of 25 we
59:37 could put in place a pilot that would
59:40 have a high chance of success and
59:44 um and I'm and I have to say too I've
59:46 heard from people who said well how come
59:48 they turn that down that would be a
59:50 great project so I'm thinking well let's
59:54 let's take another look at it if if that
59:56 is some thing I'm just putting it out
59:59 there I know it's not on a work plan
1:00:00 anywhere any of that but I just wanted
1:00:04 to to clarify that I think our no was a
1:00:08 no to this particular proposal and maybe
1:00:12 not a no to the whole concept of
1:00:15 e-scooters and e-bikes
1:00:18 does that make sense to everybody all
1:00:20 right so that that's what I wanted to
1:00:22 bring up
1:00:23 uh Deputy Town's president
1:00:26 um I mean firstly a million times in
1:00:28 support of that and hopefully a bird or
1:00:31 another company is still interested in
1:00:33 kind of pursuing something with us in
1:00:35 the future
1:00:36 um but maybe the administration can kind
1:00:39 put some thought into this idea of kind
1:00:42 of more long term what can we be doing
1:00:43 for a pilot program there a couple other
1:00:45 things I wanted to bring up
1:00:47 um first and foremost
1:00:49 um that are kind of tangentially related
1:00:50 there are tons of federal and state
1:00:54 rebate and incentives
1:00:56 um and tax exemptions for e-bikes and
1:01:00 e-scooters and things like that so I
1:01:01 want to make sure our Communications
1:01:02 Department is maybe putting these
1:01:04 together are there ways that we can be
1:01:05 communicating this out with the
1:01:07 community better
1:01:08 also the legislature our state
1:01:11 legislature recently recently approved
1:01:12 funding for something called an e-bike
1:01:15 lending library which I had never heard
1:01:18 of before but apparently it allows kind
1:01:20 of local jurisdictions businesses and
1:01:22 non-profits to lend out e-bikes to
1:01:26 people to try it out
1:01:28 um and so I wonder if that's something
1:01:30 we can kind of get in on the ground
1:01:31 early on and talk with
1:01:35 um Shelly or whoever can kind of help us
1:01:37 get more details about that program
1:01:38 because I found that incredibly
1:01:40 interesting
1:01:41 um also
1:01:43 um either with that or not could it be
1:01:45 possible to have even like City
1:01:47 sponsored events at the state park or
1:01:49 something where people could come and
1:01:51 just test ride an e-bike around a loop
1:01:55 or something like that I mean is this
1:01:56 something that you know we could be
1:01:58 interested in partnership with
1:01:59 sustainability Department of creating
1:02:01 opportunities for our residents to kind
1:02:04 of explore these options to see if it
1:02:07 might be worth them to purchase again
1:02:09 not expecting anything real to come out
1:02:10 of that but you know just some ideas I
1:02:12 wanted to spit out and then also agree
1:02:15 with councilman Michelle councilmember D
1:02:17 Michelle about the pilot program I also
1:02:20 just wanted to say that the uh
1:02:23 existing conditions report was
1:02:25 absolutely fascinating good to have data
1:02:28 in kind of a better characterization
1:02:30 that you know most of our residents
1:02:32 don't live within Iraq walking distance
1:02:33 to a bus stop but many are within
1:02:36 comfortable biking distance
1:02:39 um in that you know parking is one of
1:02:41 the main
1:02:42 issues for people who are who can drive
1:02:45 to Transit centers but the parking is
1:02:47 usually full at those spots which you
1:02:50 know we all know but it's good to get
1:02:52 that on a piece of paper in that you
1:02:54 know oftentimes these Regional
1:02:56 destinations take significantly longer
1:02:58 to go by transit than it does by car
1:03:03 and a lot more interest City trips than
1:03:06 I would expect like a lot more and I
1:03:08 found that very heartening in terms of
1:03:11 kind of our goals and where we want to
1:03:12 go into the future also reading and kind
1:03:15 of seeing some of the data around there
1:03:16 not being any Equity implications here
1:03:19 either in terms of how people of color
1:03:22 um are uh affected by being more than a
1:03:25 quarter mile away from a Transit Center
1:03:27 so I thought that was good to see that
1:03:29 there aren't any disparities that exist
1:03:33 again really appreciate all the work
1:03:35 that our consultants and staff did on
1:03:37 that report as well I'm not sure if it's
1:03:38 final or if it's still kind of in the
1:03:41 process of becoming final but again
1:03:42 thank you for all that work
1:03:47 great
1:03:48 um thank you
1:03:49 um Thomas Thanks for the uh the
1:03:51 presentation discussion and with that
1:03:53 we're going to move on to our next
1:03:55 agenda item which is ID 1414 Street
1:03:58 standards update presented by John
1:04:00 Mortensen our transportation engineering
1:04:02 manager welcome John
1:04:09 thank you very much chairman Ray
1:04:12 give me just a minute and I'll get my
1:04:14 presentation loaded up
1:04:38 good evening committee members I'm John
1:04:40 Mortensen transportation engineering
1:04:42 manager tonight I am here giving a
1:04:45 presentation seeking the committee's
1:04:47 feedback on the update to the public
1:04:49 works Street standards
1:04:54 the purpose of the tonight's item that
1:04:56 we have before you is to provide an
1:04:58 update on the update the street
1:05:01 standards and to seek the committee's
1:05:03 support
1:05:04 on the proposed revisions to the street
1:05:06 standards
1:05:09 the direction that the administration
1:05:11 needs from the committee is a simple
1:05:13 question and that is does the council
1:05:16 committee support the proposed revisions
1:05:18 to the street standards
1:05:23 a little background on this item in 2010
1:05:27 the city council adopted the current
1:05:30 version of the street standards and in
1:05:33 that street standards version
1:05:36 the council at the time decided it
1:05:38 wanted to allow the difference between
1:05:40 administrative changes and Council
1:05:43 changes and on my next slide I'll go
1:05:46 into the details of what can be done to
1:05:49 administratively versus what
1:05:51 is required to be approved by Council
1:05:54 since then A lot's changed the first
1:05:56 thing is the central Issaquah plan was
1:05:59 adopted and it included the central
1:06:01 Issaquah Street standards which are
1:06:03 circulation standards which were Street
1:06:05 standards that actually lived in the
1:06:07 land use code not into the street
1:06:09 standards
1:06:10 also recently in 2000 slash 2001 the
1:06:16 mobility master plan was completed
1:06:19 which
1:06:20 placed a new priority on alternative
1:06:23 modes of transportation set a light
1:06:25 bicycle level of traffic stress standard
1:06:27 number of other things most recently the
1:06:31 council adopted the new rewrite of Title
1:06:34 18 and then earlier this year Thomas
1:06:37 eldrez presented the street typologies
1:06:41 to the committee and got some feedback
1:06:48 with all that I want to talk a little
1:06:50 bit about the changes
1:06:53 the current Street standards say that
1:06:56 administrative changes can be made to
1:06:58 the street standards as long as they are
1:07:00 consistent with the wash.design manual
1:07:04 the issca municipal code for landscaping
1:07:06 and tree preservation and the city's
1:07:09 comprehensive plan now with this street
1:07:12 standards revision we've packaged
1:07:14 everything up at one time there's a
1:07:16 number of things that are administrative
1:07:18 changes and there's a number of things
1:07:20 that are Council changes we have it all
1:07:23 in one document though rather than
1:07:25 trying to do short two short updates
1:07:29 some examples of items that would
1:07:33 require Council approval and the so the
1:07:37 first one is currently our street
1:07:40 standards say that retaining walls will
1:07:42 be designed to the international
1:07:44 building code standard if we were to
1:07:46 want to change it to
1:07:48 the ash Stone I forget what ashto stands
1:07:51 for but that's the standard that washed
1:07:54 out in a lot of public agencies with
1:07:57 roads and streets use in my mind that
1:08:00 crosses the line where that needs to be
1:08:02 a council decision not an administrative
1:08:04 decision
1:08:05 the street typical sections that's also
1:08:08 a council item to approve which is why
1:08:11 the typologies is included in this
1:08:14 revision of the street standards that
1:08:15 we'd going to ask the council to approve
1:08:19 and then
1:08:21 right now there's a if the city the city
1:08:26 is required to put in a landscape
1:08:27 planner strip with Street trees this is
1:08:29 both in the street standards and in
1:08:32 Title 18 of the land use code and if we
1:08:35 were to change the exemption
1:08:37 to not allow a planner script maybe I
1:08:41 mean I'm thinking of an example we're
1:08:44 doing a project right now to determine
1:08:46 what would be the preferred section of
1:08:47 sidewalk or bike Lanes on squawk
1:08:50 Mountain but thinking of if the
1:08:54 community's desire
1:08:55 is to preserve the existing trees and
1:08:59 minimize not put in a planter strip that
1:09:02 would be something that would have to
1:09:04 come to the council
1:09:08 about that the proposal in the revision
1:09:12 to the street standards a lot of the
1:09:14 items that we have are just simply
1:09:16 moving things that were orphaned from
1:09:19 Title 18 into the street standards and
1:09:22 that includes the central issaqua
1:09:24 circulation facilities
1:09:25 we move those with minor changes the
1:09:29 only changes really that we made were
1:09:30 just making them consistent with how the
1:09:33 street standards were but the idea was
1:09:35 to keep the intent of the centralist
1:09:38 Cross regulation standards
1:09:40 the other one is Sky Bridges
1:09:42 that was in Title 18 with the adoption
1:09:46 it was
1:09:47 orphaned and just moved it word for word
1:09:51 the street typologies that Thomas talked
1:09:54 to you earlier this year have been
1:09:56 incorporated into the proposed revision
1:09:58 to the street standards
1:10:00 as we're working on the its plan one of
1:10:03 the things in the its plan will there'll
1:10:06 be other things that we'll want to
1:10:07 revise but one of the things this is a
1:10:10 combination of
1:10:12 something identified in the its plan as
1:10:14 well as a practice that we've gone to
1:10:18 in order to preserve our pavement is to
1:10:21 change from using Loop detectors in the
1:10:23 pavement because Loops cause pavement
1:10:26 failure to radar detection
1:10:29 and so we've got that included into this
1:10:31 revision to the street standards
1:10:33 another one is the mobility master plan
1:10:36 and then now the comprehensive plan
1:10:39 identified a bicycle level of traffic
1:10:41 stress and we added that into the street
1:10:44 standards
1:10:46 and then finally the last one minor
1:10:49 cleanup just things to reflect current
1:10:52 org charts that we have try and remove
1:10:54 any gender specific language
1:10:57 and update the references to Title 18
1:11:00 that changed
1:11:06 I want to make a quick apology I
1:11:08 realized that
1:11:10 on the council meeting on July 10th
1:11:15 we're doing a public hearing and I had
1:11:17 in my original packet said we would try
1:11:19 and adopt the street standards then but
1:11:21 typically when we do a public hearing we
1:11:24 adopted the following meeting so I made
1:11:26 a quick revision to that and so the
1:11:29 options that the committee has are to
1:11:32 modify the proposed Street standards or
1:11:36 make no changes to the proposed Street
1:11:38 standards and recommend the full Council
1:11:41 set of public hearing on July 10 2023.
1:11:47 the administration's recommendation
1:11:49 is to
1:11:53 support adopting the proposed Street
1:11:55 standards at the regular council meeting
1:11:57 on July 24th 2023
1:12:03 and the timing and next steps
1:12:06 the public hearing would like to have it
1:12:09 set for July 10th with adoption on July
1:12:14 we're working on other updates to the
1:12:17 street standards right now we are
1:12:18 working on a lot more of a technical
1:12:21 update to the traffic signal standards
1:12:23 in the street standards
1:12:25 and at this point I can't say what how
1:12:28 much of that will be items that need to
1:12:30 be approved by Council versus ones that
1:12:32 fit in the category of what can be
1:12:35 approved administratively we're in the
1:12:37 middle of working on that
1:12:39 there's a lot of technology has changed
1:12:40 since 2010
1:12:42 and that's long overdue other things
1:12:44 that we have on the long-term Street
1:12:46 standards to-do list are bicycle
1:12:49 standards or design at intersections one
1:12:52 of the things that we got from the
1:12:54 Transportation Advisory board when we're
1:12:56 talking about Street typologies was
1:12:59 that's great but what about the
1:13:01 intersections and so we have it on the
1:13:04 work plan to
1:13:06 create design standards at intersections
1:13:09 illumination standards working with
1:13:11 Community Planning and Development to
1:13:14 better coordinate what was adopted in
1:13:17 Title 18 versus what we have in the
1:13:19 street standards I think there's some
1:13:20 work that we need to do there and then
1:13:23 thinking and this is an idea I haven't
1:13:26 quite fully baked out but I'm thinking
1:13:29 of a way to
1:13:31 improve our standards to have a make it
1:13:34 easier to implement smaller
1:13:36 non-motorized Transportation
1:13:38 improvements that a lot of the way our
1:13:40 Sanders are currently written you pretty
1:13:42 much are redeveloping I mentioned squawk
1:13:45 Mountain for example where the standard
1:13:47 as written would require Street trees
1:13:49 and planter strip and trying to think of
1:13:52 what is a context sensitive outcome and
1:13:56 trying
1:13:57 form a conversation with the Council on
1:14:00 what's the community's desire
1:14:04 going back to the direction needed
1:14:07 the question is does the council
1:14:08 committee support the proposed revisions
1:14:11 to the street standards
1:14:17 right let's uh there's some questions
1:14:19 Deputy council president thank you
1:14:22 um there's one
1:14:26 one of the changes that kind of struck
1:14:28 me that I just wanted to ask about in
1:14:30 terms of what impact it would have
1:14:38 all right
1:14:39 oh here it is
1:14:41 um it was the one that added that six
1:14:43 intersections can operate at level of
1:14:44 service e or f as long as city-wide
1:14:46 averages b or better can you talk about
1:14:48 what that means the impact that is yeah
1:14:52 that one actually doesn't change
1:14:53 anything that was more housekeeping in
1:14:56 the transportation concurrency part of
1:14:58 Title 18 and I'm going to say the former
1:15:01 Title 18 and the Rewritten title 18. we
1:15:06 have it where the city's level of
1:15:09 service at a traffic signal is D or
1:15:12 better
1:15:14 except for at six intersections for a
1:15:17 variety of reasons the council at the
1:15:20 time decided that those could operate at
1:15:23 level of service e or F now
1:15:29 what we did with this was just to put
1:15:32 into the street standards which would is
1:15:35 already into the city code it's just
1:15:37 more of a cleanup item
1:15:40 I wonder if that would be
1:15:43 a potential topic for conversation in
1:15:48 the future as to whether or not that's a
1:15:51 were they six like intersections in
1:15:54 particular that the council had thought
1:15:55 or yeah it's six specific ones where it
1:15:58 would take a lot to yeah to D or better
1:16:01 and so the six I don't have them all
1:16:03 memorized East Lake Sammamish Parkway in
1:16:06 southeast 56th there's one of them
1:16:08 Issaquah Pine Lake Road in Nisswa Falls
1:16:11 City Road
1:16:12 the there's an interesting one Telus
1:16:15 drive and sr900 was one but then when we
1:16:18 updated our concurrency back in 2017
1:16:21 that one was no longer at level of
1:16:25 service erf it was actually
1:16:28 D or better and I know
1:16:32 the intersection of Sunset and front is
1:16:35 also one of them that's one of our worst
1:16:37 traffic signals
1:16:41 okay so the investment is just would be
1:16:44 a lot to get it up even deep correct
1:16:49 so Wonder though in the future good
1:16:54 I'm sorry go ahead hi this is Andrea
1:16:57 um so I believe that we uh the city has
1:17:00 had policy discussions on these
1:17:02 intersections in the past of how we
1:17:04 characterize uh the different grades to
1:17:07 each intersection and how we want to
1:17:09 approach those intersections it's been
1:17:11 part of concurrency discussions in the
1:17:14 um as Council may recall we are uh
1:17:18 updating our concurrency
1:17:21 approach as well and so we'll be talking
1:17:24 more about uh more about the concurrency
1:17:27 model traffic and investments in our um
1:17:31 and our infrastructure and our
1:17:33 transportation infrastructure in the
1:17:35 coming year I think John can tell me
1:17:37 when we expect to have the concurrency
1:17:39 project back before Council
1:17:41 there's going to be two concurrency
1:17:43 projects and such a fun topic you can't
1:17:47 just have one the first one is the
1:17:50 technical update so we're doing a
1:17:52 technical update right now and that'll
1:17:55 be this fall we'll present to the
1:17:57 committee which is one where we're it'll
1:18:01 be more of well depending on what the
1:18:04 model says depends on whether it would
1:18:06 trigger policy discussions although I
1:18:08 met with the consultant earlier today I
1:18:10 would be shocked because our traffic
1:18:12 counts are so much less than what the
1:18:14 model said they should be
1:18:15 all right
1:18:18 the other one which will be in the
1:18:21 future and we don't quite have the
1:18:22 schedule ironed out is a conversation to
1:18:25 ask the question
1:18:27 does the city's Transportation
1:18:29 concurrency system align with the
1:18:31 mobility master plan guiding principles
1:18:36 if yes then okay that works done if no
1:18:39 then what do we
1:18:42 you're nothing that's my mind always an
1:18:44 option to consider do we modify the
1:18:47 current system or do we overhaul the
1:18:50 system and redo it but that's
1:18:52 conversation for another day
1:18:56 okay thank you appreciate the answer in
1:18:57 the context
1:19:01 any other questions
1:19:04 all right uh we have another public
1:19:06 comment opportunity clerk do we have
1:19:08 anybody with us online
1:19:11 we do oh
1:19:13 all right so if you are online and you'd
1:19:16 like to make comments at this time you
1:19:17 can press uh star three on your phone or
1:19:20 look for a hand icon and we'll wait just
1:19:23 a second see if anybody raises their
1:19:25 hand I would like to make comment
1:19:37 any hands no sure no hands at this time
1:19:41 all right well we will we will move on
1:19:43 and we'll move to the next section which
1:19:46 is uh deliberation and uh the
1:19:49 administration is looking for input on
1:19:51 uh our support for the proposed
1:19:53 revisions to the street standards so
1:19:58 what was that
1:19:59 thumbs up
1:20:02 well I think I'm going to make you talk
1:20:03 about it
1:20:05 any uh comments
1:20:08 um that you'd like to make you know I
1:20:10 this one feels a little bit easier than
1:20:12 the last one in that it most of this
1:20:14 seems like housekeeping it seems like
1:20:15 you've done your homework and analyzed
1:20:17 these these changes together so I
1:20:18 appreciate
1:20:20 the summary of change is document two to
1:20:22 be able to slug through that massive
1:20:24 document so this seems um like a simple
1:20:27 update to me and so yes I'll I would
1:20:29 support the proposal
1:20:33 yeah I'll I'll Echo that and I want to
1:20:35 Echo what uh customer Hall said earlier
1:20:38 about you know every time that
1:20:42 staff comes here with a presentation for
1:20:45 us it is so thoroughly done uh we just I
1:20:49 can't thank you enough we get the best
1:20:50 materials here and they're always so
1:20:53 clearly explanatory which is another way
1:20:57 of saying that I have no objection to
1:20:59 moving forward with the street standards
1:21:01 I appreciate very much I asked for the
1:21:04 marked up copy and that was very helpful
1:21:07 and I will admit that I did not get all
1:21:09 the way through it but it's very obvious
1:21:11 that it's been very thoughtfully done
1:21:13 and if we have a hearing on the 10th and
1:21:17 adopt on the 24th I will be supporting
1:21:20 that as well so but just a general
1:21:23 appreciation for the thoroughness of the
1:21:25 materials that are brought to us here
1:21:27 every time thank you so much
1:21:29 all right great I and I I concur so the
1:21:32 question then really is
1:21:36 we'll do the public hearing on the 10th
1:21:38 we're supportive of that yes
1:21:41 um and then it'll come back for final
1:21:43 adoption on the 24th consent okay or you
1:21:47 want to do regular business
1:21:50 I think consent too all right so let's
1:21:52 uh let's schedule the public hearing for
1:21:55 July 10 and let's put it on consent on
1:21:58 July 24th
1:22:00 right
1:22:01 council member D Michelle oh I when we
1:22:05 were talking about whether it goes on
1:22:06 consent or the regular agenda the first
1:22:09 item that we discussed what are the next
1:22:11 next steps for that is that going back
1:22:13 to staff or uh what what is the next
1:22:16 step for for that particular item
1:22:20 thank you for that question I was
1:22:21 realizing that we didn't actually spell
1:22:22 out what the next steps are so the
1:22:24 transit study is a very big study for us
1:22:27 it is not done this is just really the
1:22:31 first section of us taking a look at
1:22:32 what our existing conditions what are
1:22:35 the gaps where do we want to head to
1:22:37 right so there's a lot more development
1:22:39 that needs to occur we do anticipate
1:22:41 being uh back in front of this Committee
1:22:44 in August with the second set of policy
1:22:47 questions from the transit study so we
1:22:50 uh we still have the expectation that
1:22:53 the transit study will be complete by
1:22:55 the end of the year and come to full
1:22:57 council at that time but at this point
1:22:59 we're working on sections at a time so
1:23:01 we're going to come back to this
1:23:02 Committee in August with the next set of
1:23:05 policy questions for you
1:23:08 uh Deputy council president
1:23:11 um I just really quickly then wanted
1:23:13 also to say to add on to councilmember
1:23:15 Michelle's thanks
1:23:17 um they're kind of thinking John
1:23:18 thinking ahead like the 2024 next steps
1:23:20 that you have including this kind of
1:23:22 what sounds like a kind of creative
1:23:24 discussion about non-motorized
1:23:26 implementation standards very supportive
1:23:29 of us kind of having those conversations
1:23:30 thank you for keeping an eye out for
1:23:33 these opportunities
1:23:34 discussion I'm just thinking
1:23:38 all right um thank you John great as
1:23:40 always all right so that brings us to
1:23:43 the end of our agenda uh we have
1:23:45 announcements any uh announcements from
1:23:48 the committee
1:23:52 I'm seeing a maybe
1:23:56 um and I'm looking at at Andrea the
1:23:58 regional transit committee has their
1:24:00 meeting I believe next week on the 2020
1:24:06 let's see 19 21st and I believe the safe
1:24:10 they're going to give us another report
1:24:12 on the safe project which is uh
1:24:15 increasing
1:24:17 um safety on the bus system and I will
1:24:20 be I will be in Spokane but I will be at
1:24:23 the RTC meeting because that is an issue
1:24:25 I think of real importance to our
1:24:27 community so anybody who wants to watch
1:24:30 the regional transit committee and watch
1:24:33 that report
1:24:34 it is online on the King County website
1:24:37 or contact me and I'll help you find it
1:24:40 thanks
1:24:42 thank you
1:24:43 nothing okay
1:24:44 since we have no nothing else this
1:24:46 meeting is adjourned at 802. thank you

Motions and votes (1)

APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE MAY 9, 2023 MEETING. . AGENDA ITEMS a) ID 1353 Transit Study Gaps Analysis Following the staff presentation nobody spoke at public comment. Committee comments included the following: • Whether to provide alternative bus stop amenities for local bus stops for local high p…
Moved by COUNCILMEMBER DE MICHELE · seconded by DEPUTY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HALL
Carried 3-0