City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee · Tuesday, March 12, 2024 · City Council Digest

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of December 12, 2023

packet pp.5–6

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 12-12-23 City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Page (1) Committee Minutes CITY OF ISSAQUAH City Council Mobility & Infrastructure Committee 6:30 PM Council Chambers, 135 E. December 12, 2023 MINUTES Sunset Way, Issaquah WA

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Transportation Concurrency Model ID 1339

90 min · John Mortenson, Transportation Manager · packet pp.7–37

Topics: Transportation

▶ Watch from 0:35 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

Concurrency is one of the goals of the Growth Management Act and refers to the timely provision of public facilities and services relatively to the demand for them. To maintain concurrency means that adequate public facilities are in place to serve new development as it occurs or within a specified time. For transportation projects, the specified time is within six years.

1568 segments .txt ↗

0:03 ↗ all right um good evening everyone I'm

0:05 ↗ Chris Ray and I'm going to call to order

0:07 ↗ the March 12th 2023 City uh Council

0:10 ↗ mobility and infrastructure committee uh

0:13 ↗ with me this evening is council member

0:14 ↗ uh Barbara D Michelle um council member

0:17 ↗ Zach Hall has an excuse absence this

0:20 ↗ evening um there will be two uh multiple

0:24 ↗ public comment opportunities at

0:25 ↗ tonight's meeting there's a general

0:27 ↗ public comment opportunity at the

0:28 ↗ beginning of the meeting or you can make

0:31 ↗ public comment after the presentation

0:32 ↗ and Council question and answer period

0:35 ↗ on tonight's agenda item um so our first

0:39 ↗ agenda item is public comment and

0:41 ↗ members of the public May address the

0:43 ↗ council at this time in person or

0:45 ↗ virtually city clerk is there anybody

0:48 ↗ online who has expressed an interest in

0:49 ↗ making public comment chair Ray we

0:52 ↗ currently have no online attendees okay

0:55 ↗ and it doesn't look like uh anybody in

0:57 ↗ the audience is interested in making

0:59 ↗ public comments

1:01 ↗ right so we will um skip over that there

1:04 ↗ but just to note there is another public

1:06 ↗ comment opportunity um later on the

1:09 ↗ agenda so we'll move on to our next

1:11 ↗ agenda item which is approval of the

1:13 ↗ minutes um any objection to approving

1:16 ↗ the draft minutes from our last meeting

1:18 ↗ no okay without objection the minutes

1:21 ↗ have been

1:23 ↗ approved okay we have one agenda item

1:26 ↗ and it's a big um it's ID 1339 the

1:29 ↗ transport ation concurrency model uh

1:32 ↗ Transportation um manager John mortson

1:34 ↗ is going to be presenting tonight and I

1:36 ↗ think he's brought some uh some backup

1:39 ↗ so John uh welcome and take it away all

1:42 ↗ right thank you very much chair Ray I'm

1:44 ↗ John Mortenson transportation

1:46 ↗ engineering manager with the city and

1:48 ↗ with me is Torsten linau he is our

1:51 ↗ consultant with Jacobs who's been

1:53 ↗ working on our transportation

1:55 ↗ concurrency System since

1:58 ↗ 1998

2:01 ↗ and Torsten can you go ahead and share

2:03 ↗ the

2:04 ↗ presentation I am trying I'm learning

2:06 ↗ web web I've never used this program

2:08 ↗ before so I'm trying to figure it out

2:11 ↗ but I think I'm sharing it

2:14 ↗ now oh wait hold

2:18 ↗ on there we

2:23 ↗ go is that

2:26 ↗ good yep that's great all right let's go

2:29 ↗ to next

2:33 ↗ slide okay so the purpose of this item

2:36 ↗ is to talk about

2:37 ↗ the 20 2022 update to the transportation

2:43 ↗ concurrency model and the agenda for

2:46 ↗ tonight is to go over the purpose the

2:49 ↗ direction needed from the committee give

2:52 ↗ some background of the city's

2:54 ↗ Transportation concurrency

2:56 ↗ system talk about the results from the

2:58 ↗ model update

3:00 ↗ the administration's recommendation

3:03 ↗ followed by timing and next steps next

3:07 ↗ slide oops sorry wrong

3:14 ↗ way all right so the purpose of this

3:18 ↗ item tonight is isqua Municipal Code

3:22 ↗ 18.15 245 requires updates to the city's

3:27 ↗ Transportation concurrency system

3:30 ↗ there's three triggers for when the

3:31 ↗ concurrency system gets updated it's

3:35 ↗ when development's taken up has reserved

3:38 ↗ more than half of the trips that the

3:39 ↗ city has available for

3:41 ↗ development also another time period

3:44 ↗ when we would update it is if when we

3:46 ↗ were doing the comprehensive plan if the

3:49 ↗ city were to be re-evaluating

3:51 ↗ concurrency as part of that that it

3:54 ↗ would require an update and then the

3:57 ↗ last one is we're just supposed to do it

3:58 ↗ every 3 years now the last update was

4:01 ↗ done in

4:02 ↗ 2017 and doing some math that would have

4:04 ↗ put us right at 20220 in the middle of

4:07 ↗ the pandemic so we chose to put the

4:10 ↗ project on hold for a couple years to

4:12 ↗ wait for travel patterns

4:14 ↗ to go back to something that did not

4:17 ↗ look like

4:20 ↗ 2020 and another purpose for updating

4:23 ↗ the transportation concurrency system is

4:25 ↗ to make sure that development and

4:27 ↗ transportation improvements are in sync

4:30 ↗ the one of the purposes of

4:32 ↗ Transportation concurrency is to make

4:34 ↗ sure that Transportation improvements

4:37 ↗ happen concurrent with development and

4:39 ↗ this is a way of checking to make sure

4:42 ↗ we're still heading in the right

4:43 ↗ direction or if we need to make

4:46 ↗ Corrections and then finally the

4:48 ↗ information used from the Transportation

4:51 ↗ concurrency system update will

4:53 ↗ eventually be used to update our the

4:56 ↗ city's traffic impact fees and um

5:00 ↗ usually at the same time we update the

5:02 ↗ bicycle and pedestrian mitigation fees

5:04 ↗ next

5:07 ↗ Slide the direction that the

5:09 ↗ administration needs from the committee

5:11 ↗ tonight regarding the transportation

5:14 ↗ concurrency is first of all we're going

5:16 ↗ to provide an update on the model update

5:21 ↗ and ask the question does the committee

5:23 ↗ support waiting until after the

5:25 ↗ concurrency policy and level of service

5:28 ↗ evaluation has been completed before

5:30 ↗ deciding the future of two intersections

5:33 ↗ that will operate below the city's

5:35 ↗ adopted level of service in the year

5:38 ↗ 2050 and next

5:40 ↗ slide and at this point I'm going to

5:43 ↗ transer over to Torsten who will give

5:47 ↗ the update on the results in the

5:51 ↗ background great thank you

5:53 ↗ John um so as I as I go through this if

5:57 ↗ I um say something that you don't

6:00 ↗ understand if I'm being too technical

6:02 ↗ please by all means just interrupt me

6:04 ↗ and and ask

6:06 ↗ me um all right so concurrency I think

6:10 ↗ most of you know Transportation

6:12 ↗ concurrency is a requirement of state

6:14 ↗ law um but the the good thing is that um

6:19 ↗ the state basically gives each

6:21 ↗ individual

6:23 ↗ agency um sort of the right to create

6:26 ↗ its own concurrency system in the way

6:28 ↗ that it's sees fit and manage it however

6:31 ↗ you see fit so um so there's lots of

6:35 ↗ flexibility and that's why you see

6:37 ↗ different concurrency systems from one

6:39 ↗ agency to the

6:41 ↗ next um so in 1998 the city did uh adopt

6:46 ↗ their first Transportation concurrency

6:49 ↗ system and um I I at that time was

6:54 ↗ working for um for the city working on

6:57 ↗ an Eis for development called East

7:00 ↗ Village at the time it's now called

7:02 ↗ Talis I think most of you know it as

7:05 ↗ Talis um but Talis was the first

7:07 ↗ development to go through um the

7:10 ↗ concurrency system the the new adopted

7:13 ↗ concurrency system at that time and it

7:15 ↗ just so happened that the city's traffic

7:17 ↗ engineer quit right around that same

7:20 ↗ time and so um so it was my uh pleasure

7:24 ↗ and and it turned out that's how I got

7:27 ↗ sort of involved in isqua concurrency

7:29 ↗ system way back in

7:31 ↗ 1998 I basically had to learn the system

7:34 ↗ um on the Fly and then uh use it to

7:37 ↗ assess Talis and um it's sort of been

7:40 ↗ history since then um so I do know a lot

7:44 ↗ about the system about concurrency uh

7:47 ↗ since I have worked on it since 1998

7:49 ↗ since its

7:50 ↗ Inception um and so just in general um

7:54 ↗ this concurrency in isqua the

7:57 ↗ methodology that's used to assess your

8:01 ↗ transportation system that's been uh

8:03 ↗ changed twice since 1998 and I'll go

8:06 ↗ through a a flowchart soon and and

8:08 ↗ explain those those changes um and then

8:13 ↗ uh since 1998 there have been seven

8:15 ↗ technical updates which means the

8:17 ↗ methodology didn't change but we did

8:20 ↗ update it to you know new counts uh or

8:23 ↗ new information that's you know

8:24 ↗ generally provided uh land use or

8:27 ↗ Transportation improvements that have

8:29 ↗ been changed over the

8:31 ↗ years the current methodology that's

8:34 ↗ used in in his squads referred to a

8:37 ↗ simplified concurrency that was adopted

8:39 ↗ back in

8:40 ↗ 2010 um and since 2010 um it well it

8:44 ↗ became effective in 2012 uh and since

8:48 ↗ 2012 there's been only really the 2017

8:52 ↗ update and then the update that I'm

8:54 ↗ going to talk about

8:58 ↗ tonight

9:03 ↗ there we go okay so uh this timeline

9:06 ↗ basically shows the history of

9:08 ↗ concurrency of Transportation

9:09 ↗ concurrency in isqua since

9:11 ↗ 1998 um as I mentioned it was first

9:14 ↗ adopted then ordinance

9:16 ↗ 2184 uh soon after Talis went through um

9:20 ↗ its uh went was the first development to

9:24 ↗ actually use the new concurrency system

9:26 ↗ in

9:26 ↗ 1999 and when that happened um the the

9:31 ↗ system started to fail um right away and

9:34 ↗ it the city went into a state of

9:36 ↗ moratorium um and so no new development

9:39 ↗ was permitted after the Talis

9:41 ↗ development was approved there was a

9:44 ↗ another update that was done in

9:47 ↗ 2000 um uh and that was mostly just a

9:50 ↗ technical update and um after that

9:53 ↗ update the city was still in a state of

9:56 ↗ moratorium again no development could

9:59 ↗ could move forward in in in

10:02 ↗ isqua then in 2005 the city of isqua

10:05 ↗ participated in a study called The Brick

10:08 ↗ study and they that stands for Belleview

10:11 ↗ Redmond isqua and Kirkland the four

10:13 ↗ agencies got together and look and

10:16 ↗ decided to do a study that looked at um

10:20 ↗ uh concurrency in general but but

10:23 ↗ looking at a way to incorporate a

10:26 ↗ multimodal approach to concurrency and

10:29 ↗ really those four agencies including you

10:32 ↗ isqua you were really the um the first

10:36 ↗ in the state to look at multimodal

10:38 ↗ concurrency and to actually use it um

10:42 ↗ and so that was uh that was a a great

10:45 ↗ undertaking and um I mean obviously you

10:48 ↗ guys should be proud of that today the

10:51 ↗ only other change to concurrency in the

10:53 ↗ state of Washington uh that has that uh

10:57 ↗ that is required and this is a Rec

10:59 ↗ change is that uh the state has required

11:02 ↗ that every single agency have a

11:05 ↗ multimodal concurrency system so think

11:09 ↗ about it back in 2005 you were one of

11:11 ↗ the first uh to to um embark on that

11:15 ↗ already in any event um in

11:19 ↗ 2004 uh there was another update done to

11:22 ↗ the concurrency system and with that

11:25 ↗ update the moratorium was lifted and

11:28 ↗ development was allowed to continue the

11:31 ↗ system up until

11:33 ↗ 2004 was a link based system meaning

11:37 ↗ that we measured

11:39 ↗ capacity uh between intersections so um

11:43 ↗ basically the links uh of the available

11:47 ↗ capacity between

11:48 ↗ intersections and in reality the

11:52 ↗ majority of delay and or

11:56 ↗ um backup that you uh experienc when

11:59 ↗ you're driving the system isn't actually

12:01 ↗ between the intersections it's at the

12:03 ↗ intersection itself and so in

12:06 ↗ 2006 there was uh U an an effort made to

12:11 ↗ look at changing the methodology in

12:14 ↗ isqua from a link based system to an

12:18 ↗ intersection based system and um and

12:20 ↗ that was actually enacted in 2007 there

12:24 ↗ was a major update done then to the

12:27 ↗ concurrency system and that was the

12:29 ↗ first time that the system what the the

12:32 ↗ policy or the methodology was changed

12:35 ↗ from link based to intersection based it

12:38 ↗ was still on the developers it was the

12:41 ↗ developers onus though to run the

12:44 ↗ concurrency model and uh when they were

12:47 ↗ proposing something in the city and then

12:50 ↗ to propose mitigation that would fix

12:53 ↗ anything uh or any impacts that the

12:56 ↗ developer created as a result of the the

12:59 ↗ development itself and so over the years

13:03 ↗ we found that the city was basically

13:06 ↗ getting um improvements recommended by

13:10 ↗ developers that were really inter they

13:13 ↗ were always intersection based but they

13:14 ↗ were very small improvements like a turn

13:17 ↗ lane or uh an adjustment to Signal

13:20 ↗ timing Etc and in the

13:24 ↗ end the city was not getting the

13:27 ↗ transportation improvements that it had

13:29 ↗ envisioned for the city um and it was

13:32 ↗ getting much smaller improvements just

13:34 ↗ scattered throughout the city and as a

13:36 ↗ result in 2010 and

13:40 ↗ 2012 um the central isqua plan uh was

13:44 ↗ underway and at that time we decided to

13:46 ↗ do another uh policy update or a

13:49 ↗ methodology update which resulted in

13:52 ↗ simplified concurrency the system still

13:55 ↗ was intersection based but the onus now

13:59 ↗ fell on the city to determine the level

14:02 ↗ of service within the city and the set

14:05 ↗ of Transportation improvements that

14:07 ↗ would be required to maintain that level

14:09 ↗ of service and what then happened was as

14:14 ↗ a developer came in the door they were

14:16 ↗ approved based on their land use and if

14:20 ↗ their land use was consistent with the

14:23 ↗ land use that we had assumed in the

14:25 ↗ transportation concurrency model then

14:28 ↗ they were approved approv D but they

14:30 ↗ paid an impact fee which helps build the

14:35 ↗ transportation system that the city had

14:37 ↗ set forth in the comprehensive plan so

14:40 ↗ since 2012 um that's been the new

14:44 ↗ concurrency

14:45 ↗ system um you might ask about the

14:48 ↗ multimodal piece I think John had

14:49 ↗ alluded to that with each concurrency

14:52 ↗ update we then do an update to the

14:54 ↗ impact fee system and there's also a

14:58 ↗ multimodal um a voluntary multimodal fee

15:01 ↗ that's required that helps build the uh

15:04 ↗ non-motorized facilities within the city

15:06 ↗ and that's the multimodal piece of this

15:10 ↗ concurrency

15:13 ↗ system so uh as I mentioned 2017 was the

15:16 ↗ last technical update that was done and

15:20 ↗ um and then of course the world was hit

15:23 ↗ by uh the pandemic and that changed

15:27 ↗ travel patterns dramatically instead of

15:29 ↗ updating the system more regularly like

15:32 ↗ in 2020 or 2021 uh we decided to hold

15:36 ↗ off until travel patterns seem to uh

15:39 ↗ settle down and get back to normal so

15:42 ↗ that's why we had initiated the update

15:45 ↗ in

15:47 ↗ 2022 any questions before I move

15:53 ↗ on okay hold on just a second I think we

15:56 ↗ I know I have a question I was going to

15:57 ↗ give Barb for shot um I'm just curious I

16:00 ↗ mean do we have a sense that we are back

16:01 ↗ to prepandemic traffic uh patterns and

16:04 ↗ traffic

16:05 ↗ volumes so definitely not um there's

16:09 ↗ been you know B there's really no agency

16:12 ↗ that I've worked with that has that is

16:14 ↗ back to pre-pandemic traffic levels um

16:18 ↗ they certainly have increased those

16:20 ↗ since the worst of the pandemic um and

16:23 ↗ so there is an upward Trend I do believe

16:26 ↗ they've been settling down um and and uh

16:29 ↗ but I don't know that we've seen the end

16:31 ↗ of you know traffic patterns changing I

16:34 ↗ think it's just a it's it was a a major

16:38 ↗ shift and a major change in travel

16:40 ↗ patterns and for now I think it's

16:41 ↗ settled down I can't guarantee that it's

16:44 ↗ not going to um you know continue to

16:47 ↗ change and morph over time uh but I do

16:50 ↗ believe the 2022 traffic counts that we

16:53 ↗ obtained are um Pro probably very

16:57 ↗ consistent with sort of a settled down

17:00 ↗ you know travel pattern so we're let me

17:04 ↗ let me play that back at you so we're

17:05 ↗ we're we are down from pre-pandemic

17:08 ↗ levels but we think we've hit a plateau

17:10 ↗ of what at least in the short term will

17:12 ↗ be our expected um number of trips

17:15 ↗ number of cars traffic pattern per

17:18 ↗ perfect way of saying it and uh your use

17:21 ↗ of the word shortterm is is important

17:24 ↗ because as John mentioned and and as I

17:27 ↗ indicated we do these updates

17:29 ↗ typically every 3 years um and so if

17:32 ↗ travel patterns do change the city sort

17:35 ↗ of self-monitors themselves to make sure

17:37 ↗ that you know we don't get too far out

17:40 ↗ of sync so if if we continue to allow

17:43 ↗ development to occur between this update

17:46 ↗ and your next update let's say in

17:49 ↗ 2025 then um you know hopefully we will

17:52 ↗ have caught any changes in travel

17:54 ↗ patterns in

17:56 ↗ 2025 that didn't get you so far out of

17:58 ↗ synced in terms of you know balancing

18:01 ↗ the amount of development that occurs

18:03 ↗ but also building the transportation

18:05 ↗ system um at the same time that can

18:07 ↗ support that

18:09 ↗ development Deputy council president you

18:11 ↗ have questions um he just answered the

18:13 ↗ question I was going to ask all right

18:15 ↗ preemptive strike I like it good all

18:19 ↗ right good well then I'll continue

18:22 ↗ um so when we do a a technical update of

18:26 ↗ your concurrency system there's

18:27 ↗ basically three things that we do um we

18:31 ↗ have models that we use to um to

18:35 ↗ replicate basically traffic patterns in

18:37 ↗ the city um and what we do with those

18:41 ↗ models is we obtain new traffic counts

18:44 ↗ and then we calibrate those models to

18:46 ↗ the traffic counts so that we can be

18:48 ↗ assured that the models are replicating

18:51 ↗ the real world as best as possible so

18:55 ↗ the first thing as I mentioned is we get

18:57 ↗ the new counts and we start to C at

18:59 ↗ those models the next major thing that

19:01 ↗ we do is we work with City staff to

19:05 ↗ update all the land uses in the city and

19:07 ↗ that includes what was approved in uh

19:11 ↗ for development in let's say the last

19:14 ↗ update in 2017 we go through that list

19:17 ↗ of improvement uh I'm sorry of uh

19:20 ↗ developments and we confirm with City

19:23 ↗ staff okay did development X get built

19:27 ↗ or if it is partially built how much of

19:30 ↗ it got built and how much of it is still

19:33 ↗ unbuilt and so we go through those land

19:36 ↗ use uh you know uh reviews with City

19:39 ↗ staff and we update the model to reflect

19:42 ↗ all of those land use changes that have

19:44 ↗ occurred since

19:46 ↗ 2017 and then lastly we go through and

19:49 ↗ do updates to the transportation Network

19:51 ↗ so just like land use we look at what

19:54 ↗ was built uh in the transportation

19:57 ↗ system since 2017

19:59 ↗ and um and then are there any new

20:02 ↗ projects that were added to the

20:04 ↗ transportation Improvement program the

20:06 ↗ tip since the 2017 update that we should

20:09 ↗ be including in the model moving

20:12 ↗ forward um I have a just a quick

20:14 ↗ question about the modeling and um and I

20:18 ↗ get we can look at our development here

20:20 ↗ but because we're such a Nexus of of

20:23 ↗ transportation from outside of the city

20:26 ↗ how do we factor in the either e even

20:29 ↗ the pass through traffic but also the

20:31 ↗ destination traffic where people are

20:32 ↗ coming to Costco or or whatever from

20:35 ↗ outside the city what how is that

20:36 ↗ factored into the modeling yeah no

20:38 ↗ that's a great question so um so the

20:42 ↗ model that we use for the city is City

20:45 ↗ specific um but we the model is bigger

20:49 ↗ than the city so we do include uh a good

20:52 ↗ half of the city of samamish there are

20:55 ↗ portions of King County um and portions

20:58 ↗ of Belleview within our model window

21:01 ↗ then beyond the isqua model window we

21:05 ↗ use uh the regional model the psrc model

21:09 ↗ to uh obtain the um

21:13 ↗ 2050 uh traffic volumes that are

21:15 ↗ entering and leaving the city at your

21:17 ↗ model window um and from the psrc model

21:21 ↗ so that takes into account all the

21:23 ↗ growth that's been assumed outside of

21:25 ↗ the city and we kind of force the the

21:28 ↗ isqua model to use those numbers coming

21:32 ↗ in and out of the out of the city's

21:34 ↗ model so that we um we know exactly how

21:38 ↗ many folks are coming in and out based

21:40 ↗ on the regional uh psrc

21:43 ↗ model um oh no I just going to pass it

21:47 ↗ over to

21:48 ↗ you so this is a concurrency 101

21:51 ↗ question but so how exactly do you

21:54 ↗ tabulate numbers are those the little

21:56 ↗ strips that go across the road and count

21:59 ↗ cars coming in and out or do we actually

22:01 ↗ send people out I I was really amazed

22:03 ↗ that we have figures for lots and lots

22:06 ↗ and lots of intersections so I'm going

22:09 ↗ to presume that we don't send people out

22:11 ↗ to every intersection but just exactly

22:13 ↗ how do we get those numbers I mean

22:16 ↗ actually back in 1998 we did uh you

22:19 ↗ might have if you were around 1998

22:22 ↗ people sat in lawn chairs at

22:24 ↗ intersections with a board on their lap

22:26 ↗ and they clicked and counted CS

22:29 ↗ we don't do that anymore we don't do

22:31 ↗ that anymore it's all done with video at

22:33 ↗ this point it's very technical um but so

22:35 ↗ you don't see people doing it anymore uh

22:38 ↗ you know humans out at intersections uh

22:41 ↗ but we do set up cameras and then the

22:43 ↗ cameras are used to count the

22:45 ↗ cars and so that's how it's done thank

22:48 ↗ you yep I think we're good all

22:53 ↗ right okay so the uh Transportation uh

22:57 ↗ concurrency system is made up of two

23:00 ↗ separate models um and this is where I

23:02 ↗ might get a little technical so by all

23:04 ↗ means please interrupt me if you don't

23:07 ↗ understand uh so the first model is what

23:10 ↗ we call a travel demand model that model

23:12 ↗ is used to predict uh traffic where do

23:16 ↗ people go based on the land uses that we

23:19 ↗ input into that model so um so for

23:23 ↗ instance a typical trip in the morning

23:26 ↗ might be from home to work

23:29 ↗ and in the evening it would be from work

23:31 ↗ to home of course there might be

23:33 ↗ intermediate trips if you have children

23:34 ↗ and you're going to a daycare it might

23:36 ↗ be from work to a daycare to home those

23:40 ↗ are all trips that we uh characterize

23:43 ↗ using this first model the travel demand

23:46 ↗ model uh based on the land uses that we

23:49 ↗ use uh or that we input into the model

23:52 ↗ so that that first model we do use

23:55 ↗ traffic counts to calibrate the model

23:57 ↗ there is a n n workor um that's used and

24:01 ↗ we Define the capacity of each roadway

24:04 ↗ within the city in that model but the

24:07 ↗ Unique Piece of this model is that it

24:09 ↗ also contains land use and uh the so the

24:12 ↗ attractions of trips from one land use

24:15 ↗ to another that's what's used to predict

24:18 ↗ travel patterns within the city and of

24:20 ↗ course we calibrate it to the counts the

24:23 ↗ output of that first model are traffic

24:26 ↗ volumes or traffic forecasts on roadways

24:30 ↗ and at

24:31 ↗ intersections we then take that output

24:34 ↗ and it goes into the second model which

24:36 ↗ is a traffic operations model and that

24:39 ↗ model is used to determine the level of

24:43 ↗ service at intersections so um how much

24:46 ↗ delay is are you experiencing at an

24:49 ↗ intersection is what's used to determine

24:52 ↗ the level of service of an intersection

24:54 ↗ and I'll go into the definitions of

24:56 ↗ level of service a little bit later uh

24:58 ↗ in this presentation but basically it's

25:00 ↗ like a report card if you've seen it

25:02 ↗ before AB c d h e and f uh are the

25:07 ↗ levels a being good F being bad and I'll

25:10 ↗ go into that a little bit more detail

25:11 ↗ later but but it's that second model

25:14 ↗ that's ultimately used to determine the

25:17 ↗ capacities uh or the available capacity

25:20 ↗ left on your transportation system and

25:23 ↗ the levels of

25:25 ↗ service any questions before I move on I

25:28 ↗ do and it may be not a question for this

25:30 ↗ time but I'm going to put it out there

25:31 ↗ and you can answer it whenever you want

25:33 ↗ because it might be more appropriate but

25:34 ↗ one of the things that we're looking at

25:36 ↗ investing it is the uh the intelligent

25:38 ↗ transportation system and um I would

25:41 ↗ like at sometime before we get done

25:43 ↗ tonight um see how that might affect the

25:46 ↗ modeling and also the the actual level

25:49 ↗ of service at intersections and so if

25:51 ↗ you factor that in um someplace I so

25:55 ↗ I'll let you do it now you can do it

25:56 ↗ later just sometime

25:58 ↗ no it's fine it's factored into that

26:00 ↗ second model so that second model is the

26:02 ↗ one that is uh more refined and where we

26:05 ↗ can use inputs that you know um that its

26:10 ↗ or intelligent Transportation Systems

26:12 ↗ would would affect or impact that's

26:15 ↗ where it's taken care of in that second

26:16 ↗ model so the model would evolve over

26:18 ↗ time so if you know we're you know we're

26:21 ↗ we're years you know several years

26:22 ↗ before we started implementing so we

26:24 ↗ might see a change in in this the next

26:26 ↗ time we do it because of the modeling or

26:29 ↗ will we see it um are we projecting for

26:31 ↗ that far out where we want to kind of

26:33 ↗ pre preposition that

26:35 ↗ data yeah I mean these models evolve

26:38 ↗ every year there's a new release

26:40 ↗ basically of these models and they get

26:42 ↗ more and more sophisticated as time goes

26:44 ↗ on so as there are more Technologies out

26:47 ↗ there the models are updated so that you

26:50 ↗ can um input what technologies you're

26:54 ↗ using that could be implemented into the

26:57 ↗ model that makes great sense yeah Barb

27:00 ↗ you have

27:01 ↗ something all right so I said John a

27:05 ↗ bunch of questions so this one I'll ask

27:08 ↗ ask out loud because it was interesting

27:10 ↗ to me so I was so uh we're talking about

27:13 ↗ how you know the input goes into the

27:16 ↗ model and then out comes the level of

27:18 ↗ service so I was looking at the

27:20 ↗ intersection of dogwood and Front Street

27:23 ↗ which is currently uh a level of service

27:25 ↗ C but it's predicted to be a b by 2050

27:29 ↗ so I've been stuck there if I'm coming

27:31 ↗ in from Dogwood I've been stuck there

27:33 ↗ for at least 5 minutes at sometimes

27:37 ↗ especially if you're trying to do a left

27:39 ↗ but also sometimes if you're doing a

27:41 ↗ right um and so my question was uh you

27:47 ↗ know you've got traic coming in from

27:49 ↗ basically four different directions into

27:52 ↗ an intersection and if one of those

27:56 ↗ streets is slow but the rest of it is

27:59 ↗ fast you know how do you come to how do

28:02 ↗ you get to that level of service that

28:05 ↗ identifies uh all of the issues at a

28:08 ↗ particular

28:10 ↗ intersection you bet so it's a there's

28:13 ↗ it's a little bit of a complicated

28:15 ↗ answer um first of all uh the level of

28:19 ↗ service of an unsignalized intersection

28:21 ↗ is measured differently than the level

28:23 ↗ of service at a signalized intersection

28:26 ↗ so um let's start with I believe that

28:29 ↗ intersection is unsignalized

28:30 ↗ today and um so at an unsignalized

28:35 ↗ intersection the uh the worst movement

28:38 ↗ is the one that's actually reported as

28:41 ↗ the level of service so if it's usually

28:43 ↗ a side street the uh because that's the

28:46 ↗ one that stopped um and uh then at that

28:51 ↗ intersection there is a planned

28:52 ↗ Improvement uh so when you said it went

28:55 ↗ from C to B that was because because

28:58 ↗ there's a signal proposed at that

29:00 ↗ intersection and uh a turn lane

29:03 ↗ Improvement that was included in the

29:05 ↗ future year model and at a signalized

29:09 ↗ intersection you actually average the

29:12 ↗ delays at every single movement at the

29:14 ↗ intersection and so the level of service

29:17 ↗ that's reported is an overall average of

29:19 ↗ all the movements not the worst movement

29:22 ↗ but it is a weighted average so to get

29:25 ↗ to your point um that if there is a

29:29 ↗ movement that is uh a lot of traffic but

29:32 ↗ it's moving fast or it's moving well and

29:36 ↗ then there's another movement that is

29:38 ↗ experiencing a lot of delay but it's a

29:41 ↗ low volume movement that low volume

29:43 ↗ movement is going to have very little

29:46 ↗ impact on the overall level of service

29:48 ↗ at the intersection because there's so

29:50 ↗ many vehicles at the intersection that

29:52 ↗ are uh generally having low delay at the

29:56 ↗ intersection so that's how that's

29:58 ↗ um that's how it's measured so it's an

30:01 ↗ overall average or weighted average of

30:04 ↗ delay at the

30:05 ↗ intersection if it's a signalized

30:08 ↗ intersection now we do we can and we do

30:11 ↗ have the levels of service at each

30:14 ↗ individual movement so for instance that

30:17 ↗ intersection that you're talking about

30:19 ↗ even though it might be operating at

30:21 ↗ B we we would be able to look up what is

30:24 ↗ the level of service of let's say a side

30:28 ↗ Street left turn and you know

30:30 ↗ potentially that could be a level

30:32 ↗ service e um but that averaged with all

30:36 ↗ the rest results in the intersection

30:38 ↗ overall operating at level service speed

30:41 ↗ now did that answer your question that

30:44 ↗ that answered my question and when I'm

30:46 ↗ talking to residents of isqua who

30:49 ↗ question how that level of service got

30:52 ↗ assigned at that particular intersection

30:54 ↗ I'm going to carry a video of your of

30:58 ↗ explanation so thank you very much I

31:01 ↗ know it's very complicated I appreciate

31:03 ↗ I appreciate that explanation thank you

31:06 ↗ you

31:08 ↗ bet

31:10 ↗ okay um oops went the wrong way okay so

31:14 ↗ uh I mentioned earlier there were three

31:16 ↗ major steps to doing an update the first

31:18 ↗ is that calibration step uh so the

31:21 ↗ traffic counts so I just want to give

31:22 ↗ you a little bit more detail on that we

31:24 ↗ did collect 78 intersection counts

31:28 ↗ throughout the city they were obtained

31:29 ↗ between April and June of

31:31 ↗ 2022 those were uh we made sure that

31:34 ↗ those were uh During the period that

31:36 ↗ school was still in session because

31:39 ↗ school traffic does add to the overall

31:42 ↗ uh levels of congestion in the city and

31:44 ↗ so we always ensure when we do these

31:46 ↗ updates that they're during um you know

31:49 ↗ the the school

31:50 ↗ session um so uh when I say intersection

31:55 ↗ counts what that means again uh as I

31:58 ↗ mentioned is that we use cameras to

31:59 ↗ count at the intersections usually two

32:02 ↗ hours of data is collected during the

32:05 ↗ Peak at the PM peak hour and uh and then

32:09 ↗ we take the absolute Peak that's used uh

32:12 ↗ to calibrate the models so the 1eh hour

32:14 ↗ Peak within that two hours of data

32:17 ↗ that's

32:18 ↗ collected um and we basically know every

32:22 ↗ single movement the count of cars at

32:24 ↗ every single movement so every single

32:26 ↗ left right and through movement on each

32:28 ↗ approach is counted and that's what

32:30 ↗ makes up an intersection uh turning

32:33 ↗ movement

32:34 ↗ count in addition to those 78

32:37 ↗ intersection counts we also obtained um

32:41 ↗ eight daily counts now I think someone

32:43 ↗ referred to those tubes that are put

32:45 ↗ across a roadway um that's how you

32:49 ↗ generally collect uh daily counts so

32:52 ↗ they're there for more than 24 hours and

32:55 ↗ they count uh cars going uh over the

32:57 ↗ tube basically and so we have in

33:00 ↗ addition to the intersection counts we

33:02 ↗ have uh daily counts that we use at the

33:05 ↗ model window again that's the the uh the

33:09 ↗ outskirts of the model and we always

33:11 ↗ match those counts to the psrc model the

33:15 ↗ regional Puget Sound Regional Council

33:18 ↗ model um so that we can ensure that when

33:21 ↗ we get the volumes from that model We

33:23 ↗ compare them to the actual counts that

33:26 ↗ we obtained make sure that there in sync

33:29 ↗ and we calibrate to that and that way we

33:31 ↗ know that when we're forecasting out to

33:34 ↗ the Future and using the psrc forecasts

33:37 ↗ at your model window that they are

33:42 ↗ accurate any questions about the counts

33:45 ↗ before I move on nope I think we're good

33:48 ↗ okay

33:51 ↗ good um okay the next major update we do

33:54 ↗ is with the land use and so I'm going to

33:57 ↗ break this up into two slides we do a um

34:00 ↗ uh both commercial and residential uh

34:03 ↗ updates of land use and the graphic that

34:07 ↗ I've got up uh on the slide shows

34:09 ↗ basically the history since the since

34:12 ↗ the simplified concurrency system was

34:14 ↗ adopted back in

34:15 ↗ 2012 um so you've got the 2013 Update

34:19 ↗ the 2017 update and then of course

34:21 ↗ tonight's update that we're presenting

34:23 ↗ in 2022 so you see the history of of how

34:25 ↗ land use has changed over those years

34:27 ↗ years uh the blue bars are existing so

34:32 ↗ that means what land use was built in

34:35 ↗ place and generating traffic at the time

34:37 ↗ that we did the updates the orange bars

34:42 ↗ are represent land use that the city has

34:44 ↗ approved so developments that have been

34:46 ↗ approved but they haven't been built yet

34:48 ↗ at the time that we did the update we

34:51 ↗ account for that traffic um separately

34:54 ↗ than we do for future land use which is

34:56 ↗ the gray bar those are land uses that

34:59 ↗ the city desires and hopes will happen

35:03 ↗ uh through the comprehensive plan but

35:06 ↗ that there hasn't been an identified

35:08 ↗ development yet or a developer has not

35:10 ↗ come in the door yet um but those are

35:12 ↗ land uses that the city is targeting and

35:15 ↗ hoping to obtain or to um achieve by the

35:19 ↗ growth year and I should mention um our

35:22 ↗ growth year is 2050 that corresponds to

35:25 ↗ the psrc regional model and we typically

35:29 ↗ when we do these updates we always match

35:31 ↗ to whatever the latest Regional uh psrc

35:35 ↗ Regional model year is so that we can uh

35:39 ↗ use that model for as I had mentioned

35:41 ↗ before the window the model

35:44 ↗ window so talking about commercial land

35:47 ↗ uses um overall uh by

35:52 ↗ 2050 um there's about 2 million square

35:55 ↗ feet of commercial SP space that is uh

35:59 ↗ anticipated over your existing

36:02 ↗ commercial space um uh

36:05 ↗ today uh 1.1 million square feet is has

36:08 ↗ been built since 2017 so you see that

36:11 ↗ blue bar increased slightly since the

36:14 ↗ 2017 update that's about 1.1 million

36:17 ↗ square fet that was built over those uh

36:20 ↗ 5

36:22 ↗ years then 2.2 million square feet um uh

36:26 ↗ there's two .2 more 2.2 million square F

36:30 ↗ feet more in that orange bar since

36:34 ↗ 2017 and the major reason for that is

36:38 ↗ back in 2017 when we did the update then

36:42 ↗ uh the major um uh developments Talis

36:46 ↗ and Highlands both of those developments

36:49 ↗ were sunsetting so their development

36:52 ↗ agreements were retiring and but they

36:56 ↗ had still not completely built built out

36:58 ↗ at that time the city made a decision to

37:02 ↗ move all of the development that had

37:04 ↗ previously been approved for those two

37:07 ↗ developments out of the pipeline and

37:10 ↗ move it into future land use so

37:12 ↗ basically the city said look you guys

37:15 ↗ can still build that land use but it's

37:17 ↗ no longer approved you have to come back

37:20 ↗ through the city system and get it

37:22 ↗ approved if you want to build it now

37:26 ↗ since over the years since 2017 and up

37:29 ↗ to this year I think the logic on that

37:32 ↗ has

37:34 ↗ reversed uh and so what we did with this

37:38 ↗ year's update is all that land use that

37:41 ↗ and in Talis and Highlands that had not

37:43 ↗ yet been built we moved it out of the

37:46 ↗ gray bar and put it back into the orange

37:48 ↗ bar so it's now considered pipeline

37:50 ↗ development again and so that's why you

37:52 ↗ see such a large increase in that orange

37:56 ↗ bar hey quick question about that the

38:00 ↗ um do we does the modeling then treat

38:03 ↗ the orange bar different than the gray

38:05 ↗ bar it it does only in that the impact

38:09 ↗ fees that are charged for development is

38:12 ↗ based on the gray bar everything orange

38:15 ↗ and blue has is either existing has

38:18 ↗ already paid the impact fee through an

38:21 ↗ approved development agreement um or

38:24 ↗ obviously it was existing when the model

38:26 ↗ was was built so didn't ever pay an

38:28 ↗ impact fee so this is really about uh

38:30 ↗ anticipated um revenues more than it is

38:33 ↗ about uh model itself got it thanks

38:36 ↗ right the land use was always there it's

38:38 ↗ just a matter of what where is your

38:41 ↗ impact what is the basis for your impact

38:43 ↗ fee how much land use are we charging

38:45 ↗ that impact fee on so that's that's the

38:48 ↗ big

38:52 ↗ change okay um and so what's left in

38:56 ↗ that gray bar is 1 .3 million square fet

38:59 ↗ um Less in the long range plan than was

39:02 ↗ previously in the 2017 model so that

39:05 ↗ explains why the gray bar is smaller

39:08 ↗ than in the 2017 um but overall there is

39:12 ↗ planned growth of about 2.2 million

39:14 ↗ square

39:17 ↗ fet so that's the number that uh impact

39:20 ↗ fees would be based

39:23 ↗ on

39:25 ↗ okay all right let's talk about

39:27 ↗ residential land uses

39:29 ↗ now so a little bit different where you

39:32 ↗ saw in the on the previous Slide the

39:34 ↗ commercial is actually higher in 2022

39:37 ↗ than it was in

39:39 ↗ 2017 uh for residential land use it

39:41 ↗ actually is less then um and that's

39:44 ↗ because there was a uh a shift of land

39:47 ↗ uses within the central isqua plan that

39:50 ↗ uh was felt was never actually uh going

39:53 ↗ to happen or is possible to happen and

39:56 ↗ so that's where that gray bar

39:58 ↗ change from 2017 to

40:00 ↗ 2022 um is that in working with City

40:04 ↗ staff we decided a more realistic number

40:08 ↗ of residential units is is is the new

40:11 ↗ gray bar which is significantly less

40:13 ↗ than what was uh estimated in 2017 so

40:17 ↗ overall that is a that results in about

40:20 ↗ a thousand fewer units overall uh in

40:23 ↗ 2050 than was um assumed in the 2017

40:26 ↗ model

40:28 ↗ but breaking down the numbers you'll see

40:30 ↗ the blue bar did increase so since 2017

40:33 ↗ there's been about a thousand new

40:35 ↗ residential units built um and since

40:39 ↗ 2017 there's been about 200 more uh uh

40:43 ↗ units that have been approved through

40:45 ↗ developments that have come in the door

40:47 ↗ um and so that is the resulting 4,000 uh

40:51 ↗ units planned growth

40:53 ↗ overall any questions about that no

40:57 ↗ thank it makees sense okay great all

41:01 ↗ right this table is

41:03 ↗ basically I know it's a lot of numbers

41:05 ↗ it's basically a summary of what I just

41:07 ↗ presented except that it's broke so if

41:10 ↗ you were interested in where is that

41:12 ↗ growth actually occurring within the

41:14 ↗ city it's broken out uh in this table so

41:18 ↗ that first set of numbers under the gray

41:21 ↗ Central isqua sub area those are all um

41:25 ↗ uh sort of subsets of the central isqua

41:28 ↗ sub area and that is actually where most

41:31 ↗ of the growth is planned um and then we

41:34 ↗ broke out also The Villages so you see

41:36 ↗ Highlands Talis and Lakeside uh and so

41:39 ↗ you can see how growth is um is

41:43 ↗ projected um over the years for both

41:46 ↗ residential and Commercial if you were

41:48 ↗ interested you could see how that

41:50 ↗ changes over time and then lastly that

41:53 ↗ that last gray bar is the rest of the

41:55 ↗ city um that excludes the isqua sub area

41:59 ↗ and The Villages and so you'll see there

42:01 ↗ actually there's very little growth

42:03 ↗ anticipated outside of the central isqua

42:07 ↗ area and uh The Villages um very little

42:13 ↗ growth any questions about that this is

42:16 ↗ maybe more of a comment than a question

42:17 ↗ I'm just really shocked quite honestly

42:19 ↗ the the commercial growth in the

42:21 ↗ highlands I mean that's that's just a

42:24 ↗ big old number so um I don't know that I

42:27 ↗ need an answer I just um really curious

42:30 ↗ to know what we think if what's in that

42:33 ↗ pipeline of of commercial and actually

42:35 ↗ in residential growth too in the

42:36 ↗ highlands yeah and there was actually a

42:39 ↗ shift of commercial to residential up in

42:41 ↗ the highlands with this update um a

42:44 ↗ development known as shelter I think had

42:47 ↗ um uh had shifted some of its land use

42:50 ↗ from uh commercial to residential so

42:54 ↗ there was actually an increase um of

42:56 ↗ residential but still a significant

42:58 ↗ amount of commercial so yeah up in the

43:01 ↗ um so up in the highlands you'll see

43:05 ↗ there's uh 4.9 million square feet in

43:07 ↗ the pipeline so that's what's already

43:09 ↗ been approved and is you

43:12 ↗ know going to happen based on approvals

43:16 ↗ but currently there's 2.5 million square

43:19 ↗ feet that's already been built so there

43:20 ↗ is a significant amount still still in

43:23 ↗ the books to

43:24 ↗ happen Deputy City administrator you

43:27 ↗ you're you're you're putting coming

43:29 ↗ online uh well thank you council member

43:32 ↗ you may recall that the city has a

43:33 ↗ development agreement with Swedish

43:34 ↗ Hospital which accounts for some of that

43:36 ↗ commercial as well as um I I'm going to

43:40 ↗ guess that the former or uh maybe I

43:44 ↗ shouldn't call it former but the the

43:46 ↗ property that was supposed to be a new

43:48 ↗ bellevie college campus um it's future

43:51 ↗ fate is yet to be determined and is

43:53 ↗ probably included in this count it is

43:56 ↗ okay yeah I just um it's just kind of

43:58 ↗ interesting because the pipeline is

44:00 ↗ twice the the built base and it's like I

44:04 ↗ didn't know there was that much growth

44:05 ↗ capacity left in the Highland so um just

44:08 ↗ interesting thank you for

44:10 ↗ that

44:15 ↗ absolutely okay so uh we tackled the

44:17 ↗ counts and calibration we talked about

44:19 ↗ land use the third major thing that we

44:22 ↗ do with an update is we look at the

44:24 ↗ transportation improvements that are

44:25 ↗ planned within the city and of course

44:27 ↗ for that we go to your adopted uh

44:30 ↗ Transportation Improvement program in

44:32 ↗ this case uh and at the time that we

44:34 ↗ were doing this update we used the 2023

44:36 ↗ to

44:38 ↗ 2028 uh

44:39 ↗ tip um and we go through the the long

44:42 ↗ list of projects that are included in

44:44 ↗ there uh and we determine which projects

44:46 ↗ are capacity related so in other words

44:48 ↗ which projects uh would affect the

44:51 ↗ transportation system in terms of

44:53 ↗ capacity and out of those there were 25

44:57 ↗ they're all I'm not going to go through

44:58 ↗ every single one but you can see on the

45:01 ↗ graphic uh that uh you know which the

45:04 ↗ the black lines are sort of corridor uh

45:07 ↗ projects and then the black dots are

45:10 ↗ intersection based

45:12 ↗ improvements um and so you know if

45:15 ↗ you're interested you can look at there

45:16 ↗ the the labels that are used on here are

45:18 ↗ the exact identifiers that are used in

45:21 ↗ your in your tip so you know if you look

45:23 ↗ up t23 it's uh which is on Newport WB it

45:27 ↗ should show uh in your tip the the

45:30 ↗ improvements that are planned on Newport

45:32 ↗ way and I believe that includes uh

45:33 ↗ probably two or three roundabouts and a

45:36 ↗ widening in One Direction along that

45:38 ↗ Corridor so uh so that's an example in

45:42 ↗ addition to the tip there are Developer

45:45 ↗ agreements that were um signed by

45:48 ↗ various developers around the city and

45:51 ↗ through those development agreements um

45:54 ↗ they agreed to build Transportation

45:56 ↗ Improv ments as part of their approval

45:59 ↗ and um back in 2017 there were about

46:02 ↗ seven of those uh improvements uh the

46:05 ↗ list is is now down to three uh the

46:08 ↗ other four were all built since 2017 so

46:11 ↗ those don't show up on this map anymore

46:13 ↗ but the three remaining ones are still

46:15 ↗ on here uh and that's why when you look

46:18 ↗ for them they're called dm5 dm6 dm7 the

46:22 ↗ reason why we start at five and six and

46:25 ↗ seven is because the first one two three

46:27 ↗ and four were built and so just to keep

46:29 ↗ track of all of those improvements we

46:31 ↗ just continue the numbering system so I

46:33 ↗ didn't want you to think that dm1 two

46:36 ↗ three and four are missing from the

46:38 ↗ graphic they're they've um they're

46:40 ↗ accounted for they've already been

46:42 ↗ question

46:44 ↗ from council member Deputy council

46:46 ↗ president whatever your title is this

46:48 ↗ whatever it is uh and this just occurred

46:50 ↗ to me as I'm looking at the map so we

46:52 ↗ we're anticipating that we'll have a

46:55 ↗ Link light rail station

46:58 ↗ uh in 2045 we're hoping we've got our

47:00 ↗ fingers crossed at any rate would would

47:03 ↗ the U if that were completed by 2045 pre

47:08 ↗ prior to 2050 would that impact our our

47:12 ↗ um in currency at any you know any way

47:18 ↗ it does and it's been accounted for in

47:21 ↗ this update and in the past update um by

47:26 ↗ uh since the model can't doesn't

47:29 ↗ actually model Link light rail uh what

47:32 ↗ we do is we account for um the the the

47:36 ↗ mode shift so people you know the the

47:39 ↗ Hope obviously is that instead of using

47:41 ↗ your car you'll be using linkl light

47:43 ↗ rail right and so the Assumption in this

47:46 ↗ model which was determined way back in

47:49 ↗ 2012 um is that about uh a total of

47:53 ↗ about 20% of the trips uh of the trips

47:57 ↗ in the model would be done by other

48:00 ↗ modes that includes walking and biking

48:03 ↗ and buses but it also includes Link

48:06 ↗ light rails so

48:07 ↗ today um the roughly you're at about 10%

48:11 ↗ mode split and so what I would say is

48:14 ↗ and that so that would include the buses

48:16 ↗ the walking and biking right um but

48:19 ↗ there's no Link light rail today so to

48:22 ↗ get to that 20% we're basically assuming

48:25 ↗ another 10% will be using link Link

48:28 ↗ light rail it's a conservative estimate

48:31 ↗ for right now because we really don't

48:33 ↗ know the Hope obviously would be that

48:35 ↗ it's going to be more than 10% but we

48:37 ↗ didn't want to

48:38 ↗ overestimate um for the purposes of this

48:41 ↗ model and ultimately get you in trouble

48:44 ↗ if it isn't

48:45 ↗ 10% so U so that's the Assumption that's

48:48 ↗ built into the model is that there's a

48:50 ↗ reduction of of overall traffic in the

48:53 ↗ City by 10% in addition to what your

48:57 ↗ already um achieving through mode

49:01 ↗ split thank you you're

49:06 ↗ welcome

49:10 ↗ okay all right so as a result of those

49:13 ↗ three updates that I just talked about

49:15 ↗ the um traffic counts the land uses and

49:20 ↗ um the transportation

49:22 ↗ improvements the this graphic shows

49:25 ↗ basically an overall uh result of the

49:28 ↗ number of trips that are included in the

49:30 ↗ model or traffic during the PM peak hour

49:33 ↗ and again this is a historical map um so

49:36 ↗ you'll see existing numbers but then

49:38 ↗ also the future projections so um the

49:42 ↗ 2022 bar would be this year's update and

49:46 ↗ that includes today's counts that we

49:49 ↗ collected in the field and then if you

49:52 ↗ go all the way to the uh end of the

49:54 ↗ graphic the 2050 number is this Year's

49:57 ↗ uh concurrency update and projections

49:59 ↗ for 2050 you'll see both of those bars

50:03 ↗ are lower than the previous years the

50:05 ↗ 2040 and the 2017 years and again that's

50:09 ↗ a result of the um the new counts that

50:12 ↗ we obtained in the city being lower as a

50:14 ↗ result of the

50:16 ↗ pandemic generally speaking now of

50:18 ↗ course I mentioned residential

50:20 ↗ projections were down commercial was up

50:23 ↗ so th that also contributes to the

50:26 ↗ change uh in traffic patterns in the

50:28 ↗ 2050

50:29 ↗ forecasts um quick question about the

50:32 ↗ graphic so the 2030 and 2040 numbers are

50:36 ↗ those from previous um updates and so

50:41 ↗ these are not all kind of forward

50:43 ↗ looking based on today's data that's why

50:45 ↗ we see the drop off yes so the 2040 bar

50:49 ↗ was from the last update done in 2017

50:53 ↗ got it MH okay and and then again just

50:57 ↗ to point out the blue uh represents

51:00 ↗ those that's what we call City traffic

51:03 ↗ the orange uh bars is what we call

51:06 ↗ Regional traffic Regional traffic is

51:08 ↗ defined as any uh trip that has uh

51:13 ↗ either one trip end outside the city so

51:15 ↗ either they live outside the city and

51:18 ↗ then used let's say uh a grocery store

51:22 ↗ or um or an office space within isqua um

51:26 ↗ so one trip was outside the city the

51:28 ↗ other end of the trip was inside the

51:30 ↗ city that's considered a regional trip

51:32 ↗ and of course any trip that that

51:34 ↗ transverses the city so someone that

51:37 ↗ let's say originated in Belleview and

51:39 ↗ ended up in samamish that's also in that

51:42 ↗ orange

51:43 ↗ bar so roughly and that has been pretty

51:47 ↗ consistent over the years that's roughly

51:49 ↗ about 30% of the total trips um in isqua

51:53 ↗ are considered

51:55 ↗ Regional

51:58 ↗ any questions no that's great um I'm

52:01 ↗ just another comment is I'm I'm kind of

52:03 ↗ shocked I would have expected the

52:05 ↗ regional trips to be actually higher but

52:07 ↗ yeah I'm not questioning the data I just

52:09 ↗ think that's

52:10 ↗ interesting

52:12 ↗ yeah

52:17 ↗ okay okay uh I told you I would Define

52:19 ↗ level of service because I'm about to

52:21 ↗ tell you the level the results the

52:23 ↗ levels of service within the city um

52:26 ↗ again it's a it's a it's sort of like a

52:29 ↗ a report card um it's measured a through

52:32 ↗ F A being um a good level service

52:36 ↗ basically free flow and you're

52:38 ↗ experiencing very little delay as you

52:41 ↗ approach or and travel through in

52:43 ↗ intersection and then you know basically

52:46 ↗ b c and d are all considered acceptable

52:48 ↗ levels of service in fact the city's

52:50 ↗ level service standard is D the hope is

52:53 ↗ to maintain the majority of the city's

52:55 ↗ intersections a level service D or

52:58 ↗ better um and then you'll see the how I

53:01 ↗ had mentioned before the difference

53:03 ↗ between signalized and unsignalized uh

53:06 ↗ intersections it is measured differently

53:08 ↗ again signalized is is the um the

53:11 ↗ average of all the movements at the

53:13 ↗ intersection whereas unsignalized is um

53:16 ↗ the worst movement and you'll see the

53:19 ↗ thresholds are also different between

53:21 ↗ the two U intersection of the the two

53:24 ↗ control

53:25 ↗ types level service e is where you start

53:29 ↗ to see failures meaning you might uh

53:32 ↗ approach an intersection and maybe you

53:35 ↗ don't get through on the first um Green

53:38 ↗ Cycle and you end up waiting through a

53:40 ↗ second cycle before you can get through

53:42 ↗ the intersection that's typically what

53:44 ↗ would happen when you start to

53:46 ↗ experience level service e uh and then f

53:49 ↗ is you're going to see that happening a

53:51 ↗ lot more frequently at maybe more than

53:54 ↗ one or two movements at the intersection

53:56 ↗ you'll also see very long cues uh long

54:00 ↗ rows of cars waiting at

54:02 ↗ intersections um and so that's a level

54:04 ↗ service F condition just to review the

54:07 ↗ city's levels of service standards as I

54:09 ↗ mentioned is level service D but there

54:11 ↗ are six intersections that the city has

54:15 ↗ uh previously by code allowed to operate

54:18 ↗ at level service e or F those were

54:20 ↗ generally

54:21 ↗ selected um in the 2010 update based on

54:25 ↗ the fact that those were intersections

54:27 ↗ that were considered to be primarily

54:29 ↗ Regional intersections meaning they

54:31 ↗ carry the most Regional trips and the

54:34 ↗ city's um you know responsibility for

54:37 ↗ maintaining levels of service for other

54:40 ↗ agencies was viewed as you know not a

54:43 ↗ necessity um that rather the city would

54:46 ↗ would prefer investing its money at

54:48 ↗ intersections that uh serve the city's

54:51 ↗ residents mostly so that's how those six

54:54 ↗ intersections were detered

54:56 ↗ way back when um and so what we do is we

55:00 ↗ measure when we do these updates we

55:02 ↗ basically measure against that

55:04 ↗ standard the there's one other standard

55:07 ↗ and that is although we allow six

55:09 ↗ intersections to operate at level

55:11 ↗ service e or F overall when we average

55:14 ↗ all you know 80 some intersections

55:17 ↗ within the city we need to still

55:19 ↗ maintain an a level of service D overall

55:22 ↗ so we can allow those six intersections

55:25 ↗ to be so bad that they would result in

55:28 ↗ the

55:29 ↗ overall uh system operating below level

55:32 ↗ of service

55:34 ↗ D any questions before I move

55:36 ↗ on nope okay great I went the wrong way

55:41 ↗ again all right so these are the results

55:44 ↗ of the

55:46 ↗ Tada of the uh of the update so um the

55:51 ↗ map that's shown on the on the left side

55:53 ↗ of the graphic uh those green and orange

55:57 ↗ and red dots are all the intersections

55:59 ↗ that were um were analyzed and assessed

56:02 ↗ within the city um those are mostly

56:04 ↗ signalized intersections some are

56:06 ↗ roundabouts and there are some that are

56:09 ↗ uh today um stop controlled

56:12 ↗ intersections but probably by 2050 would

56:15 ↗ become signalized intersections that's

56:17 ↗ generally the uh what determines whether

56:20 ↗ the intersection is considered a

56:22 ↗ concurrency intersection and whether it

56:24 ↗ gets measured for uh for the

56:27 ↗ analysis so you'll see um there are

56:30 ↗ orange and red dots those are the ones

56:33 ↗ that are operating at level service e or

56:36 ↗ F uh all the green intersections are

56:38 ↗ operating at level service a through

56:41 ↗ D so uh four there are four level of

56:45 ↗ service e intersections those are at

56:47 ↗ East Lake samamish Parkway in 56 and

56:50 ↗ Front Street and Gilman um I'm going to

56:52 ↗ point out that those two are brand new

56:55 ↗ to uh the list of intersections this

56:57 ↗ year they've never been on the list of

57:00 ↗ of uh failing intersections before and

57:03 ↗ so we'll talk a little bit about that

57:05 ↗ later um and then Front Street and

57:07 ↗ sunset Way isqua Fall City Road and

57:09 ↗ black Nugget Road both operating at

57:11 ↗ level service e those were operating at

57:14 ↗ level service e in the previous uh

57:16 ↗ update as well and then two level

57:20 ↗ service F intersections those are

57:22 ↗ probably not surprisingly at the sr900

57:25 ↗ 12 uh Northwest samamish Road

57:28 ↗ intersection uh and I know there's an

57:30 ↗ improvement going on there so I'm sure

57:32 ↗ there's a question as to why that one is

57:35 ↗ is failing um it although there is an

57:38 ↗ improvement there it is still um over

57:40 ↗ capacity even with the Improvement by

57:43 ↗ 2050 um and then finally isqua Fall City

57:45 ↗ Road and isqua Pine Lake Road up on the

57:47 ↗ plateau is uh another one that's

57:49 ↗ operating at level service F and then

57:52 ↗ IID mentioned how we make sure that even

57:54 ↗ though we allow those six to uh to allow

57:58 ↗ or we they can operate at love service

58:00 ↗ EF we want to make sure they don't bring

58:03 ↗ the systemwide level of service down

58:05 ↗ below uh d uh and so the calculation

58:09 ↗ that we did for that shows that we're

58:11 ↗ still well within uh level Service uh D

58:14 ↗ standards in fact the overall weighted

58:17 ↗ uh delay within the city is level

58:19 ↗ service

58:20 ↗ C uh another question for you um having

58:23 ↗ just driven over here today um from Tal

58:26 ↗ and looking at the backup at State Route

58:29 ↗ 900 and Talis way um way over 80 Seconds

58:33 ↗ um just kind of surprised not to see it

58:34 ↗ here because it's always like that yeah

58:37 ↗ so Talis Talis has historically been on

58:40 ↗ the list uh in the past it it was it did

58:45 ↗ I think in the 2017 update it did fall

58:47 ↗ off the list it was no longer there and

58:50 ↗ we saw it again this year um fall off

58:52 ↗ the list I I am um I am

58:57 ↗ I'm with you I'm surprised as well but

58:59 ↗ again it's that average of all the

59:01 ↗ movements uh at the

59:03 ↗ intersection um and it's just the PM

59:05 ↗ peak hour so although there might be

59:08 ↗ other times of the day that it operates

59:10 ↗ poorly um that's what this this system

59:13 ↗ is based on the PMP cow so is is the all

59:17 ↗ the movements is that weighted in any

59:18 ↗ way or is it it oh it is

59:21 ↗ waited

59:23 ↗ okay yeah that's I mean that's an

59:25 ↗ interesting

59:26 ↗ that's an interesting intersection but

59:31 ↗ um I'm not going to dispute the model I

59:33 ↗ just I just I'm I'm flabbergasted with

59:36 ↗ the results

59:41 ↗ yeah all right I think uh oh okay so I

59:45 ↗ think this is my last slide and then uh

59:47 ↗ John I'll come back and talk to you but

59:49 ↗ you know as we had mentioned um we do

59:52 ↗ allow six intersections to operate at

59:54 ↗ level service um uh e or F uh but by

59:58 ↗ code those six intersections were

1:00:00 ↗ defined

1:00:02 ↗ previously um and I had mentioned to you

1:00:05 ↗ we just talked about the sr900 Talis uh

1:00:08 ↗ intersection was one of the six

1:00:10 ↗ originally um but that one has fallen

1:00:12 ↗ off the list now and now we've got two

1:00:15 ↗ new ones um that and then the sr900 I90

1:00:19 ↗ eastbound ramp intersection was the

1:00:20 ↗ other one that fell off the list but we

1:00:23 ↗ have those two new ones that got added

1:00:25 ↗ and so

1:00:27 ↗ um uh you know in order to move forward

1:00:30 ↗ with the update you know there are

1:00:32 ↗ options as to what we do since those six

1:00:35 ↗ are um are by code the six that are

1:00:38 ↗ allowed to operate at level service ER

1:00:40 ↗ ORF and so with that I'm going to let uh

1:00:43 ↗ John talk to you about those

1:00:46 ↗ options thank you Torsten yep so for the

1:00:51 ↗ two intersections that the model are

1:00:53 ↗ showing will operate at level service e

1:00:57 ↗ in the year

1:00:58 ↗ 2050 there are three options that the

1:01:02 ↗ committee can consider and the first one

1:01:05 ↗ is wait and the reason why the

1:01:08 ↗ administration is recommending to wait

1:01:10 ↗ is we have another project that we're

1:01:12 ↗ just getting started which is going to

1:01:15 ↗ evaluate that multimodal component and

1:01:18 ↗ so when we the city adopted the mobility

1:01:21 ↗ master plan one of the actions within

1:01:23 ↗ the mobility master plan was to evaluate

1:01:26 ↗ the concurrency system and adopted level

1:01:28 ↗ of service for alignment with the

1:01:30 ↗ guiding principles in the mobility

1:01:32 ↗ master plan and then the state

1:01:34 ↗ legislator added a requirement to

1:01:37 ↗ incorporate multimodal into concurrency

1:01:41 ↗ so with this weight option it allows the

1:01:45 ↗ city to look at the concurrency policy

1:01:48 ↗ and the level of service prior

1:01:51 ↗ [Music]

1:01:52 ↗ to looking at what to do with these two

1:01:54 ↗ intersections that way any changes in

1:01:57 ↗ policy could be used to guide the

1:01:59 ↗ decision at those

1:02:01 ↗ intersections another option would be to

1:02:04 ↗ amend isqua Municipal Code

1:02:07 ↗ 18.

1:02:09 ↗ 22.50 level of service and allow the two

1:02:13 ↗ intersections I guess I should say one

1:02:15 ↗ or both of the intersections to operate

1:02:17 ↗ at level of service e or F or the third

1:02:21 ↗ option would be to add Transportation

1:02:24 ↗ projects to increase the Capac capacity

1:02:26 ↗ at those intersections and we did do a

1:02:29 ↗ little bit of modeling to see what it

1:02:30 ↗ would take but basically if we were to

1:02:34 ↗ add East West well at 56 we already the

1:02:39 ↗ model already has

1:02:41 ↗ additional westbound Lanes on the west

1:02:45 ↗ leg and eastbound legs or on the

1:02:49 ↗ eastbound Lanes on the west leg um but

1:02:53 ↗ then we did look at okay if we add added

1:02:56 ↗ additional through Lanes on the east

1:02:59 ↗ side of the intersection that it could

1:03:01 ↗ reach an overall level of service D and

1:03:04 ↗ likewise at front and Gilman if we added

1:03:06 ↗ through Lanes on both the East and West

1:03:10 ↗ legs then it could achieve level of

1:03:12 ↗ service

1:03:14 ↗ D next

1:03:17 ↗ slide hey John just I find that

1:03:20 ↗ fascinating because um I was expecting

1:03:22 ↗ that we wouldn't really have any really

1:03:24 ↗ viable options for improving the level

1:03:26 ↗ of service do do you guys do any kind of

1:03:29 ↗ uh estimating of what the cost of said

1:03:32 ↗ improvements would be or was it just

1:03:34 ↗ mostly uh this is what it would take to

1:03:35 ↗ kind of get us in the model yeah we did

1:03:38 ↗ not look at the costs although I will

1:03:41 ↗ say widening projects are expensive yeah

1:03:44 ↗ okay good but it's good to know that I

1:03:46 ↗ mean it's it's I'm glad you guys ran the

1:03:49 ↗ you know here's what it would take to

1:03:50 ↗ get us to to D yeah and so the

1:03:54 ↗ recommendation from from the ad

1:03:56 ↗ Administration is waiting to decide what

1:03:59 ↗ to do with the intersections of East

1:04:00 ↗ Lake samamish Parkway and Southeast 56

1:04:04 ↗ in the intersection of Front Street

1:04:07 ↗ North and Gilman Boulevard until after

1:04:10 ↗ the city has reviewed the concurrency

1:04:13 ↗ system and level of service for

1:04:16 ↗ alignment with the guiding principles in

1:04:18 ↗ the mobility master

1:04:22 ↗ plan Deputy council president D Michelle

1:04:25 ↗ that is a

1:04:27 ↗ mouthful um so uh I uh I lean certainly

1:04:33 ↗ towards uh the recommendation from the

1:04:35 ↗ administration but to uh follow up on

1:04:39 ↗ council member Ray's question if we wait

1:04:42 ↗ uh until we get all this additional

1:04:44 ↗ information would we also have a better

1:04:47 ↗ idea of the financial uh implications or

1:04:51 ↗ are those just are you really looking to

1:04:53 ↗ us for policy Direction and then

1:04:56 ↗ the financials will follow

1:04:59 ↗ that are we going to do the policy first

1:05:02 ↗ and then look at Financial applications

1:05:04 ↗ basically the question yes and

1:05:13 ↗ yeah what else you got okay next

1:05:24 ↗ slide all right

1:05:26 ↗ so timing and next steps and I guess

1:05:28 ↗ this is contingent upon the committee

1:05:31 ↗ going with the administration's

1:05:33 ↗ recommendation is as we look at the

1:05:35 ↗ schedule for the concurrency policy and

1:05:38 ↗ level of service we anticipate having a

1:05:42 ↗ couple touch points first with the

1:05:43 ↗ transportation Advisory Board in July

1:05:46 ↗ and October followed by touch points

1:05:49 ↗ with the mobility and infrastructure

1:05:51 ↗ Committee in September and November of

1:05:53 ↗ this year and the item going to the full

1:05:56 ↗ Council in

1:05:58 ↗ January in addition the community

1:06:02 ↗ Planning and Development Department is

1:06:04 ↗ planning to update the impact fees

1:06:07 ↗ Citywide including traffic impact fees

1:06:09 ↗ and pedestrian and bicycle mitigation

1:06:12 ↗ fees in late

1:06:14 ↗ 2025 and so that's part of the reason

1:06:17 ↗ for the recommendation to wait

1:06:20 ↗ because any information on adding

1:06:23 ↗ potential projects wouldn't get put into

1:06:25 ↗ the new traffic impact fee until that

1:06:31 ↗ point Deputy council

1:06:33 ↗ president um so I'm pretty sure I know

1:06:36 ↗ the answer to this but I just think it's

1:06:38 ↗ probably a question that uh the public

1:06:40 ↗ might be interested in are there any

1:06:42 ↗ other adverse impacts if we uh wait uh

1:06:46 ↗ are we going to miss deadlines or um you

1:06:49 ↗ know I think there's a deadline for the

1:06:51 ↗ plan to be uh submitted and so uh any

1:06:55 ↗ other adverse impacts from waiting that

1:06:59 ↗ uh you could tell us about none there

1:07:02 ↗ are none that's kind of what I thought

1:07:04 ↗ but I just wanted to check thank

1:07:08 ↗ you

1:07:09 ↗ right um joh I think you're done

1:07:14 ↗ huh are you

1:07:15 ↗ done I am okay questions any other

1:07:19 ↗ questions from

1:07:21 ↗ you no I think we've had some really

1:07:23 ↗ good answers to questions I don't have

1:07:25 ↗ any other questions yeah I don't either

1:07:26 ↗ was uh I I think I appreciate doing that

1:07:30 ↗ as we went but we are in another public

1:07:32 ↗ comment opportunity so I'm going to turn

1:07:34 ↗ to the city clerk and see if there was

1:07:35 ↗ anybody online and if you are and you'd

1:07:38 ↗ like to make public comment this would

1:07:39 ↗ be another opportunity to do that no

1:07:43 ↗ virtual attendees chair a okay anybody

1:07:45 ↗ in the uh in the audience want to no one

1:07:48 ↗ wants to make public comment okay so

1:07:49 ↗ we're going to move on and let's um

1:07:52 ↗ let's provide some direction Council

1:07:55 ↗ presid what are your

1:07:56 ↗ thoughts uh my thoughts are first of all

1:07:59 ↗ uh as always John this is a really

1:08:02 ↗ thorough and very complete presentation

1:08:05 ↗ and again thank you for answering all my

1:08:07 ↗ questions uh prior and and here in the

1:08:11 ↗ meeting um and our our uh consultant

1:08:14 ↗ also thank you so much um I think that

1:08:18 ↗ you've made a really good case for our

1:08:21 ↗ waiting um until we have uh the

1:08:24 ↗ additional information that we're

1:08:26 ↗ looking for and if there's no adverse

1:08:28 ↗ impacts to uh uh anything uh in our uh

1:08:34 ↗ if we're meeting all of our deadlines

1:08:35 ↗ and all of that um I think uh that I

1:08:39 ↗ certainly concur that we should wait and

1:08:41 ↗ we'll make that decision when we' got

1:08:42 ↗ War

1:08:45 ↗ yeah yeah um I I think so too I mean if

1:08:48 ↗ if there's nothing pressing us let's

1:08:49 ↗ take the time to do it right so we can

1:08:51 ↗ push this off until we have complete

1:08:53 ↗ information I am very interested in not

1:08:56 ↗ um changing the two new intersections

1:08:59 ↗ from uh to an E ORF level of service um

1:09:03 ↗ so I'm very interested in in um how we

1:09:06 ↗ can model that and what impact that

1:09:08 ↗ would have on U Transportation impact

1:09:10 ↗ fees um but I also want to factor into

1:09:13 ↗ all of that the the other modes of

1:09:16 ↗ transportation um and see what effect

1:09:18 ↗ that might have so um you know I

1:09:22 ↗ think it's one of those actually fairly

1:09:24 ↗ easy questions if there's nothing really

1:09:26 ↗ pushing us and there's more information

1:09:27 ↗ to be gathered that can make us do a

1:09:31 ↗ more informed decision let's um gather

1:09:33 ↗ that information and deal with it and

1:09:36 ↗ also seems like the next big thing

1:09:37 ↗ that's going to happen is with um change

1:09:39 ↗ in trans or Transportation impact fees

1:09:43 ↗ and that's not until next year sometime

1:09:45 ↗ so we we definitely got a a window here

1:09:48 ↗ um I just want to um Echo what um the

1:09:51 ↗ deputy council president said which is

1:09:53 ↗ um that was a great presentation to our

1:09:55 ↗ and I I really really appreciated it

1:09:57 ↗ because concurrency is really tough and

1:10:00 ↗ you covered a lot of great stuff about

1:10:02 ↗ the model and how we did that and

1:10:05 ↗ um it would maybe if this is my my sixth

1:10:08 ↗ year here on the council maybe the first

1:10:09 ↗ time I really have have understood the

1:10:11 ↗ modeling so I really appreciate that and

1:10:13 ↗ John of course always always well done

1:10:15 ↗ thank

1:10:17 ↗ you

1:10:19 ↗ you all right John you have what you

1:10:22 ↗ need from us I think we were do pretty

1:10:25 ↗ raging uh alignment on on Direction so

1:10:28 ↗ all right um that was our one agenda

1:10:31 ↗ item we have next agenda item is

1:10:33 ↗ announcements um Deputy council

1:10:35 ↗ president D Michelle anything from you

1:10:37 ↗ you know the only thing I'm going to uh

1:10:39 ↗ I would like to report on I'll do it

1:10:41 ↗ again at the full council is uh the

1:10:44 ↗ inperson meeting we had with the

1:10:46 ↗ Eastside Transportation partnership was

1:10:48 ↗ a great success and uh we held a hybrid

1:10:51 ↗ meeting in Redmond first uh chance for

1:10:54 ↗ the east side Transportation partnership

1:10:56 ↗ to get together since the pandemic so it

1:11:00 ↗ was uh really great and I think

1:11:02 ↗ everybody really enjoyed the opportunity

1:11:04 ↗ to spend that time sharing uh what was

1:11:07 ↗ going on in our local so so uh yeah uh

1:11:12 ↗ slowly but surely we're recovering from

1:11:14 ↗ the pandemic going to take a

1:11:17 ↗ while all right um I think then that we

1:11:20 ↗ are done so we'll adjourn at uh 7:42

1:11:25 ↗ thank you very much really appreciate

1:11:28 ↗ everyone

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (2)

Chris Reh

Barbara de Michele

Staff (2)

Andrea Snyder, Deputy City Administrator

Chris Grabowski, Deputy City Clerk

Excused

Zach Hall

Recommendations & actions (1)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

a) Minutes of December 12, 2023 were approved by unanimous consent.