City Council Special Meeting · Monday, January 14, 2019 · City Council Digest

3049 segments .txt ↗

0:15 ↗ good evening and welcome to the Monday

0:18 ↗ January 14th it's a quest city council

0:20 ↗ community work session this is

0:22 ↗ technically a special meeting because we

0:23 ↗ are starting at 7:00 p.m. this evening

0:25 ↗ and we have two items on the agenda this

0:28 ↗ evening the first is ID zero two eight

0:30 ↗ eight Gilman Boulevard corridor

0:32 ↗ framework and that is going to be

0:34 ↗ there's a cast of thousands but it's

0:36 ↗ going to be crowded by Kurt Simon our

0:38 ↗ transportation manager

0:52 ↗ Thank You council president Mars very

0:55 ↗ very happy to be here tonight I'm curtsy

0:57 ↗ and the transportation manager here at

0:59 ↗ the city and there is a cast of

1:01 ↗ thousands actually just three people

1:03 ↗ that will be making the most of the

1:06 ↗ presentation so this is the Gilmore

1:09 ↗ Gillman framework plan we've been

1:11 ↗ working on this for just about a year

1:14 ↗ and we've done a lot of really great

1:16 ↗ work and these are the folks much more

1:19 ↗ than me that have been doing the bulk of

1:21 ↗ the work so they're going to tell you

1:23 ↗ about what they've been doing so let me

1:25 ↗ introduce the folks here so this is

1:27 ↗ Brianne Ross formerly of from the city

1:30 ↗ of Issaquah now working for perteet but

1:35 ↗ she's come we're lucky to have her back

1:36 ↗ tonight and Nathan Polanski is the and

1:39 ↗ McCool Mehrotra are both project

1:42 ↗ managers on this job and have really

1:44 ↗ been a joy to work with so I think with

1:48 ↗ that I'm going to turn it over to

1:49 ↗ Brianne she's going to start us off and

1:51 ↗ walk us through everything we're done

1:53 ↗ and then I'm gonna finish up and talk a

1:55 ↗ little bit about what the next steps are

1:57 ↗ so Brianne do you want to start all

2:02 ↗ right thank you very much so I came back

2:07 ↗ today because I had been managing gummin

2:10 ↗ for the last year and so seemed fitting

2:12 ↗ to to see it through and discuss it with

2:14 ↗ you all tonight I do the the purpose of

2:20 ↗ our meeting tonight is to gain council's

2:24 ↗ endorsement of the framework that will

2:27 ↗ allow us to move forward with the next

2:29 ↗ steps which would be the concept

2:30 ↗ development to with some confidence that

2:33 ↗ you agree that we're heading in the

2:35 ↗ right direction so this framework is a

2:38 ↗ higher level visioning document you're

2:41 ↗ not going to find cross sections or a

2:42 ↗ concept in there yet

2:45 ↗ and that's really the work of the next

2:47 ↗ phase and so this was really the purpose

2:49 ↗ of this document was to document all of

2:52 ↗ our community engagement that we've done

2:54 ↗ that last year and get into the the

2:57 ↗ higher level visioning the goals the

2:59 ↗ opportunities the challenges that we see

3:01 ↗ with going

3:02 ↗ and then next next steps that Kurt we'll

3:05 ↗ talk about will include that concept

3:06 ↗ development so Gilman we're talking

3:12 ↗ about from s900 to Front Street and I

3:16 ↗ wanted to make sure we were clear on the

3:19 ↗ relationship with between this document

3:21 ↗ the framework as well as the corridor

3:24 ↗ concept future corridor concept in

3:26 ↗ relationship to the central Issaquah

3:28 ↗ plan and the central is quad design

3:30 ↗ standards so the central Issaquah during

3:33 ↗ the central Issaquah plan development it

3:37 ↗ was clear that Gilman was a vital and

3:39 ↗ important corridor for central is quiet

3:42 ↗ and always would be and at that time

3:45 ↗ there was limited time and resources to

3:48 ↗ dedicate the attention that staff

3:49 ↗ thought that it deserved and to really

3:52 ↗ truly flush out what yeoman should be

3:54 ↗ and so in the design standards it really

3:59 ↗ says that Gilman should be determined at

4:01 ↗ this point on a case-by-case basis and

4:03 ↗ so what we are doing with this framework

4:07 ↗ and the concept development is is really

4:09 ↗ in line with the policy that was adopted

4:11 ↗ with central Issaquah plan and the

4:13 ↗ land-use and supporting everything in

4:15 ↗ that plan and it is further defining the

4:19 ↗ standard for Gilman so again right now

4:26 ↗ when a developer comes in like corner

4:28 ↗ bakery or atlas or the Gilman lofts we

4:31 ↗ didn't have a standard to provide that

4:32 ↗ developer to say here's where your

4:34 ↗ building should be here's what our

4:37 ↗ right-of-way needs are for pedestrians

4:39 ↗ bikes transit and vehicles and so that's

4:42 ↗ really that you need for this project

4:44 ↗ there's also a high number of traffic

4:48 ↗ accidents on Gilman and so we have

4:49 ↗ always had a Gilman safety project in

4:53 ↗ our ti P and so this incorporates those

4:55 ↗ ideas as well so when we first kicked

5:00 ↗ off our efforts with our consultant team

5:02 ↗ we gave them these objectives we wanted

5:05 ↗ to make sure that that our work with

5:07 ↗ Gilman addressed the safety concerns

5:10 ↗ we've have also plans for the future of

5:12 ↗ Gilman not just looking at what our

5:14 ↗ today's needs but

5:16 ↗ Ford with the central Issaquah plan and

5:17 ↗ the future development along that area

5:19 ↗ that's anticipated what what will gilman

5:22 ↗ need to do and function to support that

5:24 ↗ we also really wanted to have meaningful

5:27 ↗ community participation knowing that

5:29 ↗ this was a unique opportunity to really

5:32 ↗ reimagine an existing road from the

5:34 ↗ ground up that's not something that that

5:36 ↗ we do every day and along with that make

5:39 ↗ sure that we build some consensus and

5:41 ↗ feed into potentially future city

5:44 ↗ projects so in March 2017 council

5:49 ↗ approved this project with that there

5:53 ↗ was a lot of discussion that this

5:55 ↗ project should take a different approach

5:56 ↗ we should not go out to the public with

5:58 ↗ our preferred alternative we should not

6:00 ↗ go out to the public with two

6:01 ↗ alternatives and let's pick one

6:03 ↗ we should go out to the the public

6:04 ↗ without a concept and listen to what the

6:08 ↗ public wanted and and get their feedback

6:10 ↗ on what the vision for Gilman should be

6:12 ↗ and so that's what we've done it's a

6:14 ↗ different process than what we've taken

6:15 ↗ before with other projects and we really

6:17 ↗ did go in and first ask the public what

6:20 ↗ do you want Gilman to be right and so

6:25 ↗ with that we have this this framework

6:28 ↗ document that you guys have tonight and

6:30 ↗ that really is this higher level

6:33 ↗ visioning document document it discusses

6:37 ↗ all the community gate engagement that

6:39 ↗ we've done over the last year and also

6:43 ↗ really shows what we've just got our

6:45 ↗ discovered as far as goals objectives

6:47 ↗ challenges and it's not a concept it

6:51 ↗ doesn't have those cross sections but

6:53 ↗ it's an interim step to work towards

6:54 ↗ that concept taking this with your

6:57 ↗ guys's endorsement forward saying you

6:59 ↗ know we're heading in the right

7:00 ↗ direction and this is what we're going

7:02 ↗ to use then to develop the corridor

7:04 ↗ concepts so I wanted to overview a

7:09 ↗ little bit with the community engagement

7:11 ↗ we had a variety of outreach methods and

7:14 ↗ targeted a variety of audiences so we

7:17 ↗ did online and in-person surveys had

7:21 ↗ stakeholder meetings as where we

7:23 ↗ specifically targeted the business

7:25 ↗ owners and property owners along the

7:26 ↗ corridor as well as meeting with

7:29 ↗ targeting the resident

7:30 ↗ and also attended various boards and

7:33 ↗ commissions so first we did these

7:37 ↗ stakeholder workshops where we invited

7:38 ↗ the property owners and business owners

7:40 ↗ along the corridor and really we heard a

7:43 ↗ need for some bike and pedestrian

7:45 ↗ improvements we also heard a high value

7:50 ↗ placed on traffic in those conversations

7:52 ↗ and how to make sure that we address the

7:55 ↗ vehicle in the car as well with our

7:56 ↗ projects and then also a key thing that

8:00 ↗ came out of that was making sure that it

8:02 ↗ was implementable we had an online

8:06 ↗ survey where we had a great response

8:08 ↗ rate and had a really diverse geographic

8:11 ↗ area represented and a lot of really

8:14 ↗ good quality feedback that came out of

8:16 ↗ the survey and then we also had a

8:22 ↗ meeting with the public targeting

8:24 ↗ residents and things that when we had a

8:26 ↗ mix of residents community business

8:29 ↗ leaders and council members attendance

8:31 ↗ and the to kind of fun concepts that

8:35 ↗ came out of that were the park once and

8:37 ↗ be able to walk to your variety of

8:39 ↗ destinations idea that we talked about a

8:41 ↗ lot and also a signature street concept

8:44 ↗ and talking about knowing that Gilman is

8:48 ↗ special it's a heart of our commercial

8:49 ↗ core how can we make Gillman look and

8:52 ↗ feel different than any other street in

8:54 ↗ the city you know Gilman's different

8:56 ↗ than East Lake Sammamish Parkway for

8:58 ↗ instance and so how do we go about doing

9:01 ↗ that to make Gilman truly the heart of

9:03 ↗ our commercial core so this illustrates

9:07 ↗ the variety of touches that we had we

9:10 ↗ were out in the Chamber newsletter

9:12 ↗ various boards and Commission

9:14 ↗ presentations in the mayor's report I

9:17 ↗ was presented at the Chamber luncheon

9:18 ↗ and got up one early early morning at

9:22 ↗ the Tibbets park-and-ride and handed out

9:24 ↗ flyers for people to as a captive

9:26 ↗ audience fill out the survey in the

9:29 ↗ morning and also hundreds of business

9:33 ↗ visits so our economic or economic

9:37 ↗ development team as well as some project

9:40 ↗ ambassadors really helped us out in

9:41 ↗ contacting all that

9:43 ↗ businesses so as we were doing the

9:50 ↗ community engagement a key part was to

9:52 ↗ also do the existing condition analysis

9:56 ↗ like Brianne said we looked at all the

9:58 ↗ key past as well as concurrent projects

10:02 ↗ that were going on the past projects

10:04 ↗ such as central Issaquah plan or the

10:06 ↗ concurrent project just as the 2018 park

10:10 ↗ strategic plan which for example gave us

10:13 ↗ very clear direction that the community

10:15 ↗ had envisioned this the Gilman corridor

10:18 ↗ to be part of the larger green necklace

10:20 ↗ so it was very critical for us to take

10:22 ↗ into account what the existing plans had

10:25 ↗ already told us and how do we

10:26 ↗ incorporate that in the work that we are

10:30 ↗ doing we did start of the project by

10:33 ↗ also doing a big brainstorming session

10:37 ↗ with all the key departments across the

10:41 ↗ board be it

10:42 ↗ parks or police Public Works traffic

10:45 ↗ because we wanted to learn what the

10:47 ↗ staff had learned about Gilman and what

10:50 ↗ they knew about Gilman not just in terms

10:52 ↗ of key data like Brianne talked about

10:55 ↗ with regards to accidents happening

10:58 ↗ along Gilman but also what the community

11:00 ↗ has been telling the staff because that

11:02 ↗ was equally important to us out of which

11:05 ↗ came up different challenges constraints

11:09 ↗ assets as well as opportunities that we

11:12 ↗ began to map and and look at what the

11:15 ↗ corridor looks at what are the wide

11:18 ↗ network of trails that crisscross this

11:21 ↗ corridor the different natural elements

11:24 ↗ including the creek that goes and come

11:26 ↗ across the corridor we wanted to make

11:29 ↗ sure that we were responding to the

11:31 ↗ assets that exist along the corridor the

11:34 ↗ constraints that need to be addressed as

11:36 ↗ well as the opportunities that we would

11:38 ↗ like to maximize as we begin to listen

11:41 ↗ to the community and understand what

11:43 ↗ they want this to be and as we began to

11:47 ↗ do our initial analysis existing

11:50 ↗ condition analysis we did find that the

11:52 ↗ corridor changes its character be it in

11:55 ↗ the numb

11:55 ↗ of liens the width of the right-of-way

11:57 ↗ the kind of improvements that exists the

12:01 ↗ pedestrian or the bike facilities that

12:03 ↗ exist or do not exist along the corridor

12:06 ↗ the planting that we have it changes its

12:08 ↗ character and we wanted to respect that

12:11 ↗ changing character and as nathan is

12:14 ↗ going to talk about that is what the

12:16 ↗ community also said and they wanted to

12:18 ↗ make sure that we design to the changing

12:21 ↗ context and then last but not the least

12:23 ↗ we also looked at the overall regional

12:27 ↗ context the wonderful natural resources

12:30 ↗ we have around the area but also looking

12:32 ↗ into account in the future as we get new

12:35 ↗ sound transit opportunities come close

12:38 ↗ to our corridor how could it maximize

12:40 ↗ that opportunity but it all began like

12:43 ↗ Kurt as well as beyond I've said is on a

12:46 ↗ meaningful community engagement which

12:49 ↗ key which brought us the vision and

12:51 ↗ goals and Ethan is going to talk more

12:53 ↗ about that okay so as Brian mentioned we

13:00 ↗ really had great participation across

13:02 ↗ the board from the online survey to

13:03 ↗ people attending the workshops and the

13:06 ↗ stakeholder meetings and I think the

13:08 ↗ city really deserves the credit for kind

13:10 ↗ of identifying a need for this project

13:11 ↗ to be approached differently than the

13:13 ↗ standard public works or transportation

13:14 ↗ project so I think that's kind of a pat

13:16 ↗ on everyone's back at the city's side

13:19 ↗ and it wasn't just the residents you

13:21 ↗ know I think it's important to

13:22 ↗ understand that we're talking to also

13:26 ↗ the employers and employees they'll come

13:29 ↗ to and work along Gilman and so

13:31 ↗ recognizing that those folks might come

13:33 ↗ more frequently they might be coming

13:35 ↗ multiple times a week they might be

13:36 ↗ getting to work slightly differently

13:37 ↗ coming on buses leaving on buses

13:40 ↗ so they have a very different

13:44 ↗ perspective of Gilman than people that

13:46 ↗ are coming to shop use the retail to use

13:49 ↗ different services along the corridor

13:54 ↗ this is one of the maps from the online

13:57 ↗ survey and it really shows that there

13:59 ↗ are no unimportant areas along Gilman

14:01 ↗ the shops and the businesses are really

14:05 ↗ important to the city of Issaquah and

14:07 ↗ central I so claw

14:09 ↗ is a variety of kind of reasons people

14:11 ↗ come shopping eating services you can

14:14 ↗ see that people come fairly frequently

14:16 ↗ it's it's not you know every couple

14:18 ↗ months that you know every couple weeks

14:20 ↗ every couple months was most of the

14:21 ↗ feedback that we got from people one of

14:25 ↗ the things that was really great about

14:27 ↗ the online survey platform that we were

14:29 ↗ able to develop and ask the questions to

14:32 ↗ the communities that allowed them an

14:33 ↗ opportunity to give specific place-based

14:35 ↗ feedback for comments that they had on

14:39 ↗ the corridor so specific issues that

14:41 ↗ they see day in and day out as they're

14:43 ↗ coming to visit they were able to drop

14:45 ↗ pin on the map and give us specific

14:47 ↗ information saying this driveway always

14:49 ↗ has a problem this intersection never

14:53 ↗ traffic never moves and we were able to

14:54 ↗ get really good kind of insightful real

14:58 ↗ feedback from the public and from

15:00 ↗ property owners of business owners

15:02 ↗ during this you know here are some of

15:06 ↗ the specific comments that we got you

15:08 ↗ know at the West End really looking at

15:10 ↗ the kind of length between SR 900 and

15:13 ↗ pole Street for their first block and

15:14 ↗ the lack of opportunity for people

15:16 ↗ walking across the street the dangerous

15:19 ↗ crossing just I think that's just to the

15:21 ↗ west of MacDonald's driveway are people

15:24 ↗ trying to get in and out of the driveway

15:25 ↗ and at the end there other end of the

15:27 ↗ corridor one of the ones that was highly

15:31 ↗ competent on it was the kind of Gilman

15:32 ↗ Rainier Juniper intersection I know

15:34 ↗ there's development that's happening on

15:35 ↗ the north side that's going to address

15:37 ↗ traffic associated with that development

15:40 ↗ and making sure people have access to

15:41 ↗ and from that new development but it

15:43 ↗ doesn't address the kind of multimodal

15:45 ↗ need associated with the trail crossing

15:48 ↗ or the existing mid-block crossing this

15:49 ↗ to what to the west of that so that was

15:53 ↗ we got really good information that

15:56 ↗ really gave us as designers a lot more

15:59 ↗ insight into the opportunity that's a

16:01 ↗ very interesting pardon the interruption

16:03 ↗ dated and something you just said caught

16:05 ↗ my attention and maybe if you're going

16:07 ↗ to address this later on that spine it's

16:10 ↗ kind of a technical detail I think we do

16:12 ↗ have a plan for that mid-block crossing

16:14 ↗ that's now West to move that East to

16:16 ↗ where the Sammamish trail is we're gonna

16:20 ↗ move that

16:20 ↗ that's gonna be part of the the

16:23 ↗ development we have a partnership with

16:25 ↗ the landowner there right so the the

16:28 ↗ development agreement with Gilman laughs

16:29 ↗ thank you it eliminates the mid-block

16:33 ↗ crossing that signal and puts in a

16:35 ↗ signal at the intersection what it

16:39 ↗ really doesn't address is the Rainier

16:41 ↗ Juniper end of the intersection right if

16:44 ↗ that's what you were referring to that

16:45 ↗ that's why I agreed yeah so it's kind of

16:47 ↗ the proximity of those 200 seconds right

16:49 ↗ there and the kind of problems that

16:50 ↗ happen for all users the stakeholder

16:57 ↗ meetings were an opportunity for us to

16:59 ↗ hear directly from property owners and

17:01 ↗ business owners along the corridor we

17:05 ↗ were reminded about the importance of

17:08 ↗ the corridor for all users and I think

17:10 ↗ what was very insightful for us to

17:13 ↗ remember is that it's not just people

17:15 ↗ walking and biking in an urban context

17:17 ↗ there are businesses hardened hearth and

17:19 ↗ home that you know really rely on people

17:21 ↗ driving their car to come and buy things

17:23 ↗ and take something kind of you know

17:25 ↗ you're not gonna come by a fireplace on

17:27 ↗ your bike and so it was really good to

17:28 ↗ get specific feedback from folks like

17:30 ↗ that the to develop property owner who

17:32 ↗ was really interested and kind of

17:34 ↗ visibility to businesses and how

17:36 ↗ potential future street improvements

17:37 ↗ could change or impact their ability to

17:40 ↗ attract customers driving traffic that

17:45 ↗ was kind of one of the biggest things

17:46 ↗ that we heard throughout the online

17:48 ↗ survey and from property and business

17:50 ↗ owners we also heard people that were

17:54 ↗ they were very appreciative of the

17:55 ↗ process that the city was going through

17:57 ↗ with this project I know there we had

17:59 ↗ heard that there were past projects to

18:01 ↗ where the communication wasn't as didn't

18:05 ↗ happen as early and kind of after kind

18:08 ↗ of E is studies have been done kind of

18:10 ↗ people would find out after the fact

18:12 ↗ that things were changing to their

18:14 ↗ driveway access so they really

18:15 ↗ appreciated being part of this process

18:16 ↗ and wanting to continue that through the

18:19 ↗ duration of it and then also really

18:21 ↗ talking about the importance of the

18:23 ↗ implementation of this the community

18:28 ↗ workshop Brianne mentioned we really

18:30 ↗ talked about kind of a shift from a

18:32 ↗ suburban to a more urban

18:33 ↗ dynamic that's going to be happening in

18:35 ↗ the future as Sound Transit comes yes

18:37 ↗ that's a long ways away but it's also

18:39 ↗ important to make sure that the city

18:41 ↗ gets out in front and kind of helps to

18:44 ↗ plan around that rather than respond to

18:46 ↗ it and so here are a series of slides

18:51 ↗ that kind of I just want I flipped

18:52 ↗ through fairly quickly but they

18:54 ↗ summarize the online survey results and

18:56 ↗ these are some of the initial goals that

18:57 ↗ came out of that staff workshop in the

19:00 ↗ early spring of the year I think it was

19:02 ↗ at the March workshop you really start

19:05 ↗ to see that the goals the final goals

19:07 ↗ really varied significantly from this

19:09 ↗ through that outreach process that we

19:10 ↗ went through supporting business and

19:13 ↗ economic development strong support for

19:16 ↗ all of the questions that were asked

19:18 ↗ here driving improvements and kind of

19:24 ↗ the importance of traffic was the number

19:26 ↗ one thing that we heard from folks

19:27 ↗ throughout the process we were able to

19:31 ↗ get kind of the map based information so

19:33 ↗ we were able to see that you know from a

19:35 ↗ signal standpoint there are a lot of

19:36 ↗ issues at the east and west ends of the

19:38 ↗ corridor but as you're talking about

19:39 ↗ accessing specific businesses it was

19:41 ↗ something that was really happening

19:42 ↗ throughout the whole corridor walking

19:46 ↗ and preventing transit signalization

19:48 ↗ question you may so my understanding is

19:52 ↗ that one of our challenges is that we

19:56 ↗ don't control the lights either around

19:58 ↗ exit 15 or because that's federal and

20:02 ↗ and highway 900 which is a state

20:05 ↗ corridor yeah

20:06 ↗ can we design our sequencing to just key

20:11 ↗ off their sequencing like basically they

20:14 ↗ could be the drum beat and we could just

20:16 ↗ you know to make our system a slave to

20:21 ↗ that system from a bass standpoint so

20:24 ↗ I'm not a traffic engineer so I'm going

20:26 ↗ to turn it over to Kurt so short answer

20:31 ↗ is is yes and we do to the degree that

20:35 ↗ we can and we do coordinate with

20:36 ↗ washed-out there as you mentioned they

20:39 ↗ are optimizing their corridors and

20:42 ↗ that's includes the freeway and the

20:45 ↗ they're ramps and so they're trying to

20:47 ↗ make those work as best as they can but

20:50 ↗ we have all those times as we work with

20:52 ↗ them

20:53 ↗ interestingly enough in as part of this

20:55 ↗ corridor work and looking at at the

20:58 ↗ existing conditions we had a traffic

21:02 ↗ engineer on the team look at the signal

21:03 ↗ timings for Gilman and there I won't say

21:07 ↗ they're optimized 100% but they're

21:11 ↗ pretty darn close to operating about as

21:14 ↗ well as they can so still probably need

21:16 ↗ to look at that again but we are

21:21 ↗ coordinated to the maximum degree that

21:23 ↗ we can be with washed-out and our

21:25 ↗ corridor progresses some might argue

21:28 ↗ with when you're when you're waiting

21:30 ↗ there at a signal but it progresses at

21:33 ↗ the optimum way that it can so thank you

21:42 ↗ so walking improvements safety

21:47 ↗ visibility providing separation from

21:50 ↗ traffic those are all things that rose

21:51 ↗ to the top the amenities associated with

21:54 ↗ the walking environment again were

21:56 ↗ really related kind of focused on kind

21:58 ↗ of improving safety visibility street

22:00 ↗ trees providing separation from the road

22:02 ↗ street trees was actually the second

22:04 ↗ most written in comment that we got

22:07 ↗ through the online surveys which is

22:08 ↗ pretty interesting and it kind of shows

22:10 ↗ the respect and the care for that

22:11 ↗ existing tree canopy that exists today

22:14 ↗ biking improvements really focused on

22:17 ↗ improving the original trail connections

22:19 ↗ and the desire to provide a facility off

22:21 ↗ street away from cars people recognize

22:27 ↗ the importance to kind of support and

22:28 ↗ improve the transit stations and then

22:32 ↗ one of the things that we saw reviewing

22:35 ↗ all the existing planning and policy

22:36 ↗ documents is the importance of the

22:38 ↗ natural environment and kinda Sukhois

22:40 ↗ Creek and opportunity to manage

22:42 ↗ stormwater and that's something that was

22:43 ↗ really looked on highly from the

22:47 ↗ feedback that we got from the community

22:48 ↗ question yes I'm sorry I know you're

22:52 ↗ going really rapidly go back to slides

22:54 ↗ please

22:55 ↗ right here can you tell me how many

22:57 ↗ existing bus stops we actually have on

22:59 ↗ Gilman I want to say it's four three or

23:05 ↗ four in each direction it could and do

23:09 ↗ you know my impression so this is not

23:13 ↗ data driven is there are not I'll there

23:15 ↗ or not not a lot of public transit trips

23:17 ↗ down that roadway yeah there's only a

23:20 ↗ couple of routes natural routes there

23:22 ↗ and they don't have the kind of the

23:23 ↗ regular you know fairly frequent service

23:27 ↗ that maybe you would expect in a more

23:29 ↗ urban setting so I find this very

23:31 ↗ interesting says prove what's there but

23:33 ↗ don't add new I'm that's the way I read

23:37 ↗ that I mean maybe that's a little bit

23:39 ↗ too strong but I would think of this

23:44 ↗ issue in particular that we have to

23:47 ↗ whatever we do here there's a wider

23:49 ↗ mobility master plan that we're going to

23:51 ↗ work on and the presence of and planning

23:56 ↗ for public transit long this roadway is

23:59 ↗ very important mm-hmm yeah and I think

24:02 ↗ now as the project moves forward and

24:05 ↗ kind of sound transit discussion happens

24:06 ↗ it's really important to coordinate this

24:12 ↗ so these are the final community vision

24:16 ↗ goals so you know we started out kind of

24:17 ↗ asking about five or six goals from our

24:19 ↗ workshop with the city and fairly set of

24:23 ↗ goals that was identified so kind of the

24:29 ↗ overall framework plan is what the final

24:30 ↗ document that was developed this is kind

24:34 ↗ of summarizes our existing conditions

24:35 ↗ analysis and research the community

24:37 ↗ community outreach the project process

24:39 ↗ it's really a summary of the community's

24:41 ↗ vision and goals and kind of discusses

24:43 ↗ how those goals need to be balanced as

24:45 ↗ the project moves into concept

24:47 ↗ development and kind of recognizes that

24:48 ↗ right now these are all equal weighted

24:50 ↗ goals and depending where you are on the

24:52 ↗ corridor there's going to be different

24:53 ↗ levels of importance it also begins to

24:56 ↗ strategize how that vision is

24:58 ↗ implemented so this is the kind of

25:03 ↗ graphic representation of the framework

25:05 ↗ it's a representation of the nine step

25:07 ↗ of opportunities that are documented and

25:10 ↗ its really kind of a consolidation of

25:11 ↗ the ideas in the community's vision and

25:13 ↗ ultimately it's kind of a mind map to

25:16 ↗ some extent of the gathered and learned

25:17 ↗ information from throughout from the

25:19 ↗ year kind of working with the community

25:21 ↗ what it isn't it isn't like brianza

25:24 ↗ concept plan

25:26 ↗ we don't know where curbs are going to

25:27 ↗ be located it doesn't document the type

25:29 ↗ of intersection improvements at

25:31 ↗ different locations it doesn't define

25:32 ↗ the type or the location of a proposed

25:35 ↗ bike facility or address how trees that

25:39 ↗ will be impacted how that's kind of

25:43 ↗ succession will happen the typical

25:46 ↗ content that's documented with each of

25:49 ↗ these nine sets of opportunities are

25:52 ↗ kind of the applicable mapped elements

25:54 ↗ for each opportunity we go through the

25:57 ↗ different users kind of drivers

25:59 ↗ pedestrians bicyclists transit users

26:02 ↗ different elements related to the

26:04 ↗ environment and streetscape

26:06 ↗ opportunities we identify key objectives

26:11 ↗ I'm kind of really kind of stress

26:12 ↗ high-level strategy goals for each set

26:14 ↗ of opportunities and events document

26:17 ↗ design challenges and considerations

26:19 ↗ that are really kind of our roadmap to

26:21 ↗ moving those sets of opportunities

26:23 ↗ forward and to the extent that we can

26:25 ↗ document all of this information for

26:27 ↗ this from this first year of work moving

26:29 ↗ forward so that we're not having to go

26:30 ↗ back and kind of rethink the wheel and

26:34 ↗ then kind of how each set of

26:35 ↗ opportunities aligns with project goals

26:38 ↗ at the end of the document there's a

26:40 ↗ section on next steps that really

26:42 ↗ consolidates the important kind of tasks

26:45 ↗ and elements from within the document to

26:48 ↗ move this forward from phase one into

26:50 ↗ Phase two

26:51 ↗ there were several key things that kind

26:55 ↗ of came up through the community process

26:56 ↗ that I don't think we're on the the

26:59 ↗ cities or the design teams mind kind of

27:01 ↗ really thinking about the kind of future

27:03 ↗ of the tree canopy and kind of idea of

27:05 ↗ developing a tree succession plan during

27:07 ↗ our workshops with city staff operation

27:10 ↗ the meinen spokes really understanding

27:11 ↗ how does the existing infrastructure

27:13 ↗ that's below the street how is that

27:15 ↗ going to interact with and

27:18 ↗ Packt kind of partial redevelopment or

27:21 ↗ private redevelopment parcel by parcel

27:22 ↗ over time as this happens and so that

27:25 ↗ was those were two things that were

27:26 ↗ identified that really needs some more

27:28 ↗ thought moving forward and it also helps

27:32 ↗ to communicate kind of next steps with

27:35 ↗ partner agencies and the public alright

27:43 ↗ so I took the the framework plan out to

27:46 ↗ the various boards and commissions and

27:49 ↗ to hear what they had to say so

27:53 ↗ the economic vitality Commission also

27:55 ↗ discussed the opportunities to try and

27:57 ↗ improve traffic flow similar to to what

28:01 ↗ we heard in those business meetings they

28:03 ↗ also though recognized the importance of

28:05 ↗ pedestrian walkability and acknowledged

28:08 ↗ that we will likely have to consolidate

28:10 ↗ driveways to achieve some of those

28:12 ↗ safety improvements that we're looking

28:14 ↗ towards and acknowledged that that's

28:17 ↗ necessary and you know just asked that

28:19 ↗ we continue to have a good public

28:22 ↗ process and and work closely with

28:24 ↗ affected business owners and property

28:25 ↗ owners our Parks Department we really

28:28 ↗ got into that tree canopy it is a

28:31 ↗ well-loved tree canopy it is also a

28:34 ↗ little bit challenging for our Parks

28:36 ↗ Department because they're all about the

28:39 ↗ same age they're starting to face

28:41 ↗ similar issues and then we also have the

28:43 ↗ edible landscape throughout the corridor

28:45 ↗ and so we really got into the need for a

28:48 ↗ tree succession plan so that we don't

28:51 ↗ we're not in a position where we lose

28:53 ↗ all of our trees all at once due to age

28:55 ↗ or issues and so how can we continue to

28:59 ↗ step that in and preserve and maintain a

29:02 ↗ tree canopy throughout the corridor was

29:04 ↗ was a big topic of conversation we also

29:07 ↗ with the Parks Board discussed

29:09 ↗ relocating the edible landscape

29:10 ↗ currently that's along gilman in various

29:14 ↗ locations our property owners and

29:16 ↗ business owners have a lot of

29:19 ↗ frustrations with it because it is hard

29:20 ↗ to maintain and there's often fallen

29:22 ↗ fruit and food on the floor which can

29:25 ↗ attract

29:25 ↗ and unsightly things and they Parks has

29:32 ↗ again because it's this linear function

29:35 ↗ it is more challenging to to maintain

29:38 ↗ and for everyone to come out and pick so

29:40 ↗ a big topic a conversation at the parks

29:42 ↗ board was also relocating the edible

29:44 ↗ landscape to a place where it could be

29:46 ↗ more of an orchard type growth and the

29:50 ↗ parks board was very excited to continue

29:52 ↗ that conversation as to where that could

29:53 ↗ go

29:54 ↗ that's not something that we have put in

29:57 ↗ place yes

29:59 ↗ councilmember winter saying thank you so

30:02 ↗ in the your slide on final community

30:05 ↗ vision goals you do have natural element

30:07 ↗ as one of the seven excuse me nine goals

30:13 ↗ you just talked about the edible

30:16 ↗ landscape mm-hmm you also used an

30:18 ↗ interesting phrase about Teresa session

30:20 ↗ which I love the planning I like that

30:22 ↗ what are those part of this natural

30:24 ↗ environment as a goal and and if and

30:28 ↗ what are maybe other elements of this

30:31 ↗ natural environment all the natural

30:33 ↗ environment really celebrates the you

30:37 ↗ could call it a ditch or you could call

30:38 ↗ it a creek along Gilman and diamond

30:42 ↗ bearing stream I believe uh-huh and how

30:45 ↗ can we incorporate and improve and

30:48 ↗ beautify and utilize that as well as

30:52 ↗ trying to utilize other green

30:54 ↗ infrastructure rain garden type

30:56 ↗ opportunities so that's really the key

30:59 ↗ of the the natural cool cases are trees

31:02 ↗ and the edible environment you're

31:05 ↗ talking about fall into what category

31:07 ↗ also that okay okay

31:10 ↗ all the above yep okay all right thank

31:15 ↗ you

31:15 ↗ mm-hmm so parks I'm sorry we have a

31:20 ↗ councilmember hunt I have a follow-up

31:23 ↗ question which is about how because I

31:25 ↗ see it disconnect between the goals and

31:28 ↗ the goal for the natural environment and

31:29 ↗ the removal of the edible landscape so I

31:32 ↗ I don't see how if you're making that as

31:36 ↗ part of the objective for

31:37 ↗ enhancing the natural environment I'm

31:39 ↗ not sure I don't connect with the

31:42 ↗ rationale for removing the edible

31:44 ↗ landscape on that goal are you is that

31:48 ↗ what you're saying that we would remove

31:51 ↗ the edible landscape you know that meets

31:54 ↗ the goal of enhancing the natural

31:55 ↗ environment we are saying that there are

32:00 ↗ challenges with the existing landscape

32:02 ↗ that's out there today and we recognize

32:04 ↗ that it's important with the existing

32:07 ↗ tree canopy and you know people do use

32:10 ↗ and and appreciate the edible landscape

32:12 ↗ and that with those issues maybe there's

32:16 ↗ a better way that we can look at it

32:18 ↗ going forward so you know relocating

32:21 ↗ edible landscape to another location

32:23 ↗ that might be more user friendly we

32:25 ↗ don't have people picking the fruit on

32:27 ↗ the side of the road the maintenance

32:29 ↗ issues that we have with the linear

32:31 ↗ function of that as well as recognizing

32:36 ↗ that when our trees do reach the end of

32:38 ↗ life we don't want to have you know have

32:41 ↗ them all have to be removed at the same

32:43 ↗ time because we will lose that canopy so

32:45 ↗ how can we face that in and and really

32:48 ↗ consider it from a holistic planning

32:50 ↗ view so that we don't lose those things

32:52 ↗ that are important all right okay our

33:02 ↗ export also really keyed in on the three

33:05 ↗ trails crossing intersection and that's

33:07 ↗ something that they discussed a lot in

33:09 ↗ their green necklace and continue to

33:12 ↗ really support some improvements there

33:13 ↗ and they also want to look at the entire

33:16 ↗ street network with respect to

33:18 ↗ non-motorized users and really consider

33:20 ↗ where the function and where the

33:24 ↗ function lies for Mall Street the maple

33:27 ↗ maple juniper trail as well as Gilman

33:30 ↗ and how do we look at it holistically

33:32 ↗ and not just at Gilman PPC really

33:38 ↗ supported the landscaping that

33:39 ↗ incorporates stormwater also really

33:41 ↗ getting into that destination or

33:43 ↗ signature street and also acknowledging

33:46 ↗ that traffic was a concern and really

33:48 ↗ supporting the off street bike

33:50 ↗ and then Development Commission also

33:53 ↗ supported green infrastructure and

33:55 ↗ wanted to celebrate that existing Creek

33:58 ↗ and use that to add to a pedestrian

34:00 ↗ experience through all Gilman and they

34:04 ↗ also really wanted to make sure that we

34:06 ↗ still continue to consider the role of a

34:08 ↗ future Sound Transit in some proximity

34:11 ↗ to this area and how does that impact or

34:16 ↗ look how does that impact the design of

34:18 ↗ this corridor so we've talked a lot

34:26 ↗ about where we have been with this

34:28 ↗ framework development and really looking

34:32 ↗ that in the next phase we would really

34:35 ↗ look to develop that concept corridor

34:38 ↗ concept that's really the tool that we

34:41 ↗ need as developers come in to be able to

34:43 ↗ say here this is what we would like you

34:44 ↗ to build it also is that tool that we

34:47 ↗ look towards to say you know maybe

34:49 ↗ there's some pieces in here that we

34:51 ↗ don't think a developer is gonna do or

34:53 ↗ key intersection improvements that we

34:55 ↗ think is important for the city to take

34:57 ↗ on and so we look to that to identify

34:59 ↗ what you know potentially city projects

35:02 ↗ might come out of that as well as like I

35:04 ↗ said what developer improvements we'd

35:06 ↗ expect as the developers come in

35:15 ↗ just a few more slides here and then

35:17 ↗ we're going to looking forward to

35:19 ↗ hearing your questions and comments so

35:22 ↗ as we've talked about way back when a

35:25 ↗ year ago we had some really simple goals

35:29 ↗ for this project pretty straight forward

35:31 ↗ we were going to go out and listen to

35:34 ↗ the community and from that work we were

35:37 ↗ going to move into a Phase two of this

35:39 ↗ project where we would use the

35:42 ↗ information that we gathered from the

35:43 ↗ community in Phase two now to to do two

35:48 ↗ things we know that the corridor will

35:51 ↗ redevelop we've already seen some

35:54 ↗ projects along the corridor and it's

35:56 ↗ likely that that they'll be more

35:59 ↗ probably sooner than later we know more

36:04 ↗ things are happening it's the crosstown

36:06 ↗ transits on its way and other things so

36:08 ↗ there's likely to be more development

36:10 ↗ along Gilman and to have this corridor

36:12 ↗ work and have the corridor figured out

36:14 ↗ is super important to us in helping us

36:18 ↗ condition development correctly so that

36:21 ↗ we get the right buildings built in the

36:24 ↗ right places along Gilman and then in

36:27 ↗ addition there may be capital projects

36:29 ↗ that come out of this work we haven't

36:30 ↗ defined those yet and those will need of

36:33 ↗ course some funding discussions

36:34 ↗ depending on what the projects are so

36:36 ↗ that's a whole other conversation but it

36:39 ↗ may be it's unlikely I would say that

36:41 ↗ there's going to be a single capital

36:43 ↗ project that builds Gilman so to speak

36:46 ↗ but there may be smaller capital

36:48 ↗ projects that come out of this work that

36:50 ↗ may make sense so those were the

36:54 ↗ original goals I think as we've done the

36:56 ↗ work here and these folks have mentioned

37:00 ↗ some of these already just I'll go

37:01 ↗ through them again briefly so we looked

37:04 ↗ at infrastructure at a high level in

37:06 ↗ this first phase of the project we map

37:09 ↗ the project we've know where all the

37:11 ↗ property lines are we know where all the

37:13 ↗ utilities and the infrastructure are but

37:16 ↗ we haven't done a real in-depth

37:17 ↗ assessment and so where that just to

37:19 ↗ give an example of that where that comes

37:21 ↗ in useful or handy is as the corridor

37:25 ↗ redevelops

37:27 ↗ you know what size should that water

37:28 ↗ service be which size should be that

37:31 ↗ should that water line be do we have

37:33 ↗ sufficient sewer capacity those kinds of

37:36 ↗ things do those utilities for example

37:39 ↗ need to be upgraded so a more detailed

37:41 ↗ infrastructure assessment will save us

37:45 ↗ money in the long run and potentially if

37:48 ↗ we have that figured out it's easier to

37:50 ↗ condition development as it comes in to

37:52 ↗ build those pieces of infrastructure

37:54 ↗ that we need tree succession plan we've

37:57 ↗ talked about that and just there's old

38:01 ↗ trees there everyone values the trees

38:03 ↗ everyone values the edible landscape

38:05 ↗ there's some very special things about

38:07 ↗ this corridor and we want to make sure

38:09 ↗ that going forward we have a plan that's

38:11 ↗ going to continue that success so as we

38:15 ↗ mentioned just not to belabor the edible

38:17 ↗ landscape discussion but I think we all

38:21 ↗ recognize the value that and it's

38:23 ↗ certainly a treasure for Issaquah it may

38:26 ↗ not gilman per se may not be the very

38:30 ↗ best location for that there may be a

38:31 ↗ better location where we could have a

38:34 ↗ more even more successful out of edible

38:37 ↗ landscape than directly on Gilman so

38:40 ↗ just wanted to point that out design

38:42 ↗ guidelines if we're going to be

38:45 ↗ approving development as it comes in

38:47 ↗ being as specific as we can and telling

38:51 ↗ them what we want them to build so that

38:53 ↗ we only build the corridor once is super

38:57 ↗ important

38:59 ↗ with more clear design guidelines where

39:02 ↗ again more likely to get exactly what we

39:04 ↗ want and build only the build Gilman

39:06 ↗ just once so when a when a piece of the

39:09 ↗ corridor redevelops developers will

39:12 ↗ build those portions of Gilman and then

39:15 ↗ the implement implementation

39:17 ↗ considerations so what that's about

39:19 ↗ is development will build portions of it

39:24 ↗ there will be portions that look just

39:27 ↗ like they do today so how does that work

39:29 ↗ how does how does that fit together

39:30 ↗ that's not a trivial question to figure

39:33 ↗ out how you fit together portions of the

39:37 ↗ corridor that are redeveloped and

39:38 ↗ portions

39:39 ↗ of the corridor that look like they do

39:42 ↗ today and then I think finally and not

39:45 ↗ not lastly by any means this continued

39:48 ↗ meaningful outreach we've done we think

39:50 ↗ we've done a great job in our outreach

39:53 ↗ so far so we want to continue to

39:55 ↗ maintain that keep the community

39:58 ↗ involved maintain the trust that we've

39:59 ↗ developed in the first phase of this so

40:02 ↗ finally they will be coming to you as we

40:05 ↗ know that's quite developed yet but

40:07 ↗ we'll be coming to you with a scope a

40:09 ↗ schedule we believe this is a

40:12 ↗ approximately a one-year effort I know

40:16 ↗ that council is going to have some

40:17 ↗ funding discussions as early as this

40:19 ↗ week so that that may help us understand

40:23 ↗ a little bit better where where this

40:24 ↗ project fits in with all our comedic

40:27 ↗ competing interests and in this scope in

40:33 ↗ the second scope as we've talked about

40:36 ↗ will continue to finalize and dial in

40:39 ↗ our infrastructure will de further

40:42 ↗ develop emerging concepts and and this

40:45 ↗ is where you'll start to see

40:46 ↗ cross-sections and what this corridor

40:49 ↗ will could look like and that's the

40:53 ↗ final concept and again against against

40:56 ↗ the background of robust public outreach

41:00 ↗ so I think with that we're done and the

41:04 ↗ whole team is here and we've got about a

41:07 ↗ half an hour I think a little bit last

41:09 ↗ 20 minutes and we're very happy to

41:12 ↗ answer any questions or listen to any

41:15 ↗ comments that you may have it's a minute

41:18 ↗ winter Stine Thank You tole put that

41:21 ↗ slide back you just lost the slide we

41:25 ↗ can go back or forward on any of this I

41:27 ↗ know that's fine the task recently we've

41:31 ↗ been through the process of developing a

41:33 ↗ quarter concept for Newport way west

41:39 ↗ we're using the same label here I'm

41:41 ↗ assuming that this act this part of this

41:47 ↗ task is similar to what transpired and

41:50 ↗ what we experienced in the Newport Way

41:51 ↗ quarter con

41:52 ↗ I'm now at the Newport Way corridor

41:54 ↗ concept looking at brand the realize

41:57 ↗ she's a no longer she is no you're gonna

42:01 ↗ own it now Brian although that Brienne

42:03 ↗ is I just want to know yes I have an

42:08 ↗ idea what concept is it's based upon

42:10 ↗ what we did a new part are you talking

42:12 ↗ about the same thing yeah coming up with

42:14 ↗ that cross-section and and looking at

42:17 ↗ you know an overarching view of of what

42:19 ↗ does that look like laid upon like an

42:21 ↗ aerial so not getting into the level of

42:25 ↗ this is the exact type of curb or using

42:27 ↗ or anything like that but that that

42:29 ↗ higher level corridor concept yes yeah

42:32 ↗ and you laid out options and that's

42:33 ↗ where we had options and there were many

42:36 ↗ opportunities for people to respond to

42:39 ↗ and offer their inputs yep so if it if

42:42 ↗ it unfolds like that then I understand

42:44 ↗ that and I think it's a good plan that

42:46 ↗ was my first question my second question

42:48 ↗ is again I'm looking at final community

42:51 ↗ vision goals

42:52 ↗ well these nine and one of them says

42:55 ↗ very designed by streets segments now

42:58 ↗ Breanna you surprised me actually when

42:59 ↗ you said or when it was said earlier in

43:01 ↗ the evening I think the gentleman who

43:03 ↗ spoke first maybe mentioned this how you

43:06 ↗ actually looked at the street today as

43:08 ↗ it is and said there's kind of some

43:10 ↗ natural segments which I thought is a

43:12 ↗ little bit in contradictory to the

43:14 ↗ overall plan going in and that we're

43:17 ↗ more visioning on what this needs to be

43:19 ↗ and should be and can be obviously we're

43:22 ↗ working at constraints and now I see

43:23 ↗ kind of a kind of a goal that seems to

43:27 ↗ me that was maybe shaped by what's a lot

43:29 ↗ by what's already there and now he may

43:32 ↗ be even codified in having a goal like

43:34 ↗ this this is very designed by street

43:35 ↗ segments so did I so again I'm did I

43:41 ↗ understand that when you show the

43:43 ↗ diagram you saw five segments and you're

43:44 ↗ breaking it down to like what's there

43:46 ↗ now it feels like we're maybe carrying a

43:49 ↗ little bit of the as is forward but that

43:52 ↗ seems in contradiction to one of our

43:54 ↗ goals yeah so the existing context not

43:56 ↗ as much as the infrastructure that

43:57 ↗ exists today but the land-use the

43:59 ↗ right-of-way widths the natural

44:02 ↗ environments that the stream the

44:03 ↗ parallels Gilman the creeks the cross

44:06 ↗ it and then the built environment

44:09 ↗ knowing we've got I nine dealing a

44:10 ↗ section property ownership so kind of

44:13 ↗ really looking at things that aren't

44:14 ↗ going to change or are unlikely to

44:17 ↗ change when you think about land use

44:18 ↗ those are the types of things not where

44:20 ↗ curbs are or where trees are or where

44:21 ↗ utilities are does that help that does

44:24 ↗ and is that the same as saying as this

44:27 ↗ goal says very designed by street

44:29 ↗ segments yes are you two thinking about

44:31 ↗ the same set of those segments from

44:33 ↗ whether block by block or multiple

44:35 ↗ blocks but recognizing that what happens

44:37 ↗ from SR 902 12th has a very different

44:41 ↗ set of needs and issues than what

44:44 ↗ happens around seventh or happens at

44:48 ↗ Front Street

44:49 ↗ so it's we don't want to just take one

44:51 ↗ one typical section and extrude it

44:53 ↗ through the whole 1.4 mile corridor

44:55 ↗ because there are different things that

44:57 ↗ are more important in different

44:59 ↗ locations and that's why we've got nine

45:00 ↗ goals but they're going to have to you

45:03 ↗ can't fit all of those things into your

45:05 ↗ limited right-of-way is that I like the

45:08 ↗ image of what you just extrude it it's

45:10 ↗ just a machine extrude it so the last is

45:13 ↗ a comment as much as anything and I hope

45:15 ↗ we can avoid three weeks shutdowns when

45:17 ↗ we finally do do this that's fine

45:21 ↗ councilman Rea just a couple of

45:24 ↗ clarifications can you go back to slide

45:26 ↗ 24 can you tell me what it yeah that's

45:31 ↗ it says Community Survey place-based

45:34 ↗ feedback that one so I see red dots and

45:44 ↗ brown dots and aqua dots and purple dots

45:47 ↗ what do they mean so there were five

45:50 ↗ main questions within the survey are

45:54 ↗ kind of segments one was about issues or

45:57 ↗ opportunities for people driving for

45:59 ↗ people walking was number two for people

46:02 ↗ biking for people taking transit and

46:04 ↗ then a set of questions related to the

46:06 ↗ natural environment so each of those

46:09 ↗ callers corresponds to those kind of

46:11 ↗ section of questions from the online

46:13 ↗ survey would it be asking too much to

46:16 ↗ get a legend

46:18 ↗ no I mean it would just be nice to see

46:21 ↗ what a purple dot yeah because we got

46:24 ↗ some of those that are kind of outside

46:25 ↗ the court or something it would just be

46:27 ↗ more meaningful to me and then on page

46:30 ↗ 29 which is support for initial project

46:34 ↗ goals so plan Street improvements for

46:39 ↗ light rail so I have not heard anything

46:43 ↗ friends could just be me but but from

46:45 ↗ Sound Transit that says that Gilman is

46:47 ↗ where light mail is going to go so is

46:50 ↗ that what we hear from from sound

46:52 ↗ transit that Gilman is going to be the

46:53 ↗ part of the light rail vision no so we

46:58 ↗ we don't know where the light rail

47:00 ↗ station will be landed precisely we have

47:03 ↗ a feeling it could be in the vicinity of

47:06 ↗ Gilman and not necessarily meeting on

47:09 ↗ Gilman but somewhere that Gilman could

47:11 ↗ be a main access point to that station

47:14 ↗ from one way or another and so we wanted

47:17 ↗ to make sure that we didn't do anything

47:18 ↗ that precluded that the administrator

47:20 ↗ thank you

47:21 ↗ just quick add on to that what Sound

47:24 ↗ Transit has told us is that were the end

47:26 ↗ of the line it's likely to run in

47:29 ↗ proximity with i-90 and so our

47:32 ↗ conversations have been a little broader

47:34 ↗ than Gilman what do we need to think

47:37 ↗ about within some swath south and north

47:42 ↗ of i90 and so Gilman gets yeah and I

47:47 ↗ just think about it

47:48 ↗ you know if they stay to the current

47:50 ↗ plan we're still 22 years away so that's

47:52 ↗ a fairly lengthy planning horizon so I'm

47:55 ↗ just I don't I was just surprised that

47:59 ↗ it was the number one support for

48:00 ↗ initial project goals was something this

48:02 ↗ 22 years away yeah I'll just add that it

48:06 ↗ shows up in various city documents in

48:09 ↗ terms of our kind of legislative

48:12 ↗ ambitions our regional planning

48:14 ↗ ambitions and it's showing up in your

48:18 ↗ draft strategic plan so I think we have

48:22 ↗ spoken about as brand consultants much

48:26 ↗ and trying to get ahead of the curve and

48:28 ↗ start some community conversations so

48:30 ↗ that we

48:31 ↗ have we can have the readiness when

48:34 ↗ Sound Transit turns to us and earnest to

48:36 ↗ begin that work we've also heard from

48:38 ↗ them that they anticipate turning their

48:41 ↗ attention to us sometime in let's say

48:43 ↗ 2023 to 2025 range so if you think about

48:48 ↗ that getting started in the vicinity of

48:52 ↗ say 2020 with some community

48:53 ↗ conversations doesn't seem that far off

48:55 ↗ hey thank you

49:03 ↗ that's member hunt one question then a

49:07 ↗ couple of comments so the first question

49:09 ↗ is I know that and from talking to the

49:11 ↗ community one of the challenges has to

49:13 ↗ do with making a u-turn or turning

49:16 ↗ around or getting to a business that's

49:18 ↗ on the other side of the street with

49:20 ↗ some of the intersections that are more

49:22 ↗ tricky to navigate and so could you go

49:26 ↗ through what are some of the options

49:27 ↗ that are on the table for making those

49:29 ↗ those right so that's we haven't gotten

49:37 ↗ into that level of detail we also we did

49:40 ↗ hear that from the community that

49:41 ↗ u-turns would be helpful long corridor

49:44 ↗ and as we take a look at that corridor

49:46 ↗ holistically and determine where places

49:49 ↗ will have full access where places might

49:51 ↗ have limited access where u-turns might

49:53 ↗ be necessary that'll be something that

49:55 ↗ would really come in through that

49:56 ↗ corridor concept development and it's

49:57 ↗ not something that we have at this level

50:03 ↗ mr. winter Stein pointed out so for the

50:07 ↗ Newport the Western Newport project that

50:10 ↗ we've been working on that is that

50:14 ↗ starts to be more the well let's to give

50:17 ↗ it a number of the 30% design level so

50:20 ↗ we'll start to look more at those

50:21 ↗ details in the phase to start to look at

50:24 ↗ how intersections should be configured

50:26 ↗ where you might need to make u-turns

50:28 ↗ those kinds of things that's all the

50:30 ↗ work that we're planning to do in this

50:32 ↗ next phase so this was this is different

50:36 ↗ than how we've approached many projects

50:38 ↗ and it it really was intentional to go

50:41 ↗ to the public and have all these

50:44 ↗ meetings and hear what all the concerns

50:46 ↗ are and what we should focus on as we go

50:49 ↗ into Phase two may be another way to

50:52 ↗ approach this whole project would have

50:53 ↗ been to come with some cross-sections

50:55 ↗ initially and just come out of the gate

50:57 ↗ with those and we really again

50:59 ↗ intentionally did not do that because we

51:01 ↗ wanted to have everything out on the

51:03 ↗ table and hear from the community about

51:05 ↗ what was important and then go to work

51:07 ↗ on Phase two and then I have a comment

51:11 ↗ on the community process so I attended

51:13 ↗ one of the community meetings and I

51:15 ↗ heard a lot from people in that meeting

51:18 ↗ that the survey was very fun and

51:20 ↗ engaging and gave a lot of opportunity

51:23 ↗ for you know putting your PIN on

51:24 ↗ different places and it was very

51:26 ↗ interactive and very fun for a survey so

51:28 ↗ compliments on that and I think it got a

51:31 ↗ lot of good information which is

51:32 ↗ informing where we're going so that that

51:36 ↗ was great and there definitely seems to

51:37 ↗ be a lot of support for that kind of way

51:40 ↗ of providing feedback from people and

51:43 ↗ then my I have a concern which is about

51:46 ↗ the tree succession plan and the edible

51:48 ↗ landscape so to me looking at the main

51:51 ↗ goals it doesn't seem that any of the

51:54 ↗ goals as far as safety or visibility for

51:58 ↗ businesses or or the main objectives for

52:03 ↗ the corridor plan are addressed by

52:05 ↗ removing and out of a landscape it does

52:07 ↗ seem like it's an opportunity to maybe

52:09 ↗ do something that would be a asset to

52:14 ↗ the community in a different location

52:15 ↗ but my concern is that we don't there's

52:19 ↗ not information about what the plan is

52:21 ↗ for moving it and I would like to see

52:24 ↗ more information about that and I I do

52:28 ↗ appreciate the letter of support from

52:30 ↗ the parks board and I appreciate that

52:31 ↗ there's going to be more information

52:32 ↗ about that but I wanted to raise it as a

52:35 ↗ concern because I know that the food

52:36 ↗ bank is collected being currently gleans

52:39 ↗ or harvests food from the edible

52:42 ↗ landscape and I know too that some

52:43 ↗ members of the community enjoy that and

52:45 ↗ I'm concerns about having it go away

52:48 ↗ without having a plan for replacing it

52:51 ↗ because anytime we're removing something

52:53 ↗ that is a public benefit to some people

52:54 ↗ I would like to know more about what the

52:56 ↗ plan is for replacing it so that's

53:00 ↗ that's my concern

53:01 ↗ and I also I was looking about the

53:04 ↗ Beacon food forest in Seattle I'm I know

53:06 ↗ there are other options for how to have

53:08 ↗ these kinds of orchard type settings and

53:12 ↗ so I'm interested to learn more about

53:14 ↗ what the plan is but I'm concerned

53:16 ↗ because I don't see very much specifics

53:18 ↗ about the plan right now council deputy

53:22 ↗ president patís

53:24 ↗ so thank you for the presentation a lot

53:27 ↗ of hard work and and so much community

53:30 ↗ engagement that's that's gone into this

53:32 ↗ and that's great to see I assume that

53:34 ↗ when we get to phase two we'll be

53:37 ↗ getting more information about timelines

53:40 ↗ and prioritization with within these

53:44 ↗ schools I'm very I was really glad to

53:48 ↗ see the the tree succession plan and

53:51 ↗ share some of the concerns that

53:53 ↗ councilmember hunt has brought up but

53:56 ↗ just having that be a part of the

53:58 ↗ overarching goal was was great to see

54:01 ↗ and with the the outreach and I don't

54:04 ↗ know if you've gotten down to this

54:06 ↗ detail but the continuing meaningful

54:09 ↗ outreach will that end up boiling down

54:12 ↗ to getting outreach specifically on each

54:14 ↗ goal so when the group is working on

54:16 ↗ tree succession planning that there's

54:19 ↗ outreach specifically for that and being

54:23 ↗ able to hear back from the community so

54:28 ↗ we're in the process of as I mentioned

54:30 ↗ developing that scope and outreach plan

54:32 ↗ so that's good input we'll certainly

54:34 ↗ look at that as we're developing that

54:36 ↗ scope the administrator made sure I just

54:40 ↗ want to clarify and and hopefully

54:42 ↗ reassure that as the team has state we

54:45 ↗ understand that the edible landscape is

54:48 ↗ is a well-loved attribute of the

54:51 ↗ community and we want to have that

54:54 ↗ persist we're just not certain that it's

54:58 ↗ sustainable in the location that it is

54:59 ↗ currently in there's no plan right now

55:04 ↗ to go in and take it out without already

55:08 ↗ having a conversation with community

55:10 ↗ about what's a what might be a better

55:12 ↗ location for it so we're not just as we

55:16 ↗ have not settled on a concept plan or

55:20 ↗ type of curb that would be placed in the

55:23 ↗ future we haven't had any of those

55:26 ↗ subsequent conversations about where

55:28 ↗ might the garden move to so I'm I'm

55:33 ↗ seeing it less as you know removal with

55:35 ↗ no replacement but

55:36 ↗ just that we've brought this issue

55:38 ↗ forward that there are some concerns

55:39 ↗ about it in its current location and we

55:42 ↗ need to have some community dialogue

55:43 ↗ about what to do about that

55:47 ↗ councilmember Goodman so the question

55:53 ↗ that you have for us tonight is how we

55:57 ↗ feel about this framework and whether we

56:00 ↗ endorse it moving forward I'm I'm struck

56:04 ↗ by the incredible thoroughness of the

56:08 ↗ work that you have done and I would this

56:11 ↗ is in very very hot few presentations

56:18 ↗ I've seen body of material that I've

56:20 ↗ seen since I've been on council that has

56:21 ↗ been this thorough and so I want to come

56:23 ↗ in and commend you on that it's it's

56:25 ↗ very impressive that the amount of work

56:27 ↗ that you did to go out to the community

56:28 ↗ and get the information that you did and

56:30 ↗ I echo the Emily will roll her eyes but

56:36 ↗ I echo the concerns about the edible

56:38 ↗ landscaping in and and I think I think

56:44 ↗ one of the reasons is because we just

56:45 ↗ went through this exercise on Front

56:47 ↗ Street where we didn't have a plan in

56:49 ↗ place and that community didn't

56:52 ↗ appreciate that so so I'm excited about

56:56 ↗ the next phase and see what concept come

57:00 ↗ up with thank you no that's been winter

57:08 ↗ so I'll just add my voice to that I I

57:10 ↗ would like to see you to proceed as

57:13 ↗ requested and but of course I know that

57:17 ↗ there's a financial ask in there we have

57:18 ↗ to address that question still so

57:20 ↗ obviously and I don't know that it's

57:23 ↗ gonna be talked about this within a week

57:25 ↗ or so but as was mentioned earlier but

57:30 ↗ agree with Stacy's comments about the

57:32 ↗ thoroughness and the completeness that

57:34 ↗ was there I always love it when

57:36 ↗ consultants show up at the city and say

57:37 ↗ you know we've not seen it done this way

57:39 ↗ before and what you're complimenting us

57:40 ↗ on is the amount of engagement and the

57:42 ↗ forethought and the inclusiveness of the

57:44 ↗ wider community in before we do projects

57:47 ↗ like this so thank you for that and

57:48 ↗ thank you

57:49 ↗ Kurt and Brianne for your team's work

57:54 ↗ administrator do you want to just

57:57 ↗ clarify the the the statement about that

58:00 ↗ we might when you might have

58:02 ↗ conversation about the funding for the

58:04 ↗ next fact sure I think we will touch on

58:07 ↗ it in a generic way as we have that ad

58:09 ↗ hoc Finance Committee meeting both this

58:12 ↗ week and probably not too much further

58:18 ↗ into the into the calendar it won't meet

58:22 ↗ again and then I'm anticipating we're

58:25 ↗ going to come back to Council we had

58:28 ↗ said before the end of the first quarter

58:30 ↗ to kind of talk about all things capital

58:32 ↗ that are unfunded you will also know

58:35 ↗ that we have upcoming conversations

58:37 ↗ about the multi-year CIP so I need to

58:42 ↗ huddle with our staff and see what the

58:45 ↗ recommendation is on that front see if

58:46 ↗ we have new opportunities I'm not aware

58:48 ↗ of right now for additional funding

58:51 ↗ sources and so I'd hope we'd be back to

58:55 ↗ you to tell you what our recommendation

58:57 ↗ is on additional funding requests to

59:00 ↗ advance the next phase of work what's

59:04 ↗ the order of magnitude of round 2 the

59:09 ↗ order the magnet order of magnitude is

59:12 ↗ for phase 2 I think is around $400,000

59:17 ↗ is what I'm looking at now what was

59:19 ↗ phase 1 phase 1 was something less than

59:22 ↗ to 135 yeah all right and we're in that

59:26 ↗ 400 to 500 thousand so member ray you

59:29 ↗ look like yeah okay that's over hunt I'm

59:35 ↗ gonna add two final thoughts about the

59:38 ↗ edible landscape so the first one is

59:41 ↗ that the it's very clearly called out on

59:44 ↗ our treasures list for the city as

59:45 ↗ number 18 fruit trees parks bridges

59:48 ↗ Lincoln Boulevard so all of those things

59:50 ↗ are important to the community and then

59:52 ↗ the other the other thing that I wanted

59:57 ↗ to point out is I wanted to echo Stacy's

1:00:00 ↗ comments about the street trees and the

1:00:04 ↗ big impact that it has and I think

1:00:05 ↗ people don't actually people might not

1:00:08 ↗ appreciate that a lot of the feel and a

1:00:10 ↗ lot of the character of a given street

1:00:12 ↗ has to do with the trees until the trees

1:00:13 ↗ change but a lot of that a lot of that

1:00:16 ↗ streets character right now does have to

1:00:18 ↗ do with the fruit trees and the

1:00:19 ↗ diversity of trees that are on the

1:00:21 ↗ street and the diversity of shapes and I

1:00:24 ↗ previously worked at a botanical garden

1:00:26 ↗ and I remember like driving down that

1:00:28 ↗ street and thinking like wow all these

1:00:29 ↗ different kinds of trees are on the

1:00:32 ↗ street it's actually quite unique and it

1:00:34 ↗ really does lend to the character so I I

1:00:36 ↗ am really concerned about the tree

1:00:38 ↗ succession plan it's great that there's

1:00:39 ↗ a plan to have a plan but I I want to

1:00:43 ↗ know more about it and I want to know

1:00:45 ↗ more about the plan for relocating the

1:00:48 ↗ food forest edible landscape orchard

1:00:50 ↗ concept and since we're all talking

1:00:56 ↗ about it all I had a thought at some

1:00:58 ↗ point will have to some point meant to

1:01:00 ↗ figure out what to do with the other

1:01:01 ↗ half of Valley Park now I realized

1:01:05 ↗ that an edible orchard thing is probably

1:01:08 ↗ something you want to have in the

1:01:09 ↗ walking part of the city but I just

1:01:11 ↗ I'll just throw that out there that at

1:01:13 ↗ some point you the Grove that we have

1:01:15 ↗ done there were the trees that were

1:01:16 ↗ planted you know that's something we

1:01:19 ↗ have to figure out and it would be nice

1:01:20 ↗ to find some some use for it that could

1:01:23 ↗ over time become something important for

1:01:26 ↗ residents anything else on this one

1:01:30 ↗ before we move on anything else from the

1:01:32 ↗ administration from your team all right

1:01:35 ↗ well thank you very much that quite a

1:01:37 ↗ enthusiastic response from councils so a

1:01:40 ↗ good job and with that we will move on I

1:01:46 ↗ apologize I don't have it all ready to

1:01:48 ↗ go right in front me however oh there it

1:01:51 ↗ is

1:01:51 ↗ I do 369 of course old town and transit

1:01:56 ↗ centers parking study how could I forget

1:02:31 ↗ good evening council president deputy

1:02:33 ↗ council president council members and

1:02:35 ↗ city administrator i matthew mark

1:02:40 ↗ special projects manager with the

1:02:42 ↗ mayor's office the City Economic

1:02:45 ↗ Development Manager Christopher

1:02:47 ↗ Christopher Wright and I have Co managed

1:02:49 ↗ the research and analysis of the latest

1:02:52 ↗ parking study Chris Braylon and Daniel

1:02:56 ↗ die from fair and Pierce are our

1:02:58 ↗ consultants Daniel is here this evening

1:03:00 ↗ along with his colleague colleague

1:03:02 ↗ Kendra Braylon to answer questions

1:03:04 ↗ daniel has provided thoughtful input and

1:03:07 ↗ guidance through this effort our aim

1:03:12 ↗ tonight is to go through REM tonight is

1:03:17 ↗ to go through the work completed over

1:03:19 ↗ the last four months that illustrates

1:03:21 ↗ what is going on with parking in the

1:03:23 ↗ city the story is extensive and it

1:03:27 ↗ should take about 35 minutes and we will

1:03:29 ↗ work through these four sections we'll

1:03:32 ↗ start with first the background then

1:03:35 ↗ outline the studies methodology and

1:03:37 ↗ findings that point to the options

1:03:39 ↗ before council if it pleases the council

1:03:43 ↗ I request that you take note of any

1:03:46 ↗ questions that come up along with the

1:03:48 ↗ slide numbers as we work through the

1:03:50 ↗ presentation and once we're through we

1:03:53 ↗ will answer your questions and seek your

1:03:54 ↗ input on next steps moving forward

1:04:00 ↗ parking concerns have existed in

1:04:02 ↗ Issaquah for years particularly in Old

1:04:05 ↗ Town where we have a mix of businesses

1:04:08 ↗ residents and attractions that at times

1:04:13 ↗ strained the on-street parking resources

1:04:15 ↗ in July 2016 council directed staff to

1:04:19 ↗ develop a proposal to create additional

1:04:21 ↗ parking capacity in Old Town within a

1:04:23 ↗ two-year period during a December 2017

1:04:27 ↗ budget work session council went one

1:04:29 ↗ step further and improved funding for a

1:04:31 ↗ parking enforcement pilot program staff

1:04:35 ↗ initiated this study in August 2018 to

1:04:38 ↗ inform a potential pilot initiative and

1:04:40 ↗ because there was a general perception

1:04:42 ↗ that parking capacity in Old Town is an

1:04:44 ↗ ad

1:04:44 ↗ quit that parking right garages are full

1:04:47 ↗ and transit riders are parking in areas

1:04:49 ↗ intended for short-term Parkers parking

1:04:53 ↗ resources are strained and when whenever

1:04:56 ↗ we have major community events and that

1:04:59 ↗ people park wherever and whenever

1:05:00 ↗ without repercussion this study follows

1:05:06 ↗ previous parking assessments the

1:05:11 ↗ downtown parking utilization studies in

1:05:13 ↗ 98 and 2012 concluded Old Town generally

1:05:16 ↗ has ample parking with specific blocks

1:05:19 ↗ being highly utilized the central

1:05:21 ↗ Issaquah parking analysis evaluated

1:05:23 ↗ multifamily minimum parking requirements

1:05:25 ↗ in central Issaquah and found

1:05:27 ↗ multifamily projects are providing

1:05:29 ↗ adequate off street parking people

1:05:31 ↗ simply Park on street because it is it

1:05:33 ↗ is more convenient for the current study

1:05:39 ↗ staff completed a more in-depth data

1:05:42 ↗ collection and analysis of parking both

1:05:45 ↗ in Old Town and near the Issaquah

1:05:46 ↗ Transit Center and the Highlands Park

1:05:48 ↗ and Ride garages our focus has been to

1:05:51 ↗ complete a thorough data analysis of on

1:05:55 ↗ street parking and determine whether a

1:05:57 ↗ parking shortage exists or other

1:05:59 ↗ systemic parking issues are at play once

1:06:03 ↗ equipped with a clear understanding of

1:06:04 ↗ what is going on we developed parking

1:06:07 ↗ management options for your

1:06:08 ↗ consideration tonight parking management

1:06:14 ↗ varies greatly between jurisdictions

1:06:16 ↗ based on parking supply demand levels

1:06:19 ↗ tolerance for pricing and local values

1:06:22 ↗ that guide parking management from top

1:06:25 ↗ to bottom this graphic illustrates low

1:06:28 ↗ level parking management - more cost

1:06:30 ↗ intensive strategies that include paid

1:06:32 ↗ parking time limits permits and loading

1:06:36 ↗ zones best practices in suburban cities

1:06:39 ↗ typically entail low level management

1:06:41 ↗ which with time transitions to more

1:06:44 ↗ intensive parking management strategies

1:06:47 ↗ with increased management comes

1:06:52 ↗ increased costs primarily around

1:06:54 ↗ enforcement and please forgive me I not

1:06:57 ↗ sure why the

1:06:58 ↗ the presentation keeps jumping ahead so

1:07:00 ↗ um do you have any idea what's going on

1:07:03 ↗ okay we're just going to run with it

1:07:09 ↗ physical ads current management strategy

1:07:11 ↗ is request based enforcement and what

1:07:15 ↗ this means is that the city places low

1:07:17 ↗ priority on parking enforcement using

1:07:19 ↗ existing patrol officers given the

1:07:21 ↗ already extensive workload on the police

1:07:24 ↗ department Federal Way des moines

1:07:26 ↗ Lynwood are other cities nearby who

1:07:29 ↗ employ a similar strategy it is

1:07:33 ↗ important to note nearly all cities in

1:07:35 ↗ the Puget Sound region adopt this

1:07:37 ↗ strategy and lower density areas of

1:07:39 ↗ their communities while there is no

1:07:43 ↗ industry defined standard to trigger

1:07:45 ↗ more intensive parking management there

1:07:48 ↗ are thresholds jurisdictions aim for

1:07:51 ↗ before implementing a higher level of

1:07:54 ↗ management a common target is to

1:07:57 ↗ encourage parking turnover in makes use

1:07:59 ↗ areas where on street occupancy exceeds

1:08:02 ↗ 85% for for several hours so 85% means

1:08:06 ↗ that one to two spaces per block are

1:08:08 ↗ typically available at any given time

1:08:11 ↗ more than 85% the perception is that

1:08:14 ↗ there's nowhere to park lower than that

1:08:16 ↗ does not typically warrant parking

1:08:19 ↗ management the focus here is to ensure

1:08:21 ↗ that short-term parking needs such as

1:08:23 ↗ patrons or people seeking government

1:08:25 ↗ services are prioritized over long-term

1:08:28 ↗ parking Puget Sound communities manage

1:08:34 ↗ parking resources differently depending

1:08:36 ↗ on local factors cities with extensive

1:08:40 ↗ parking restrictions such as street

1:08:42 ↗ sweeping residential permit zones

1:08:45 ↗ extensive time limits and parking meters

1:08:47 ↗ have conditions where parking

1:08:49 ↗ enforcement becomes a revenue generator

1:08:52 ↗ cities that are examples of this are

1:08:55 ↗ Seattle Tacoma and Everett cities like

1:08:58 ↗ Bellevue Redmen and Kirkland with

1:09:00 ↗ moderate sized enforcement programs

1:09:02 ↗ strive to break even for cities with

1:09:06 ↗ small enforcement programs such as

1:09:08 ↗ Federal Way des moines in limbo

1:09:12 ↗ the system cost more to enforce than the

1:09:14 ↗ revenue they bring in even though costs

1:09:19 ↗ for parking management often outpace the

1:09:22 ↗ revenue it generates cities like

1:09:24 ↗ Bellevue Redmen Bothell Renton and Kent

1:09:27 ↗ use a mix of time limited parking and

1:09:30 ↗ full-time enforcement for mainly these

1:09:34 ↗ reasons when honest resupply is

1:09:36 ↗ constrained users get the perception

1:09:38 ↗ that an area is full and they either

1:09:40 ↗ circle or they decide to leave a car

1:09:43 ↗ parked on street all day typically turns

1:09:47 ↗ over one to two times when enforced cars

1:09:50 ↗ parked in time stalls turn over five to

1:09:53 ↗ eight times so higher turnover yields

1:09:55 ↗ more economic activity patrons visitors

1:10:00 ↗ employees residents and commuters they

1:10:03 ↗ all benefit when a structure simplifies

1:10:05 ↗ the decision-making and expectations so

1:10:08 ↗ when parking lacks order frustrations

1:10:10 ↗ increase creating a negative perception

1:10:13 ↗ of driving to an area finally a clear

1:10:17 ↗ understanding of who has priority two

1:10:19 ↗ parking stalls allow cities to develop

1:10:21 ↗ policies that get the right user in the

1:10:24 ↗ right space a robust data collection

1:10:30 ↗ effort was our primary focus in August

1:10:33 ↗ and September data was collected across

1:10:36 ↗ three study areas on four days date

1:10:41 ↗ selected include low activity levels

1:10:43 ↗ with and those with higher community

1:10:45 ↗ calendar activity we wanted to ensure

1:10:48 ↗ that we had dates before school began

1:10:50 ↗ and while it was in session we looked at

1:10:54 ↗ the inventory of existing public parking

1:10:56 ↗ supply on Street in an unrestricted Lots

1:10:59 ↗ we looked at parking duration average

1:11:02 ↗ and peak occupancy average vehicle

1:11:04 ↗ turnover average parking durations and

1:11:07 ↗ in violation rates

1:11:13 ↗ staff and the consultant team selected

1:11:17 ↗ 50 blocks within the project areas noted

1:11:19 ↗ above and those blocks are marked in

1:11:22 ↗ black I just want to take a moment and

1:11:27 ↗ explain how we use this data by focusing

1:11:30 ↗ on the 50 blocks we were able to

1:11:33 ↗ extrapolate data for similar nearby

1:11:36 ↗ blocks for instance activity and

1:11:39 ↗ occupancy level on one measured block

1:11:42 ↗ face typically mirrors activity found on

1:11:44 ↗ blocks within 200 feet because we use

1:11:48 ↗ this technique of feathering data

1:11:49 ↗ between collected block faces the

1:11:51 ↗ consultant team generated an overall map

1:11:53 ↗ that shows parking hotspots in areas of

1:11:56 ↗ lower utilization for days of

1:12:01 ↗ comprehensive data collection yielded

1:12:03 ↗ telling results although the Issaquah

1:12:06 ↗ Transit Center Garage reaches capacity

1:12:09 ↗ little or no trains at parking spillover

1:12:11 ↗ was observed in the study area in part

1:12:16 ↗ because on street parking is limited

1:12:17 ↗ near the Transit Center and we found

1:12:21 ↗ that whenever there was people people

1:12:23 ↗ were unable to park within the garage

1:12:25 ↗ there was a significant amount of

1:12:27 ↗ Parkers in the Tibbets Valley West slot

1:12:30 ↗ which on average reaches about 60%

1:12:33 ↗ occupancy at peak periods parking on

1:12:37 ↗ Wall Street is moderate but appears to

1:12:39 ↗ be utilized by people parking for nearby

1:12:41 ↗ businesses and during field observations

1:12:45 ↗ we noted in operable vehicles were

1:12:47 ↗ parked on Wall Street for more than 24

1:12:49 ↗ hours

1:12:54 ↗ Highlands Parkin ride is highly utilized

1:12:57 ↗ no pun intended and typically reaches

1:13:00 ↗ about 90 percent occupancy by 9:00 a.m.

1:13:03 ↗ field and survey observations indicate

1:13:06 ↗ that most of the long-term on street

1:13:08 ↗ parking nearby is related to adjacent

1:13:11 ↗ residential and business uses not

1:13:13 ↗ transit Parkers most vehicles parked on

1:13:17 ↗ Street in the highlands parked for less

1:13:19 ↗ than two hours outside of the highly

1:13:22 ↗ utilized park and ride garage there is

1:13:24 ↗ abundant parking available in the

1:13:26 ↗ highlands

1:13:26 ↗ both in off street Lots in on street in

1:13:33 ↗ old town approximately 60% of all

1:13:37 ↗ parking is occupied during peak hours

1:13:40 ↗ each day this map illustrates the

1:13:44 ↗ highest occupancy levels during data

1:13:46 ↗ collection this level of parking

1:13:49 ↗ occupancy is similar to what was

1:13:52 ↗ observed in the 2012 parking study a

1:13:55 ↗ common pattern during the busiest part

1:13:58 ↗ of the day has several blocks exceeding

1:14:00 ↗ 90% occupancy in the Old Town core while

1:14:04 ↗ during this time outlying areas with on

1:14:07 ↗ street parking over less than 60 percent

1:14:08 ↗ occupied this figure illustrates on

1:14:15 ↗ street parking by time of day and day of

1:14:18 ↗ week in Old Town and these maps were

1:14:28 ↗ compiled by our consultant team to

1:14:30 ↗ illustrate in general what was happening

1:14:35 ↗ hour by hour on any given day so for

1:14:39 ↗ example looking at Sunday August 19th by

1:14:42 ↗ scrolling through the map this is

1:14:45 ↗ between 8:00 to 9:00 a.m. 9:00 to 10:00

1:14:50 ↗ a.m. you can see the changes over time

1:14:55 ↗ within the old town and this is Sunday

1:15:00 ↗ 19th it had lower levels of activity but

1:15:02 ↗ you can still see peak activity

1:15:06 ↗ happening later on in the day it do you

1:15:12 ↗ have a question about the maps you asked

1:15:16 ↗ us to hold our questions yeah I bet I

1:15:17 ↗ see councilmember hunt yeah

1:15:25 ↗ okay for perspective we compared these

1:15:35 ↗ findings with downtown cores in other

1:15:36 ↗ cities Redmond and Everett experienced

1:15:39 ↗ occupancy rates slightly higher than

1:15:41 ↗ Issaquah Bend Oregon averages peak

1:15:44 ↗ occupancy periods on weekdays that reach

1:15:46 ↗ roughly 73% Everett employs an extensive

1:15:51 ↗ parking management program while Redmond

1:15:53 ↗ takes a moderate approach with parking

1:15:55 ↗ management employing diamond parking to

1:15:57 ↗ enforce time limits data collectors

1:16:04 ↗ observed a low number of violations

1:16:06 ↗ within the study area as reflected on

1:16:09 ↗ this slide this is a relatively low

1:16:12 ↗ level of violations and for context from

1:16:16 ↗ 2015 to 2018 the police department

1:16:18 ↗ averaged 109 infractions per year in Old

1:16:21 ↗ Town through request based enforcement

1:16:25 ↗ citywide the Police Department averaged

1:16:28 ↗ 340 parking infractions during the same

1:16:31 ↗ period not only did we collect

1:16:39 ↗ quantifiable parking data we also

1:16:42 ↗ surveyed over a hundred parking users to

1:16:45 ↗ better understand parking behavior

1:16:47 ↗ surveys were tailored to each

1:16:49 ↗ stakeholder and were collected online

1:16:51 ↗ and in-person by city staff staff

1:16:56 ↗ surveyed 288 Transit riders in the

1:16:59 ↗ highlands and 132 at the Transit Center

1:17:01 ↗ between 7:00 to 10:00 a.m.

1:17:05 ↗ findings demonstrated that six people

1:17:08 ↗ parked on street instead of within a

1:17:10 ↗ transit agency owned facility before

1:17:13 ↗ catching a bus most riders at the sunset

1:17:17 ↗ Way bus stop walked or wheelchair to the

1:17:19 ↗ stop

1:17:20 ↗ if commuters could not find a space in

1:17:23 ↗ one of the park and ride garages the

1:17:25 ↗ primary backup plan was to drive to

1:17:28 ↗ another park and ride that fills up

1:17:29 ↗ later

1:17:30 ↗ these findings are similar to what King

1:17:33 ↗ County observed with surveys conducted

1:17:36 ↗ earlier this summer across

1:17:38 ↗ entire park-and-ride network in other

1:17:40 ↗ words most transit patrons do not park

1:17:44 ↗ on street to catch a bus for the senior

1:17:50 ↗ center most patrons drive and park near

1:17:52 ↗ the center about 42 percent reported

1:17:56 ↗ having to park more than a block away

1:17:58 ↗ from the center several survey comments

1:18:01 ↗ noted the need for more lighting along

1:18:02 ↗ creeks way more ad a accessible parking

1:18:06 ↗ and more parking for the center in

1:18:08 ↗ general in surveying city staff we

1:18:13 ↗ learned nearly 90% of staff drive alone

1:18:16 ↗ to work which is common for a suburban

1:18:17 ↗ based employer the majority of staff

1:18:20 ↗ parking immediately in front of their

1:18:22 ↗ destination and in the survey there was

1:18:25 ↗ a note of difficulty finding parking

1:18:27 ↗ midday and the need for secured and

1:18:30 ↗ well-lit parking for police personnel

1:18:35 ↗ finally of the 76 commuters surveyed at

1:18:38 ↗ the sunset way bus stop adjacent to City

1:18:40 ↗ Hall seven people reported driving and

1:18:43 ↗ parking nearby the vast majority of

1:18:46 ↗ people walk bike and are dropped off to

1:18:48 ↗ reach this bus stop now we turn our

1:18:55 ↗ attention to the options based on these

1:18:57 ↗ findings parking management near the

1:19:01 ↗ Issaquah Transit Center and Highland's

1:19:02 ↗ Park and Ride is less of a necessity due

1:19:05 ↗ to the lack of on street parking and the

1:19:07 ↗ fact that transit patrons do not tend to

1:19:10 ↗ park on street in the transit center

1:19:13 ↗ area Council may consider staff to

1:19:16 ↗ provide education about the Tibbets

1:19:18 ↗ Valley East and West Lots educate

1:19:21 ↗ businesses and enforce existing code

1:19:23 ↗ requirements that prevent long term

1:19:25 ↗ storages of vehicles on Wall Street and

1:19:28 ↗ third staff could monitor Sound Transit

1:19:31 ↗ parking permit program and reassess if

1:19:34 ↗ parking spillover changes for the

1:19:41 ↗ Hyland's council could consider signing

1:19:43 ↗ or painting curbs in front of more

1:19:45 ↗ frequently blocked fire hydrants this is

1:19:48 ↗ not a major problem but it would

1:19:51 ↗ immediately read

1:19:52 ↗ the roughly seven vehicles observed who

1:19:54 ↗ regularly parked in front of hydrants

1:19:56 ↗ long-term staff could continue to

1:19:59 ↗ monitor on street utilization every

1:20:01 ↗ other year

1:20:01 ↗ if parking is routinely over the

1:20:04 ↗ eighty-five percent threshold for

1:20:07 ↗ several hours a day time limits may

1:20:09 ↗ become at that time appropriate staff

1:20:13 ↗ could clarify city standards regarding

1:20:15 ↗ employee parking with businesses and

1:20:17 ↗ track King County's parking permit

1:20:20 ↗ initiative staff in our consultant team

1:20:27 ↗ developed two options to provide more

1:20:29 ↗ parking management in Old Town so the

1:20:33 ↗ first option is really focused on

1:20:35 ↗ education outreach and signage it does

1:20:38 ↗ not include enforcement this is an a

1:20:43 ↗ relatively low-cost option where parking

1:20:48 ↗ information will be provided via signs

1:20:50 ↗ website information in social media

1:20:52 ↗ campaigns it recognizes that parking is

1:20:56 ↗ busy in some locations but generally

1:20:58 ↗ available within a three to five minute

1:20:59 ↗ walk of any location in Old Town about

1:21:04 ↗ 285 parking stalls were available area

1:21:08 ↗ wide even at the busiest of times during

1:21:10 ↗ the data collection effort there are

1:21:14 ↗ benefits to waiting and coordinating

1:21:16 ↗ with the forthcoming wayfinding plan

1:21:17 ↗ ongoing facility needs assessment and

1:21:20 ↗ the city's strategic plan though it does

1:21:22 ↗ not include parking restrictions staff

1:21:26 ↗ believe option 1 yields more efficient

1:21:27 ↗ use of the existing on-street parking

1:21:29 ↗ resources with future opportunities to

1:21:32 ↗ collect reassess and then take action

1:21:38 ↗ option 2 is a pilot project to install

1:21:41 ↗ and enforce through our parking time

1:21:43 ↗ limits from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on

1:21:46 ↗ the busiest blocks in Old Town outlined

1:21:49 ↗ here in the map this option recognizes

1:21:52 ↗ that Old Town has adequate parking

1:21:54 ↗ supplies with limited parking

1:21:56 ↗ availability in the core the three-hour

1:21:59 ↗ time limit is based on data collection

1:22:01 ↗ findings to limit the number of affected

1:22:04 ↗ Parkers

1:22:06 ↗ 80% of Parker's in Old Town were

1:22:09 ↗ observed to park for less than three

1:22:12 ↗ hours so that's how we came up with the

1:22:13 ↗ three hour time limit however time

1:22:16 ↗ limits would cause Parkers to be pushed

1:22:18 ↗ outside of the core area in favor of

1:22:20 ↗ creating convenient short-term parking

1:22:23 ↗ availability if time limits are enforced

1:22:29 ↗ in the downtown core employees will

1:22:31 ↗ likely be displaced from the black box

1:22:35 ↗ to the red blocks red block phases have

1:22:39 ↗ over a hundred and seventy spaces free

1:22:41 ↗ even if all of the blocks were at their

1:22:45 ↗ occupancy every hour so these outlying

1:22:48 ↗ blocks most likely will will handle this

1:22:51 ↗ potential shift of parking for option

1:22:57 ↗ two enforcement is going to be a

1:22:59 ↗ critical component to its success as

1:23:01 ↗ parking parking users disregard time

1:23:04 ↗ limits without a disincentive

1:23:06 ↗ additionally time limits would require

1:23:08 ↗ numerous signs going up in Old Town

1:23:11 ↗ which could affect the aesthetic

1:23:13 ↗ character of the area we estimate for

1:23:19 ↗ private enforcement initial costs of

1:23:22 ↗ roughly $200,000 with 167 thousand

1:23:26 ↗ dollars per year and ongoing expenses

1:23:29 ↗ alternatively if we did in-house

1:23:33 ↗ enforcement program we estimate initial

1:23:35 ↗ expenses of three hundred and sixty

1:23:38 ↗ eight thousand with one hundred and

1:23:39 ↗ thirty nine thousand ongoing per year

1:23:47 ↗ once we outline the options resulting

1:23:50 ↗ from the data collection effort we

1:23:51 ↗ turned our efforts to gauge community

1:23:55 ↗ support in an online open house so we

1:23:58 ↗ wanted to get the community sentiment

1:24:00 ↗ regarding these potential options a

1:24:03 ↗ total of 227 responses were received an

1:24:08 ↗ overall respondents supported option 1

1:24:10 ↗ not supporting option 2 and the lack of

1:24:14 ↗ option 2 really was most pronounced when

1:24:17 ↗ the community was asked whether

1:24:19 ↗ city resources on parking management and

1:24:21 ↗ enforcement in Old Town is a high

1:24:23 ↗ priority overall sentiment was no in

1:24:30 ↗ between options 1 & 2 are other actions

1:24:33 ↗ council may want to consider

1:24:35 ↗ individually or in combination

1:24:38 ↗ so for option 3 based on the findings

1:24:43 ↗ the city is positioned to wait and

1:24:45 ↗ evaluate there is no capacity issue in

1:24:48 ↗ Old Town or around the park and rides

1:24:51 ↗ there are no pressure points that were

1:24:53 ↗ identified in the study areas that

1:24:55 ↗ incite the need for immediate parking

1:24:56 ↗ management council could delay action in

1:24:59 ↗ in two years to play the same data

1:25:01 ↗ collection methodology and reevaluate in

1:25:04 ↗ 2021 alternatively staff could work to

1:25:08 ↗ encourage more efficient use of

1:25:10 ↗ privately-owned built out parking assets

1:25:13 ↗ in areas adjacent to highly utilized

1:25:15 ↗ parking in Old Town this will maintain

1:25:18 ↗ private parking during business hours

1:25:20 ↗ but activate parking assets after

1:25:24 ↗ business hours thereby adding capacity

1:25:28 ↗ for option 5 council may consider

1:25:31 ↗ creating higher parking space turnover

1:25:34 ↗ in areas close to City Hall the

1:25:36 ↗ Municipal Court the Senior Center in the

1:25:39 ↗ the playground through our time limits

1:25:42 ↗ addressed most visits to these areas

1:25:44 ↗ this would limit the scope of

1:25:46 ↗ enforcement but it would shift employee

1:25:48 ↗ parking a downside staff would have to

1:25:52 ↗ create and manage a daily permitting

1:25:54 ↗ program for visitors parking for more

1:25:57 ↗ than three hours which dilutes the

1:25:59 ↗ effect and effectiveness of creating

1:26:00 ↗ time limits to begin with we wanted to

1:26:07 ↗ outline additional considerations things

1:26:09 ↗ that we've tried to keep our eye on

1:26:11 ↗ while evaluating these five options I'll

1:26:14 ↗ walk through them as briefly as I can

1:26:17 ↗ most staff will need to update chapter

1:26:21 ↗ 10 28 parking regulations of the

1:26:24 ↗ municipal code based on councils

1:26:26 ↗ direction resulting from this study

1:26:31 ↗ the there are two core legal documents

1:26:34 ↗ that we use when we go out and we cite

1:26:38 ↗ infractions for parking we use state law

1:26:41 ↗ and we use the Municipal Code the vast

1:26:45 ↗ majority of citations that are issued

1:26:48 ↗ are a result of state code so we only

1:26:52 ↗ have one to two laws within our

1:26:55 ↗ municipal code that we actually cite

1:26:58 ↗ violations for so should council decide

1:27:02 ↗ to move forward with any of these

1:27:03 ↗ options we would go and look at our

1:27:05 ↗ municipal code and potentially update

1:27:07 ↗ those sections and specifically update

1:27:11 ↗ the violation rate parking violations in

1:27:15 ↗ Issaquah are $26 raising them to forty

1:27:18 ↗ to fifty dollars aligns with other

1:27:20 ↗ neighboring jurisdictions and it

1:27:22 ↗ provides a greater incentive to follow

1:27:24 ↗ the parking regulations currently the

1:27:27 ↗ court fees consume all the current

1:27:30 ↗ violation revenues several survey in

1:27:35 ↗ open house responses noted the lack of a

1:27:38 ↗ DA accessible parking availability near

1:27:40 ↗ the Senior Center very generally one

1:27:44 ↗ accessible stall is required for every

1:27:46 ↗ 25 public parking spaces the parking lot

1:27:49 ↗ between the Senior Center and City Hall

1:27:51 ↗ meets the minimum requirements but this

1:27:53 ↗ doesn't take into account the nature of

1:27:55 ↗ the primary uses of these facilities 4d

1:27:59 ↗ several survey respondents noted low

1:28:02 ↗ level lighting levels between available

1:28:04 ↗ parking and destinations in Old Town

1:28:10 ↗ wayfinding for parking is scheduled as

1:28:13 ↗ part of a larger citywide wayfinding

1:28:15 ↗ effort in 2019 as this project gains

1:28:18 ↗ momentum staff could include information

1:28:20 ↗ on the city chamber in downtown is guava

1:28:23 ↗ sociation web sites outlying on street

1:28:25 ↗ parking availability this is also a

1:28:28 ↗ low-cost way of making it easier for

1:28:30 ↗ people to visit the area currently the

1:28:35 ↗ city is working with a consultant to

1:28:37 ↗ assess municipal work space actions

1:28:40 ↗ resulting from this effort may involve

1:28:42 ↗ municipal parking and shoot

1:28:44 ↗ be considered as parking management

1:28:46 ↗ strategies in old town are evaluated

1:28:49 ↗ this effort may have acknowledged it is

1:28:52 ↗ best practice to provide secured parking

1:28:54 ↗ for the public safety fleet in for

1:28:57 ↗ vehicles privately owned by our police

1:28:59 ↗ officers mg conducting parking counts

1:29:04 ↗ every two to three years will track if

1:29:07 ↗ when and where more extensive parking

1:29:09 ↗ management strategies are necessary and

1:29:11 ↗ using the same methodology that we used

1:29:13 ↗ in this parking study effort is a

1:29:16 ↗ relatively low-cost undertaking and will

1:29:18 ↗ build on the data that we've collected

1:29:19 ↗ in 2018 additionally there's options for

1:29:28 ↗ paid parking which is a management

1:29:31 ↗ strategy that we typically engage after

1:29:34 ↗ time limits have been enforced it would

1:29:37 ↗ likely be revenue neutral due to the

1:29:39 ↗ acquisition operations and maintenance

1:29:41 ↗ costs of these systems however if the

1:29:44 ↗ extent of its quads managed parking

1:29:46 ↗ areas grows to other identifying areas

1:29:49 ↗ like the Highlands or central Issaquah

1:29:51 ↗ long term this could become a revenue

1:29:54 ↗ generator and finally the downtown is a

1:29:59 ↗ quality a shut elect to initiate a

1:30:01 ↗ parking and business improvement area a

1:30:04 ↗ Business Improvement District if

1:30:06 ↗ approved could expand funding for

1:30:08 ↗ increasing public parking supply parking

1:30:10 ↗ enforcement or streetscape improvements

1:30:13 ↗ this funding mechanism requires 60% of

1:30:17 ↗ affected businesses and multifamily

1:30:19 ↗ properties to approve the district it is

1:30:22 ↗ largely self governed by a rate payer

1:30:25 ↗ board so the city could propose could

1:30:28 ↗ not propose what to spend revenue on it

1:30:29 ↗ is up to the rate payers if time limits

1:30:37 ↗ are implemented employees will likely be

1:30:39 ↗ pushed into the surrounding residential

1:30:41 ↗ areas the city could put the framework

1:30:44 ↗ in place for neighborhood initiated

1:30:47 ↗ residential parking zones our PCs can be

1:30:50 ↗ managed in a variety of ways but in

1:30:52 ↗ general it ensures parking availability

1:30:54 ↗ for residents via a residential permit

1:30:57 ↗ with this

1:30:58 ↗ significant cost to the city to manage

1:31:01 ↗ that program and it's just important to

1:31:05 ↗ note that new development in Old Town is

1:31:07 ↗ required to provide dedicated off street

1:31:10 ↗ parking per the city's land use code

1:31:12 ↗ staff expect new development will

1:31:16 ↗ generally increase the overall supply

1:31:17 ↗ reducing pressure on the existing on

1:31:19 ↗ street supply strategies we are not

1:31:23 ↗ recommending it's worth making a final

1:31:27 ↗ note that an employee parking permit

1:31:30 ↗ program will dilute whatever parking

1:31:32 ↗ management strategy council direct staff

1:31:34 ↗ to employ therefore we are not

1:31:36 ↗ recommending it while some survey and

1:31:39 ↗ open house respondents encourage

1:31:41 ↗ publicly owned structured parking as a

1:31:43 ↗ standalone use this would require a

1:31:45 ↗ large investment of taxpayer dollars and

1:31:47 ↗ would likely never be repaid even with

1:31:50 ↗ parking charges I'm happy to answer any

1:31:54 ↗ questions on that

1:31:57 ↗ so my colleague Christopher handed out a

1:32:01 ↗ document a one-pager summary thank you

1:32:06 ↗ for your attention through an extensive

1:32:09 ↗ amount of information what we tried to

1:32:11 ↗ do with this one-page document is to

1:32:14 ↗ just outline questions to help you

1:32:17 ↗ navigate the options before you along

1:32:19 ↗ with the questions here on the slides my

1:32:22 ↗ colleagues and I seek your direction and

1:32:24 ↗ are ready to answer your questions wants

1:32:30 ↗ to kick off alright I will come over

1:32:35 ↗ hunt okay so I I wondered about the

1:32:42 ↗ Municipal Code change option it's not

1:32:46 ↗ it's not specific to these but when

1:32:48 ↗ you're talking about the Municipal Code

1:32:49 ↗ and then talking about how very few of

1:32:51 ↗ most of the enforcement is for the state

1:32:54 ↗ code so could you provide more

1:32:57 ↗ information about what the code change

1:32:59 ↗ would what the impacts expected impact

1:33:03 ↗ of that code changed to our municipal

1:33:05 ↗ code would be sure so chapter 10 28

1:33:09 ↗ outlines the parking regulations

1:33:12 ↗ for the city 10 2020 outlines fines paid

1:33:17 ↗ for parking for over 24 hours

1:33:22 ↗ and so we would potentially reevaluate

1:33:26 ↗ that and determine whether or not right

1:33:28 ↗ now it states within our code that after

1:33:31 ↗ 25th omen violates this law we can

1:33:33 ↗ directly impound their car which seems

1:33:36 ↗ like an aggressive stance to take so we

1:33:41 ↗ would potentially build in some

1:33:42 ↗ additional room or guidance for police

1:33:47 ↗ officers or code enforcement officers

1:33:49 ↗ around that that regulation as well as

1:33:53 ↗ um section 1028 90 which outlines the

1:33:58 ↗ violation penalty it's very general it

1:34:02 ↗ says that a penalty will not be issued

1:34:05 ↗ for more than 250 dollars so we would we

1:34:12 ↗ could per your direction revise that

1:34:15 ↗ section and outline the specific kinds

1:34:19 ↗ of violations that we we have seen

1:34:21 ↗ historically outline it directly within

1:34:24 ↗ our Municipal Code and the associated

1:34:27 ↗ violation rate rather than relying on

1:34:29 ↗ the violation rates set forth by the

1:34:32 ↗ state which are on average $26 hey thank

1:34:38 ↗ you and I have one more question about

1:34:41 ↗ the the Senior Center

1:34:43 ↗ you mentioned that it does meet the

1:34:46 ↗ requirements in terms of having a DA

1:34:48 ↗ compliant parking stalls but then also

1:34:51 ↗ that there was in the survey and talking

1:34:55 ↗ to folks I think there's interest in

1:34:57 ↗ having more more parking that's more

1:35:00 ↗ accessible for people to for patrons of

1:35:03 ↗ the Senior Center so are there options

1:35:07 ↗ that I guess what what are the studies

1:35:11 ↗ recommend what are the recommendations

1:35:12 ↗ coming out of this study in terms of

1:35:14 ↗ those options or what are the city's

1:35:16 ↗ options that they're considering thank

1:35:19 ↗ you for the question we have not

1:35:21 ↗ developed any recommendations regarding

1:35:24 ↗ lighting

1:35:25 ↗ along various walking corridors between

1:35:28 ↗ parking resources and destinations but

1:35:32 ↗ with the coming master planning effort

1:35:34 ↗ from Memorial Park as outlined by the

1:35:36 ↗ park strategic plan that would yield a

1:35:38 ↗ really good opportunity for staff to go

1:35:41 ↗ ahead and look at the photometric assets

1:35:45 ↗ along Creek way and on I believe it was

1:35:48 ↗ Rainier to potentially improve that

1:35:53 ↗ improve that those assets council deputy

1:36:02 ↗ president batise thank you for the

1:36:05 ↗ presentation a lot of good information

1:36:07 ↗ that we're going through so the

1:36:10 ↗ additional options three through five

1:36:11 ↗ that are down at the bottom of the chart

1:36:15 ↗ so those are our different options that

1:36:21 ↗ could be even added on to option one or

1:36:25 ↗ two so for example if when we're talking

1:36:28 ↗ about in option 1 wayfinding and that

1:36:31 ↗ kind of thing the private public private

1:36:34 ↗ partnership option could be added on to

1:36:39 ↗ option 1 isn't it an additional Avenue

1:36:43 ↗ to to try to help with parking in that

1:36:48 ↗ way is that correct yes correct

1:36:50 ↗ trying to make sure I'm understanding

1:36:51 ↗ and then with the 3 hour parking limit

1:36:55 ↗ what was the end time on that again

1:36:58 ↗ there were times associated with that

1:37:01 ↗ what time does it end in 10 a.m. to 8

1:37:03 ↗ p.m. 8 p.m.

1:37:05 ↗ yep so based on our observations and and

1:37:08 ↗ any of my colleagues please feel free to

1:37:10 ↗ chime in we observe that parking peak

1:37:14 ↗ midday and between 5 & 7 p.m. but in

1:37:20 ↗ general if we have a three hour time

1:37:23 ↗ limit people parking at 5:01 p.m. would

1:37:26 ↗ have no issue through the duration of

1:37:28 ↗ the evening people parking beforehand

1:37:30 ↗ would have have have a problem and would

1:37:34 ↗ have to move their car to not exceed the

1:37:37 ↗ three hour time limit

1:37:38 ↗ and enforcement would have to account

1:37:41 ↗ for that and was there discussion around

1:37:44 ↗ other time limits like a four-hour time

1:37:47 ↗ limit or you know some some cities have

1:37:49 ↗ - some are longer that three hours

1:37:54 ↗ tended to be what what you were seeing

1:37:56 ↗ in mining the data we we were able to

1:38:00 ↗ observe that based on vehicle turnover

1:38:03 ↗ in Old Town that most vehicles in fact

1:38:06 ↗ 80% of vehicles would stay for less than

1:38:09 ↗ three hours so that's how we landed on

1:38:11 ↗ the three hour number to essentially not

1:38:13 ↗ disrupt the majority of people coming to

1:38:16 ↗ Old Town thank you so first a general

1:38:25 ↗ question are there a DEA implications

1:38:29 ↗ you talked about you know the average

1:38:32 ↗ walk is a three minute walk you then

1:38:34 ↗ talked about number of stalls for folks

1:38:38 ↗ who you know disability stalls but is

1:38:45 ↗ there some ad8 guidance in terms of as

1:38:47 ↗ you get a higher fraction of your stalls

1:38:50 ↗ being used if only 10% of your stalls

1:38:53 ↗ are a DEA compliant and 85% of your

1:38:56 ↗ stalls are loaded up then you get to a

1:38:58 ↗ point where somebody who's looking for

1:39:00 ↗ an ad a stall is gonna have a long haul

1:39:02 ↗ to the between their where their parking

1:39:05 ↗ in their destination so just 88 give

1:39:07 ↗ guidance in this so look at the slide in

1:39:14 ↗ front of you outlines the the federal

1:39:17 ↗ requirements for 88 stalls which gets

1:39:20 ↗ back to the one per 25 spaces and I my

1:39:25 ↗ colleague can I think speak a little bit

1:39:27 ↗ more to your question yeah so on street

1:39:31 ↗ parking is treated a little bit

1:39:33 ↗ differently by a DA it's not per se that

1:39:36 ↗ you have to have a certain number of

1:39:38 ↗ stalls unless you have specific marked

1:39:42 ↗ spaces on street so if you were to go

1:39:44 ↗ out and mark each individual space you

1:39:46 ↗ would have to have this number of stalls

1:39:49 ↗ per block or block face

1:39:52 ↗ but when they're not marked when it's

1:39:53 ↗ just one big box like is the quiz

1:39:55 ↗ parking is there's no specific

1:39:57 ↗ requirements I do think it's important

1:40:00 ↗ to provide a TA stalls where you can but

1:40:03 ↗ there's no specific ratio like there

1:40:06 ↗ would be if there were individual stalls

1:40:07 ↗ and there it was past work by Public

1:40:11 ↗ Works for the city that looked at

1:40:12 ↗ whether it would make sense to change

1:40:14 ↗ from marking a big block or marking a

1:40:17 ↗ big box for parking versus marking

1:40:19 ↗ individual stalls and you actually get

1:40:21 ↗ more capacity by just marking that big

1:40:22 ↗ box because people can kind of move

1:40:24 ↗ around shorter cars can park closer so

1:40:29 ↗ right it's it seems a little

1:40:33 ↗ counterintuitive right if I was somebody

1:40:36 ↗ who needed to Nady a stall and you know

1:40:40 ↗ parking was 85 percent full and so the

1:40:42 ↗ nearest we don't I guess we don't have

1:40:45 ↗ it is a d8 gun we don't badge anything

1:40:48 ↗ 88 down ton v8 compliant there are a TA

1:40:53 ↗ stalls near back right behind City Hall

1:40:56 ↗ and that parking lot and some of the

1:40:58 ↗ more off street feeling stuff along the

1:41:01 ↗ train depot but on street there is no ad

1:41:04 ↗ a stalls it's something that cities are

1:41:07 ↗ starting to consider more Seattle has

1:41:10 ↗ just had to implement things they kind

1:41:14 ↗ of got a letter from the FHWA that said

1:41:15 ↗ hey you should be providing on street

1:41:17 ↗ stalls since you have a paid parking

1:41:19 ↗ program so that's something that as you

1:41:21 ↗ met more they do require more

1:41:23 ↗ PDA require 88 provisions okay thank you

1:41:27 ↗ so those are the first two my four

1:41:29 ↗ questions

1:41:29 ↗ the next is can you two slide 25 sure

1:41:42 ↗ question here okay so I was a little

1:41:49 ↗ confused about

1:41:51 ↗ he's awareness about Tibbets Valley Lots

1:41:54 ↗ okay so that's a lot you're showing

1:41:57 ↗ there plus what's the other the other

1:42:01 ↗ lot did Lots plural so that's what the

1:42:06 ↗ East and West Lots so there's a there's

1:42:09 ↗ a second parking lot on the east side of

1:42:13 ↗ tibbitt valley park where people park

1:42:15 ↗ who use the park yes yes that under an

1:42:20 ↗ agreement with sound transit dating back

1:42:25 ↗ to 97 that it is designated for transit

1:42:29 ↗ parking spillover from the garage okay

1:42:32 ↗ and it is not utilized by transit

1:42:35 ↗ Parker's about it okay

1:42:36 ↗ slide 32 please so you made a statement

1:42:43 ↗ that respondents preferred option one

1:42:46 ↗ not option two Joe many numbers for that

1:42:51 ↗ yes so

1:43:11 ↗ so we we organized the online open house

1:43:15 ↗ on a Likert scale of one to five one

1:43:18 ↗ being strongly disagree five being

1:43:20 ↗ strongly agree when option one was

1:43:24 ↗ presented as whether or not it was a

1:43:26 ↗ good short-term strategy respondents

1:43:29 ↗ replied three point five six on average

1:43:33 ↗ that means that they generally agree

1:43:35 ↗ with this statement that option two

1:43:48 ↗ that one was it different questions we

1:43:55 ↗ asked on that one for option two we

1:43:56 ↗ asked will it make it easier to park in

1:43:58 ↗ Old Town that was two point nine eight

1:44:00 ↗ the one that really made it clear that

1:44:03 ↗ it wasn't a higher priority for people

1:44:04 ↗ was when we asked about spending city

1:44:06 ↗ resources on it own enforcement and that

1:44:09 ↗ was a two point five so you're kind of

1:44:12 ↗ with all of these kind of like er

1:44:13 ↗ questions you're kind of tending toward

1:44:14 ↗ the middle but that kind of that break

1:44:17 ↗ line of three is exactly neutral so yeah

1:44:20 ↗ on the one that was three point six

1:44:21 ↗ versus two point nine what was the

1:44:23 ↗ standard deviation on that I do not know

1:44:25 ↗ but I could pull it for you that's not I

1:44:27 ↗ mean you're approaching the point where

1:44:28 ↗ you know I think you said they strongly

1:44:30 ↗ preferred option one and it's not really

1:44:34 ↗ I mean you're you're getting to the

1:44:35 ↗ point where the data doesn't seem to

1:44:39 ↗ support that statement it depends on

1:44:43 ↗ what the standard deviation is right if

1:44:46 ↗ it's super noisy data then yeah so it

1:44:50 ↗ was pretty clear just looking at the

1:44:52 ↗ spending city resources it was very

1:44:54 ↗ clearly that one I I get and that had a

1:44:57 ↗ larger difference between the option one

1:44:59 ↗ in the option two you can answer it

1:45:02 ↗ later if you'll get back to new that I

1:45:03 ↗ would appreciate it

1:45:05 ↗ another the last one is slide 38 so

1:45:11 ↗ these things were there's like an order

1:45:14 ↗ of magnitude difference in quoted metric

1:45:16 ↗ driving me nuts right because it's I

1:45:20 ↗ can't it can't be right I mean that

1:45:24 ↗ can't be that you know it's it was is a

1:45:27 ↗ hundred and Sammamish is is twenty right

1:45:30 ↗ there's some actual cost for per parking

1:45:33 ↗ stall and this number every year this

1:45:35 ↗ number goes up what I'd like to request

1:45:38 ↗ is that and I really the fundamental

1:45:40 ↗ point of your presentation is that we

1:45:41 ↗ don't have a parking problem and so we

1:45:43 ↗ don't need structured parking but

1:45:44 ↗ nonetheless these sorts of things I get

1:45:47 ↗ super skeptical about so what I'd like

1:45:49 ↗ to ask is some sort of analysis of

1:45:51 ↗ recent parking structures in King County

1:45:54 ↗ particularly in East King County to

1:45:56 ↗ understand what the actual costs have

1:45:58 ↗ been

1:45:59 ↗ for recent gentleman said I understand

1:46:00 ↗ tent has won that's an outlier right

1:46:02 ↗ that's a huge number but you know we

1:46:06 ↗ can't you know using n of one is just

1:46:09 ↗ and it's just management that you do so

1:46:11 ↗ this is not going to answer your

1:46:12 ↗ question of getting to actual numbers

1:46:15 ↗ but I can give a little bit of insight

1:46:16 ↗ on why those vary so widely so something

1:46:19 ↗ like the library garage where it's

1:46:21 ↗ literally two levels it's almost at

1:46:24 ↗ ground level you know it's just digging

1:46:26 ↗ down a little bit going up a little bit

1:46:27 ↗ that's going to that's gonna be on the

1:46:32 ↗ $20,000 range versus if you're looking

1:46:34 ↗ at five stories if you're looking at

1:46:36 ↗ elaborate architectural screening which

1:46:39 ↗ may be required by your design standards

1:46:41 ↗ if you're looking at digging down those

1:46:44 ↗ are the things that get up into that

1:46:46 ↗ hundred thousand dollar thing so you're

1:46:48 ↗ right it is a larger structure that is

1:46:50 ↗ gonna cost $100,000 per stall like I

1:46:52 ↗ can't like a sound transit park-and-ride

1:46:53 ↗ garage but it really just depends on

1:46:56 ↗ what you want to build one of the other

1:46:59 ↗ things that we did think about when we

1:47:00 ↗ thought about whether to suggest a

1:47:02 ↗ structured parking lot is that you're

1:47:05 ↗ gonna have a problem with siting so if

1:47:08 ↗ you site it on one end or the other of

1:47:10 ↗ Oldtown then that's not really going to

1:47:11 ↗ be convenient for everyone the library

1:47:15 ↗ garage as far as we're aware is kind of

1:47:16 ↗ public parking right now and I was just

1:47:18 ↗ looking through my data there are very

1:47:21 ↗ few hours when it goes above sixty

1:47:23 ↗ percent occupancy so if you put another

1:47:26 ↗ parking garage it's probably gonna be

1:47:27 ↗ similar it's not gonna be very highly

1:47:29 ↗ utilized and that's a fairly small

1:47:30 ↗ parking room just fairly small parking

1:47:33 ↗ garage at 89 stalls so just gives you a

1:47:36 ↗ little bit more context on the

1:47:38 ↗ structured parking I think I forgot to

1:47:40 ↗ talk about land you your property costs

1:47:43 ↗ are gonna be the other big thing that

1:47:44 ↗ drives up or down that cost I'd it thank

1:47:47 ↗ you

1:47:49 ↗ questions counts move we're just time

1:47:53 ↗ I was gonna ask a question about

1:47:55 ↗ standard deviation but Tola already

1:47:57 ↗ asked it saying you don't take the wind

1:47:59 ↗ out of your sails I should know the page

1:48:02 ↗ number I'm gonna teach you a trick if

1:48:07 ↗ you just type a number and the hit enter

1:48:09 ↗ it jumps right to that slide so if you

1:48:11 ↗ want to go to slide 2 hit 2 and enter

1:48:13 ↗ you're gonna go slide 38 hit 38 and

1:48:15 ↗ enter it's it's a really nice night

1:48:16 ↗ that's nice yeah thank you number of

1:48:19 ↗ these things and I can say go to slide

1:48:20 ↗ 15 you can go 1 5 enter okay that's

1:48:23 ↗ that's like that and I don't know this

1:48:26 ↗ number because the version I'm looking

1:48:27 ↗ at doesn't have page numbers so I

1:48:29 ↗ apologize the question is about

1:48:30 ↗ enforcement you mentioned in your

1:48:31 ↗ comment it's on this enforcement slide

1:48:33 ↗ and it's about 80 percent to the

1:48:38 ↗ presentation you talk about the total

1:48:41 ↗ number of enforcement citations citywide

1:48:47 ↗ and then in Old Town again I I want to

1:48:52 ↗ ask about senator deviations but I'm not

1:48:54 ↗ what is the significance of reporting it

1:48:56 ↗ that way what's the message there you

1:48:58 ↗ just threw some numbers out but I'm

1:48:59 ↗ curious about this 342 citywide and then

1:49:02 ↗ 109 in Old Town are you saying that is

1:49:07 ↗ there any message there and us are you

1:49:08 ↗ saying that's relatively high is Old

1:49:11 ↗ Town is higher than kind of the rest of

1:49:13 ↗ the city or its lower or it's just like

1:49:16 ↗ the rest of the city sure I'm not sure I

1:49:19 ↗ can answer that question but I'll tell

1:49:21 ↗ you the catalyst for this was at least

1:49:25 ↗ to make sure it was understood that we

1:49:29 ↗ do write citations for these types of

1:49:31 ↗ violations and then I think what would

1:49:35 ↗ be helpful is to just kind of put that

1:49:37 ↗ in the context of overall number of

1:49:39 ↗ citations that the police department

1:49:41 ↗ writes in a given year so that you can

1:49:44 ↗ understand how frequent that happens I

1:49:47 ↗ think it was also a good metric for us

1:49:51 ↗ to have in order to understand the cost

1:49:55 ↗ equation for implementing a program and

1:49:58 ↗ what sort of cost recovery we might have

1:50:02 ↗ on such a program but if your question

1:50:05 ↗ is more about

1:50:06 ↗ do we see more violations in one area

1:50:10 ↗ versus another and does the data reflect

1:50:14 ↗ batters or something else going question

1:50:17 ↗ we'd have to ask okay our Police

1:50:20 ↗ Department I'm not asking you to see

1:50:21 ↗ something in the data that's not there

1:50:23 ↗ you answered my question you say okay we

1:50:26 ↗ do citations and here's what it is in

1:50:28 ↗ this area and whether this is what it is

1:50:29 ↗ city city wide but these are all

1:50:35 ↗ reported right this we since we don't do

1:50:37 ↗ the enforcement someone's got to call in

1:50:40 ↗ that's correct in part our Police

1:50:43 ↗ Department of course can do what we call

1:50:46 ↗ self-initiated activity and if they see

1:50:48 ↗ evaluation they will write a ticket but

1:50:52 ↗ by nature of these violations a lot of

1:50:57 ↗ them are complaint driven violations

1:51:00 ↗ those calls come in to the police

1:51:01 ↗ department and as we have the resources

1:51:05 ↗ available we go out and investigate and

1:51:07 ↗ take action okay the last question on

1:51:13 ↗ slide 32 oh you're so close to the

1:51:20 ↗ residents employees and then customer /

1:51:23 ↗ visitors so many stakeholders involved

1:51:28 ↗ in this particular area especially on

1:51:30 ↗ Front Street our business owners

1:51:32 ↗ property owners are they in this were

1:51:35 ↗ they part of this as well I mean you

1:51:37 ↗ don't have a category for them and your

1:51:38 ↗ numbers only add up to 200 and there's

1:51:41 ↗ 227 people who are dissipated I'm just

1:51:43 ↗ because because there is some other

1:51:45 ↗ information this idea of that stall

1:51:48 ↗ right out in front of my door that's

1:51:49 ↗ easy for someone to come and go really

1:51:51 ↗ quickly I can see how special uses would

1:51:55 ↗ be perceived as beneficial to a small

1:51:57 ↗ business owner because they're so gonna

1:52:00 ↗ move that are dependent upon say on

1:52:02 ↗ street parking but I'm not I don't know

1:52:04 ↗ if that voice is included in this open

1:52:08 ↗ house data okay so this is essentially a

1:52:12 ↗ self identical identical that category

1:52:16 ↗ led to these categories

1:52:18 ↗ we after we had all of our dating data

1:52:22 ↗ and findings we went out and we we

1:52:25 ↗ formulated these these options we

1:52:27 ↗ revisited meetings that we had with

1:52:29 ↗ stakeholder groups and Christopher

1:52:31 ↗ Wright met with the downtown is a koala

1:52:33 ↗ sociation a week prior to us launching

1:52:37 ↗ the three week long online open house

1:52:39 ↗ and so we provided them all the

1:52:43 ↗ information we provided you and

1:52:45 ↗ encouraged them to participate in the

1:52:48 ↗ the online open house yeah we do know

1:52:56 ↗ that there were some business owners

1:52:57 ↗ that did answer the survey but in

1:52:59 ↗ addition to that in meeting with the

1:53:01 ↗ Downtown Association in the merchants

1:53:04 ↗ downtown we really wanted to hear what

1:53:06 ↗ they had to say cuz this is obviously

1:53:08 ↗ highly impactful to them and so what we

1:53:12 ↗ did find when we went back and kind of

1:53:15 ↗ presented the initial findings of the

1:53:17 ↗ data the data that we presented it was

1:53:20 ↗ compelling to them it comes down to then

1:53:24 ↗ whether you know your definition of a

1:53:27 ↗ problem right and that comes down to how

1:53:29 ↗ far are people willing to walk and so

1:53:33 ↗ the downtown businesses you know upon

1:53:37 ↗ talking about the data and the findings

1:53:39 ↗ when you present them with the fact that

1:53:41 ↗ there is a decent amount of parking

1:53:44 ↗ within a three to five minute walk you

1:53:48 ↗ know the data backs it up and then just

1:53:50 ↗ even logically when people stop and

1:53:51 ↗ think about it and think about okay yeah

1:53:53 ↗ I guess there is you know within a

1:53:55 ↗ quarter mile there is plenty of parking

1:53:58 ↗ but again whether that is acceptable or

1:54:02 ↗ reasonable to ask your customers to walk

1:54:05 ↗ that far that's where we start to get

1:54:07 ↗ different opinions and that's why you

1:54:10 ↗ know in our survey and I can't remember

1:54:12 ↗ if it Matt mentioned this or not but 70

1:54:17 ↗ percent of the respondents said that it

1:54:19 ↗ was reasonable to walk three to five

1:54:23 ↗ minutes to the site that you're visiting

1:54:25 ↗ they either agreed or strongly agreed

1:54:28 ↗ with that and later that

1:54:31 ↗ compelling and so then what we need to

1:54:35 ↗ do is to kind of reconcile people I

1:54:39 ↗ think it's a problem that it's not a

1:54:40 ↗ problem we just want to make sure that

1:54:42 ↗ that parking that is within a three to

1:54:44 ↗ five minute walk is easy to find and

1:54:46 ↗ that that walk that three to five minute

1:54:49 ↗ walk is as pleasurable and as safe as it

1:54:55 ↗ can possibly be all right thank you for

1:54:58 ↗ that and I did find compelling that

1:54:59 ↗ argument this idea if I'm gonna go park

1:55:01 ↗ whether it be a block or three blocks

1:55:04 ↗ away or after many turns and I've maybe

1:55:08 ↗ lost my way a little bit I got to find

1:55:10 ↗ my way back to my ultimate destination

1:55:12 ↗ to knowing that that's gonna be a safe

1:55:14 ↗ walk that that there's gonna be a good

1:55:16 ↗ walkable surface that there's gonna be

1:55:18 ↗ lighting sunsets

1:55:21 ↗ you know it's approaching four or 45 or

1:55:23 ↗ Sun you know today you know with our

1:55:25 ↗ days are getting longer but we all know

1:55:26 ↗ that so that has an overlap I think

1:55:28 ↗ especially when you talk about in the

1:55:30 ↗ old town area some over that spillover

1:55:31 ↗ could be you know those things that

1:55:32 ↗ isn't true everywhere and we kind of

1:55:35 ↗ know that so I think that's a if if we

1:55:40 ↗ were to do more and I'm in favor of this

1:55:45 ↗ you know somehow making those more

1:55:49 ↗ remote locations easy to find and to get

1:55:54 ↗ to and fro from then misil for the the

1:56:00 ↗ safe routes to do that I mean I'm in

1:56:03 ↗ favor that and I'm really looking

1:56:05 ↗ forward to your answer to toll those

1:56:07 ↗ questions about you know the data thank

1:56:13 ↗ you Matt thank you

1:56:15 ↗ I was a deputy president batiste so I

1:56:19 ↗ just wanted to ask a couple more

1:56:21 ↗ questions about option one in terms of

1:56:24 ↗ the wayfinding and branding initiative

1:56:26 ↗ scheduled for 2019 so and you remind me

1:56:30 ↗ we don't we don't have costs associated

1:56:33 ↗ with the wayfinding and branding here

1:56:35 ↗ and then we also talked about evaluating

1:56:38 ↗ lighting and that could mean adding

1:56:42 ↗ additional lighting so we we don't have

1:56:43 ↗ any costs associated with option one so

1:56:46 ↗ could you speak to both of those issues

1:56:49 ↗ I know we've been talking about

1:56:52 ↗ wayfinding and branding for quite some

1:56:55 ↗ time and and so I'm just I'm curious

1:56:59 ↗ about the timing of when we could go

1:57:02 ↗ forward and the costs associated with

1:57:04 ↗ that okay this fall city team came

1:57:11 ↗ together and a departmental team came

1:57:13 ↗ together to initiate work on a city

1:57:17 ↗ wayfinding and branding effort funds

1:57:20 ↗ were secured through the budget process

1:57:22 ↗ of two hundred and fifty thousand

1:57:24 ↗ dollars to kick off the study work of

1:57:27 ↗ that project so analyze a citywide

1:57:30 ↗ wayfinding program and revisit the city

1:57:33 ↗ the city's branding language and design

1:57:38 ↗ that's part of that effort because the

1:57:40 ↗ two essentially go hand-in-hand it was

1:57:43 ↗ planned as part of that effort that in

1:57:45 ↗ the first quarter of 2019 this group

1:57:49 ↗ would go out with a request for a

1:57:50 ↗ proposal with the design being to do the

1:57:54 ↗ work and initiate the study in 2019 so

1:58:00 ↗ does that provide some context however

1:58:02 ↗ the this wouldn't this be really an

1:58:05 ↗ added element I mean we we've been

1:58:08 ↗ talking about wayfinding and branding

1:58:11 ↗ within a city in general and so we've

1:58:15 ↗ talked about that during budgeting but

1:58:16 ↗ this is really a whole added element I'm

1:58:19 ↗ assuming that it would come with

1:58:21 ↗ additional cost well I'll just add

1:58:25 ↗ briefly and let and

1:58:27 ↗ moonspeak but when we think about

1:58:30 ↗ wayfinding it it's multimodal it's not

1:58:33 ↗ just strictly wayfinding for trails or

1:58:36 ↗ wayfinding for pedestrians or bikes or

1:58:38 ↗ buses or visitor's it's it's the whole

1:58:43 ↗ gambit and so we already anticipated

1:58:46 ↗ when we requested funding that a core

1:58:48 ↗ component of the wayfinding effort the

1:58:50 ↗ wayfinding and branding effort would

1:58:51 ↗ include parking what Matt said it's

1:58:58 ↗ gonna be part of this I guess my

1:59:00 ↗ question yeah that that I mean it makes

1:59:02 ↗ sense I'm just wondering if it's to the

1:59:04 ↗ level of what would be impactful in

1:59:08 ↗ terms of choosing option one and this is

1:59:11 ↗ our vision going forward and and it just

1:59:14 ↗ seemed like it was taking it up another

1:59:16 ↗ step ratcheting that up and seemed to

1:59:19 ↗ sure suit me potentially involve more

1:59:23 ↗ cost but yeah I think we have ample

1:59:26 ↗ budget to get the work done it's more

1:59:28 ↗ than just a study it's actually coming

1:59:31 ↗ up with as matt described the the

1:59:34 ↗ language they look in the field it's

1:59:36 ↗ also coming up with a plan in terms of

1:59:39 ↗ where in our geography we want this kind

1:59:43 ↗ of wayfinding to exist whether it's

1:59:45 ↗ virtual or physical or both and then

1:59:48 ↗ actually some funds set aside to start

1:59:51 ↗ doing any physical implementation that

1:59:54 ↗ we need to of the plans so it's not just

1:59:56 ↗ study work it's actual it includes some

1:59:58 ↗ money for implementation our thought

2:00:01 ↗ originally was that we would start on

2:00:04 ↗ the parks side because the parks

2:00:07 ↗ strategic plan also called out the need

2:00:10 ↗ for wayfinding and branding but I think

2:00:14 ↗ our team believes that well we would

2:00:18 ↗ also be able to allocate some budget

2:00:20 ↗ toward the parking system as well okay I

2:00:25 ↗ just wanted to add as part of option 1

2:00:29 ↗ what we have now with this study and all

2:00:31 ↗ of the the data that we collected what

2:00:33 ↗ we have now is information and a kind of

2:00:37 ↗ a new lens that

2:00:38 ↗ can use to look at many different city

2:00:41 ↗ projects not just the wayfinding plan

2:00:43 ↗ but you know the streetscapes plan the

2:00:46 ↗ city's facility plan as Matt mentioned

2:00:49 ↗ when we look at improvements or come up

2:00:52 ↗ with a master plan for Memorial Park you

2:00:55 ↗ know now we know some additional

2:00:57 ↗ information to incorporate into those

2:00:59 ↗ this next year we'll be looking at title

2:01:04 ↗ 18 and the IMC which is the land use

2:01:06 ↗ code and there's a parking chapter in

2:01:08 ↗ there with particular regulations about

2:01:12 ↗ parking in Old Town like I said this

2:01:14 ↗ data that we have is going to be used in

2:01:16 ↗ a lot of different places and then and

2:01:17 ↗ not just in wayfinding but incorporated

2:01:20 ↗ into other city projects as well thank

2:01:23 ↗ you come summer Rae thank you really

2:01:28 ↗ interesting um and then I was spending a

2:01:30 ↗ little bit of time as you were talking

2:01:32 ↗ looking through the customer empower the

2:01:35 ↗ citizen input data and must most of the

2:01:38 ↗ data that council president's looking

2:01:40 ↗ for is in that document if you dig a

2:01:42 ↗ little bit just just a because I found

2:01:45 ↗ it just fascinating because well I guess

2:01:48 ↗ what I'm really struck with is when I

2:01:49 ↗ look at all of the things that you put

2:01:51 ↗ on the table and and I guess what I I

2:01:53 ↗ I'm reading between the lines that

2:01:54 ↗ there's a recommendation in here

2:01:56 ↗ somewhere but to me we kind of said okay

2:02:00 ↗ the park-and-ride is okay because we

2:02:04 ↗ have overflow we're saying the highlands

2:02:06 ↗ park-and-ride is not sufficiently bad

2:02:09 ↗ that it's impacting surface streets so

2:02:12 ↗ we're kind of zooming in and we're

2:02:13 ↗ focusing now on old town and then the

2:02:17 ↗ question becomes okay there is capacity

2:02:19 ↗ an old town it just might not be exactly

2:02:21 ↗ where you want it so then we're going

2:02:24 ↗ into a discussion about okay so what is

2:02:25 ↗ a reasonable circumference of move from

2:02:32 ↗ park to where I park to where I where I

2:02:34 ↗ want to be and then I think there's

2:02:37 ↗ another question there about how to how

2:02:39 ↗ do we create an environment that it

2:02:41 ↗ feels safe to be able to move that three

2:02:44 ↗ to five minute commute from where I park

2:02:49 ↗ to where I want to do business and so if

2:02:51 ↗ I kind of unravel everything that I've

2:02:52 ↗ heard from y'all tonight well I guess

2:02:54 ↗ what it comes down to is there's the

2:02:57 ↗ recommendation is parking today isn't on

2:03:03 ↗ fire and people are not when we

2:03:06 ↗ interview them not not saying that it's

2:03:08 ↗ on fire there's places to park people

2:03:10 ↗ are okay with a certain amount of a can

2:03:12 ↗ walk from where I park an old town to

2:03:15 ↗ where I do business in Old Town I guess

2:03:16 ↗ the only thing that I'm hearing along

2:03:18 ↗ with the wayfinding in and I think

2:03:20 ↗ councilmember winter Stein hit on this

2:03:22 ↗ is how do we create it so it feels safe

2:03:24 ↗ so people feel comfortable because the

2:03:26 ↗ circumference of that commute is fairly

2:03:29 ↗ large and pushes off some of the the

2:03:31 ↗ more well-being trails that being said I

2:03:35 ↗ think that we already fast continue to

2:03:37 ↗ be a fast growing city both in terms of

2:03:39 ↗ residents and people who do business

2:03:40 ↗ here and in businesses and this could

2:03:42 ↗ change very very quickly so I think

2:03:44 ↗ there's a need to continue this this is

2:03:47 ↗ should be an ongoing thing that we look

2:03:49 ↗ at but I think in this short term what

2:03:53 ↗ we need to do is figure out how do we

2:03:54 ↗ create a safe environment within

2:03:57 ↗ front street in the old town area so

2:04:00 ↗ people feel comfortable in walking from

2:04:02 ↗ where they park to where they need to do

2:04:03 ↗ business and I think we need to do that

2:04:05 ↗ regardless of parking all right so we

2:04:12 ↗ are roughly between this and

2:04:14 ↗ councilmember council meeting hours in

2:04:17 ↗ appointment my perception that we may

2:04:19 ↗ our energy level may not be as high as

2:04:21 ↗ it was several hours ago so we're

2:04:23 ↗ looking for a sense of the room in

2:04:27 ↗ response to this issue so crisp just

2:04:31 ↗ gave a nice one of six and I'm wondering

2:04:34 ↗ if maybe what we want to do is just sort

2:04:36 ↗ of give our thoughts to what we've heard

2:04:39 ↗ here tonight and then see if that sort

2:04:42 ↗ of sufficient feedback I mean we could

2:04:46 ↗ go through question by question and and

2:04:48 ↗ whatnot but I sort of feel like if

2:04:50 ↗ everybody gave their thoughts the way

2:04:52 ↗ Chris did we'd probably have a pretty

2:04:54 ↗ good sense of the room I'm not seeing

2:04:56 ↗ anyone violently opposed council deputy

2:04:58 ↗ president Matisse

2:05:00 ↗ so I would be I would be interested in

2:05:03 ↗ in going forward with option one I still

2:05:07 ↗ do have a little bit of an outstanding

2:05:09 ↗ question about the when we talk about

2:05:12 ↗ safety so to tag on a little bit to what

2:05:16 ↗ councilmember Rea talked about as we're

2:05:19 ↗ looking at that the lighting that that

2:05:22 ↗ might be needed to provide that safety

2:05:24 ↗ and I would also really like to see just

2:05:28 ↗ in terms of old town and evening parking

2:05:31 ↗ I'd really like to see the the

2:05:35 ↗ public-private partnership piece moved

2:05:38 ↗ up to option one so we could look at

2:05:42 ↗ that in addition to wayfinding and

2:05:45 ↗ branding I I continue to think that that

2:05:49 ↗ is that is a good option something I've

2:05:52 ↗ talked about several times in the past

2:05:58 ↗ right councilmember Goodman thank you I

2:06:05 ↗ do think that the option one is where we

2:06:13 ↗ ought to focus our efforts right now I

2:06:15 ↗ don't think we're quite ready for the

2:06:21 ↗ the time limits I think given that the

2:06:26 ↗ responses that I read were sure time

2:06:28 ↗ limits would be great but not sure but

2:06:32 ↗ we don't want to focus our natural

2:06:34 ↗ resources on that and given that we are

2:06:36 ↗ [Music]

2:06:38 ↗ in our strategic plan right now maybe

2:06:41 ↗ that's something that might keep in mind

2:06:44 ↗ either this time around or next time

2:06:46 ↗ around that we're updating the strategic

2:06:48 ↗ plan after we adopt one

2:06:54 ↗ Thank You members winter Steiner hunt

2:07:00 ↗ it's whatever hunt I agree about option

2:07:05 ↗ one seeming like the way forward

2:07:07 ↗ especially my my interpretation of the

2:07:11 ↗ comments is that three to five minutes

2:07:12 ↗ is acceptable for most people in the

2:07:14 ↗ capacity is there so very high on the

2:07:19 ↗ list of needs would be just to make sure

2:07:20 ↗ that people know about where parking is

2:07:22 ↗ and and the lighting issue I did I did

2:07:28 ↗ like that it's being considered to paint

2:07:31 ↗ the curbs by hydrants I think that

2:07:33 ↗ that's that would be a good a good way

2:07:38 ↗ to make sure that people follow that and

2:07:41 ↗ I think I don't think that it's called

2:07:44 ↗ out in the options but it was in the

2:07:46 ↗ presentation and I know that people park

2:07:49 ↗ in front of them but I think a lot of it

2:07:51 ↗ is just not awareness and and people are

2:07:54 ↗ used to looking at the curbs for where

2:07:55 ↗ they can't park so that makes a lot of

2:07:56 ↗ sense to me and then I am generally in

2:08:00 ↗ favor of option one but I do wonder

2:08:02 ↗ about addressing the Senior Center a

2:08:05 ↗ little bit differently or making sure

2:08:08 ↗ that those needs are addressed to make

2:08:11 ↗ sure that people are able to get to the

2:08:14 ↗ Senior Center especially since that's

2:08:15 ↗ undergoing the that it's it's going to

2:08:18 ↗ be run by the city and just making sure

2:08:21 ↗ that the the parking is adequate for

2:08:24 ↗ that specific use so in that way I'd

2:08:28 ↗ like to see option one maybe with some

2:08:31 ↗ special considerations around how to

2:08:33 ↗ make sure that that particular area

2:08:35 ↗ addresses the needs of patrons of the

2:08:39 ↗ Senior Center that's it

2:08:41 ↗ don't remember winters time thank you

2:08:45 ↗ regarding the parking rights I think

2:08:47 ↗ that the man has been strategy that

2:08:48 ↗ you're recommending is just to continue

2:08:50 ↗ to monitor and so I appreciate having

2:08:52 ↗ the data that is I will tell you that

2:08:56 ↗ not sure I'm surprised but based upon

2:08:59 ↗ comments I've heard over the last couple

2:09:01 ↗ of years I think those results will be

2:09:04 ↗ surprising or

2:09:05 ↗ to many people the large reason we did

2:09:09 ↗ this study was people speaking about the

2:09:12 ↗ perception that we've got serious issues

2:09:14 ↗ so this data

2:09:17 ↗ tells its own tells its own story tells

2:09:19 ↗ a different story so that is that's I

2:09:22 ↗ want to make sure that we get this

2:09:24 ↗ properly communicated and and I don't

2:09:26 ↗ know what that looks like but there is

2:09:28 ↗ there is a significant number of people

2:09:32 ↗ within the city who have that perception

2:09:35 ↗ and and you know we we responded we did

2:09:38 ↗ something about it we collected data and

2:09:40 ↗ this is important and I think generally

2:09:43 ↗ people want it they want to know the

2:09:44 ↗ facts they want to be informed they

2:09:47 ↗ don't want to go just on anecdotal data

2:09:48 ↗ we have this available and let's make

2:09:50 ↗ sure that that's accessible I don't know

2:09:52 ↗ what that looks like but I do know that

2:09:54 ↗ there's perceptions out there that's

2:09:56 ↗ different than what the data says and as

2:09:58 ↗ far as for as far as the old town I

2:10:00 ↗ think I would yes I you can infer what I

2:10:03 ↗ said earlier I'm in favor of of what is

2:10:06 ↗ being recommended here I with while I'm

2:10:08 ↗ going to challenge you however I think

2:10:10 ↗ this is my own perception is to talk

2:10:13 ↗ about maybe a three minute walk is one

2:10:16 ↗ thing to park to where then to your

2:10:18 ↗ destination I think to talk about five

2:10:20 ↗ minute walk is actually something

2:10:22 ↗ significantly more and especially if you

2:10:25 ↗ know the street grid around this area

2:10:27 ↗ it's not obvious it's not like well just

2:10:32 ↗ go to more blocks that way and then two

2:10:34 ↗ more blocks the other way it isn't and

2:10:37 ↗ so the it's one thing to have distance

2:10:40 ↗ it's another to know the distance and

2:10:42 ↗ the length of the walk I think three and

2:10:43 ↗ five are actually quite different

2:10:44 ↗ numbers I know if you know I think that

2:10:48 ↗ would make a difference for me if I

2:10:49 ↗ can't get something really close you

2:10:51 ↗ know you know five minutes seems like a

2:10:54 ↗ long time and I might come back at a

2:10:55 ↗ different time but but but I think that

2:10:59 ↗ just highlights the fact in your maps

2:11:01 ↗ there that showed the blocks that you

2:11:02 ↗ studied in all of that you just look at

2:11:04 ↗ that grid you know what's going on there

2:11:05 ↗ it's not a real easy place to just go

2:11:09 ↗ explore and find what needs to be needs

2:11:12 ↗ to be found so I think the actual

2:11:14 ↗ threshold for customers for patrons that

2:11:17 ↗ want to go places if it's a quick

2:11:19 ↗ if it's something where they're gonna

2:11:20 ↗ spend a little bit more time I think

2:11:23 ↗ that's a little bit easier but we do

2:11:24 ↗ have a lot of businesses that are

2:11:25 ↗ dependent upon walk-up business and and

2:11:27 ↗ they don't they're not necessarily a

2:11:29 ↗ food establishment where they're gonna

2:11:31 ↗ spend some time so III my sense is the

2:11:34 ↗ sensitivity does change I'm going to

2:11:36 ↗ continue to you know talk to people

2:11:38 ↗ about that but I think gearing it more

2:11:41 ↗ toward the three minute threshold and

2:11:44 ↗ everything that we can do to I think the

2:11:49 ↗ comment was made about public-private I

2:11:50 ↗ think that's you have this example

2:11:52 ↗ picture in here for a Wells Fargo Bank I

2:11:54 ↗ don't think that's in Issaquah know yeah

2:11:57 ↗ it's too bad we couldn't have one of our

2:11:59 ↗ do any of those exist in Issaquah the

2:12:01 ↗ great if there could have been an

2:12:02 ↗ example here in town if such

2:12:04 ↗ partnerships exist my gosh let's take

2:12:06 ↗ pictures of those and put them up so we

2:12:08 ↗ know or mark them somehow or pursue them

2:12:11 ↗ so that comment that was made earlier by

2:12:13 ↗ one of my colleagues about

2:12:14 ↗ public-private partnerships

2:12:15 ↗ you know that's we've all seen that

2:12:18 ↗ especially if you like go to the theater

2:12:20 ↗ around that time look at all these empty

2:12:21 ↗ lots can I park there can I now I'm not

2:12:23 ↗ really sure the sign says no but boy

2:12:25 ↗ it's empty and there's nobody working

2:12:27 ↗ there and if those are if we have

2:12:28 ↗ business owners that are actually

2:12:30 ↗ amenable to that then we should

2:12:31 ↗ absolutely enlist them in this program

2:12:34 ↗ Thanks

2:12:35 ↗ great there are there are a.m. just to

2:12:40 ↗ just to respond to that there are a

2:12:41 ↗ handful of lots that we've kind of

2:12:43 ↗ looked at that are near high utilization

2:12:45 ↗ parking on Street in Old Town and an

2:12:48 ↗ example would be to target outreach with

2:12:51 ↗ the Edward Jones lot as they have a

2:12:55 ↗ decent number of spaces roughly 20

2:12:57 ↗ spaces which are almost completely

2:12:58 ↗ unused on weekends and evenings so I'm

2:13:04 ↗ gonna go with the body that that

2:13:07 ↗ obviously option one is the direction we

2:13:08 ↗ want to go in a couple of thoughts I

2:13:10 ↗ still I have a nagging fear that there's

2:13:15 ↗ a bigger picture that we might be

2:13:17 ↗ missing which is that I think that there

2:13:21 ↗ may well be sort of an equilibration

2:13:25 ↗ point that you get where yeah you've got

2:13:29 ↗ you know at peak around 85%

2:13:33 ↗ use because you know at some point if

2:13:36 ↗ you get closer to a hundred percent use

2:13:38 ↗ people stop coming to downtown because

2:13:41 ↗ they know traffic is so bad right and so

2:13:43 ↗ hard to hide parking I personally don't

2:13:46 ↗ go to Seattle most evenings because it's

2:13:48 ↗ such a pain in the butt to find parking

2:13:50 ↗ and I don't go into downtown Issaquah

2:13:53 ↗ all that much in the evenings I prefer

2:13:55 ↗ to go to North bender Snoqualmie where

2:13:57 ↗ there's where it's easier to find

2:13:58 ↗ parking and so I think there's people

2:14:00 ↗ like that and so I I do you know we're

2:14:02 ↗ gonna we're gonna do this option one but

2:14:04 ↗ I do I do and just have this nagging

2:14:06 ↗ fear in the back of my mind that if

2:14:07 ↗ somehow people felt like it was easy to

2:14:10 ↗ find parking in downtown we might have

2:14:13 ↗ more people downtown and our businesses

2:14:14 ↗ might benefit I don't know how to get

2:14:16 ↗ our arms around that as an idea the

2:14:19 ↗ second thing is I think we should

2:14:20 ↗ definitely monitor some of these

2:14:23 ↗ standards the three minutes standard you

2:14:25 ↗ know come up with an idea of what

2:14:27 ↗ fraction of people we want to have be

2:14:29 ↗ able to be no more than three minutes

2:14:30 ↗ from where they're going and and revisit

2:14:33 ↗ this on a regular basis maybe regular

2:14:35 ↗ basis is once a year maybe it's once

2:14:37 ↗ every two years I don't I don't know but

2:14:39 ↗ you know take this data and say we're

2:14:41 ↗ gonna put a flag in the in the ground

2:14:43 ↗ and we're gonna say that as long as it

2:14:44 ↗ stays below this number we're gonna we

2:14:47 ↗ think things are probably okay the third

2:14:48 ↗ thing is I want to just do a plus one on

2:14:51 ↗ the questions around lighting and I

2:14:53 ↗ think it's particularly an issue because

2:14:55 ↗ we get so much rain you have this weird

2:14:58 ↗ thing where it's like it's dark and it's

2:15:00 ↗ super rainy and your situational

2:15:02 ↗ awareness just sort of shrinks to right

2:15:04 ↗ around you and you just feel like I'm

2:15:06 ↗ not as aware of what's going on further

2:15:08 ↗ away from me because I can't see it very

2:15:10 ↗ well and because it's raining so we have

2:15:12 ↗ this sort of particular thing

2:15:13 ↗ particularly in winter when it's darker

2:15:15 ↗ anyhow so the idea of investigating how

2:15:18 ↗ we can do lower cost but effective and

2:15:21 ↗ non-obtrusive lighting would be a good

2:15:22 ↗ conversation have just a couple

2:15:27 ↗ follow-up quick comments first of all

2:15:29 ↗ actually the parking situation in the

2:15:33 ↗ Old Town area actually almost never

2:15:37 ↗ prevents me from going there when I want

2:15:40 ↗ to any day of the week at various

2:15:43 ↗ different times so my point is

2:15:46 ↗ is simply that what's here and what's

2:15:50 ↗ available and how well it meets my needs

2:15:51 ↗ is worth it even if if the parking isn't

2:15:54 ↗ for convenient for me when I have to

2:15:56 ↗ drive secondly I'm looking forward to at

2:16:01 ↗ least for the Squawk Mountain when the

2:16:04 ↗ public transit becomes available because

2:16:08 ↗ this is something my wife and I have

2:16:09 ↗ discussed before and we did we talked

2:16:11 ↗ about it with our neighbors and friends

2:16:13 ↗ as well that boy you know there'll be a

2:16:15 ↗ time you'll be able to pull up your

2:16:16 ↗ smartphone or make a phone call say I

2:16:19 ↗ need a ride here and then you can get

2:16:21 ↗ that ride home and I'm interesting this

2:16:24 ↗ it'll be interesting to see if those

2:16:26 ↗ numbers will be significant enough to to

2:16:29 ↗ help make more parking stalls available

2:16:34 ↗ to people who don't have that convenient

2:16:37 ↗ and low-cost option available to them

2:16:39 ↗ which is like is coming to squawk

2:16:41 ↗ Mountain you know what I'm talking about

2:16:42 ↗ Matt no ok well it's going to be in

2:16:45 ↗ partnership with Metro and it's it's we

2:16:49 ↗ got a presentation a few months ago and

2:16:53 ↗ both the talus neighborhoods and squawk

2:16:55 ↗ Mountain neighborhoods are going to be

2:16:56 ↗ they're going to get some new public

2:16:58 ↗ transit service and it might be on

2:16:59 ↗ demand and and it will be the kind of

2:17:04 ↗ rates we're used to for public transit

2:17:06 ↗ as opposed to private taxis or uber or

2:17:10 ↗ lyft or something like that public

2:17:12 ↗ transit type costs for trips that begin

2:17:14 ↗ or end on squawk mountain or talus and

2:17:17 ↗ it'll be a real good option especially

2:17:19 ↗ for nighttime entertainment evening

2:17:21 ↗ times for those residents

2:17:23 ↗ thanks for sharing other comments see

2:17:29 ↗ the administrator moon do you have what

2:17:30 ↗ you need from us yes I think we do thank

2:17:33 ↗ you very much

2:17:34 ↗ all right just real quick council

2:17:37 ↗ president just have a standard deviation

2:17:39 ↗ we'd like to share with you yeah so

2:17:41 ↗ which which question would you like the

2:17:43 ↗ standard deviation for unaware the one

2:17:45 ↗ the answer for option one was three

2:17:46 ↗ point six and the answer for option two

2:17:48 ↗ was two point nine so the one that was

2:17:50 ↗ three point six the standard deviation

2:17:52 ↗ on that was one point one three and the

2:17:54 ↗ other one that was two point nine eight

2:17:56 ↗ is 1.13 alright and I couldn't make that

2:17:59 ↗ up effect right because it's all done by

2:18:00 ↗ technology statistician would tell you

2:18:04 ↗ then then the help me what's it what's

2:18:08 ↗ worth it what's the term I'm looking for

2:18:10 ↗ the relevance is not high on this right

2:18:12 ↗ yeah the significance thank you that's

2:18:16 ↗ our apologies if we did overstate that

2:18:17 ↗ it is you know resident or respondent

2:18:20 ↗ slightly favored option wonder exactly

2:18:22 ↗ favorite all right one quick follow-up

2:18:26 ↗ for the council members statement about

2:18:28 ↗ transit that is actually something we

2:18:31 ↗ are seeing in our industry with TNCs

2:18:33 ↗ already is that that is reducing the

2:18:35 ↗ need for parking that's happening first

2:18:38 ↗ at airports and hotels where their

2:18:39 ↗ parking revenues are going in the tank

2:18:41 ↗ but that is happening more in downtown

2:18:44 ↗ areas like Seattle and Bellevue and it

2:18:46 ↗ will just continue more likely with

2:18:49 ↗ asthma as less people own cars less

2:18:53 ↗ people on multiple cars parking needs

2:18:55 ↗ may go down in the future so thank you

2:19:00 ↗ for that mathematical clarification

2:19:02 ↗ sheet it any other closing questions

2:19:05 ↗ comments anybody in council all right

2:19:09 ↗ administrator moon going going gone we

2:19:12 ↗ are adjourned thank you

2:19:16 ↗ you

2:19:25 ↗ you

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 (6)

Mariah Bettise

Stacy Goodman

Victoria Hunt

Tola Marts, Mayor Pro Tem

Chris Reh

Paul Winterstein