Transportation Advisory Board · Thursday, July 15, 2021 · City Council Digest

1. CALL TO ORDER

Commission Membership

packet pp.3

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD Staff Liaison Stephen Padua, Senior Transportation Planner About Email Stephen Padua Created in 2017, the board provides additional expertise and advice on the City's Regular Members transportation system and goals. The board is 2022 – Sujata Goel also the lead advisory group on the 2022 – Micah Zeitz-Chua implementation and management of the City’s 2023 – Kristi Tripple Master Mobility Plan (MMP). 2023 – Dave Waggoner 2023 – Joseph Zhang* Membership 2024 – Cynthia Krass The Transportation Advisory Board is 2024 – Janie Walzer comprised of nine regular members, and up to 2025 – Erika Boyd three alternates. All members are appointed 2025 – Tom McDonald by the Mayor and subject to confirmation by the City Council. Terms expire April 30 of the Alternate Members year listed. For more information, 2022 – Jeri Bernstein see IMC 2.92 and Rules & Regulations. 2022…

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of June 17, 2021

packet pp.5–7

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 06-17-21 Transportation Advisory Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Transportation Advisory Board 6:00 PM Virtual Meeting June 17, 2021 MINUTES

4. AGENDA ITEMS

Transportation Improvement Program

40 min · John Mortenson, Transportation Engineering Manager · packet pp.9–26

Topics: Transportation

▶ Watch from 28:21 Open packet at p.9 ↗

Staff report:

AGENDA ITEMS a) JOHN MORTENSON , TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING MANAGER

Strategic Small Capital Projects

Discussion · 30 min · Isabel Diaz, Senior Transportation Engineer · packet pp.27–43

▶ Watch from 1:08:21 Open packet at p.27 ↗

Staff report:

Strategic Small Capital Projects JULY 15, 2021 CITY OF ISSAQUAH TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD

Transit Update

Information · 20 min · Stephen Padua, Senior Transportation Planner · packet pp.45–56

Topics: Transportation

▶ Watch from 1:38:21 Open packet at p.45 ↗

Staff report:

Flexible Transit Services

5. REPORTS

Board Work Plan

packet pp.57

Open packet at p.57 ↗

Staff report:

• Discuss transit system 1/21/21 • Transportation Improvement Program update introduction FEBRUARY AUGUST 2/4/21 • TIP / Mobility Master Plan project 8/19/21 • Transportation Improvement Program prioritization

Staff Report

Chair Report

Youth Report

6. OTHER BUSINESS / ANNOUNCEMENTS

The next meeting is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on August 19, 2021

▶ Watch from 3:26

2887 segments .txt ↗

0:48 ↗ i'm going to suggest we open the meeting

0:50 ↗ unless steven has

0:53 ↗ a suggestion otherwise um sujata will

0:58 ↗ not be

0:59 ↗ here um joseph janie

1:03 ↗ tom jerry looks like julian's

1:06 ↗ on um so i'm gonna suggest we open the

1:10 ↗ meeting and travis i'm gonna um

1:13 ↗ give you i guess i'm gonna say we should

1:16 ↗ do that in

1:17 ↗ after unless there's a chat let me see

1:19 ↗ what it says in the chat here

1:21 ↗ isabel is my right okay um

1:26 ↗ oh and there's tom okay um

1:30 ↗ well travis i will go ahead and in 10

1:32 ↗ seconds open the meeting unless they

1:34 ↗ hear otherwise

1:37 ↗ just a comment i'm going to turn my

1:38 ↗ video off while i finish my

1:47 ↗ okay so i'm opening the meeting this is

1:50 ↗ the july 15th

1:52 ↗ regular meeting of the issaquah

1:53 ↗ transportation advisory board my name is

1:55 ↗ cynthia cross i'm currently the

1:57 ↗ chair of the board and i'm opening the

2:00 ↗ meeting now

2:01 ↗ and our first item of business is to

2:03 ↗ approve

2:04 ↗ the minutes did everyone have a chance

2:06 ↗ to review the minutes that were

2:09 ↗ submitted with the materials

2:14 ↗ uh i don't see anybody that said no i

2:17 ↗ will

2:18 ↗ um i have oh sorry i have a question

2:21 ↗ about i think i'm counted as

2:22 ↗ an excused absence but i was present i

2:25 ↗ was just having some trouble logging on

2:27 ↗ so i don't know if that

2:28 ↗ needs to be changed it's like a really

2:30 ↗ it's just some small potatoes thing but

2:34 ↗ that's a great question um i'm gonna go

2:37 ↗ ahead and request the staff go ahead and

2:38 ↗ change that and just maybe put um

2:41 ↗ part-time technical difficulties or

2:43 ↗ something just i think it'd be good to

2:45 ↗ note her attendance it's like joseph's

2:48 ↗ here also

2:49 ↗ so that's great thank you thank you

2:52 ↗ all right so anybody uh all those in

2:55 ↗ favor of

2:56 ↗ improving the minutes say i or wave your

2:59 ↗ show me uh hi

3:03 ↗ sorry i just had something pop up on my

3:05 ↗ screen

3:06 ↗ that i did not ask for and it's covering

3:08 ↗ half of you there we go

3:09 ↗ okay i'm not seeing any opposed so i'm

3:11 ↗ gonna consider the minutes approved

3:13 ↗ um we see jerry now too great um

3:19 ↗ uh before we go on and i turn it over to

3:22 ↗ um the staff i'm just gonna say that

3:26 ↗ uh a couple of quick announcements there

3:28 ↗ was a really interesting

3:29 ↗ training for chairs of committees and

3:32 ↗ boards

3:32 ↗ it is a quad that mayor paulie put on

3:34 ↗ and um

3:35 ↗ i've just made a couple of really minor

3:37 ↗ changes but i thought she had some good

3:38 ↗ points and one of them is to recognize

3:40 ↗ alternates

3:41 ↗ so uh we will not have sujata tonight

3:44 ↗ um and so julian of the alternates

3:47 ↗ julian logged on first

3:49 ↗ so that means even though we're not

3:51 ↗ making any decisions tonight

3:52 ↗ if we were to make a decision that would

3:54 ↗ make julian um not an alternate but a

3:56 ↗ regular member for tonight

3:58 ↗ and um i think if we don't

4:01 ↗ see janie then that would make jerry

4:04 ↗ also a regular and of course discussion

4:06 ↗ is all um there is no distinction

4:09 ↗ between a just

4:10 ↗ an alternate and a regular for

4:12 ↗ discussion it would only be relevant if

4:13 ↗ we were voting

4:15 ↗ um so um i guess

4:18 ↗ i hadn't thought about what to do to

4:20 ↗ recognize an alternate if

4:21 ↗ i don't know if somebody who's delayed

4:23 ↗ is going to be joining us that would be

4:25 ↗ genie but

4:26 ↗ um if jenny doesn't join us i would put

4:29 ↗ jerry

4:29 ↗ uh into the regular category anyway um

4:32 ↗ i'd had a couple other minor comments

4:34 ↗ um about ways to encourage everyone

4:37 ↗ to speak and i'll just say now um

4:40 ↗ definitely i think we've been doing a

4:41 ↗ good job using the chat when you have

4:42 ↗ something to say it's best not to put

4:44 ↗ um your substance in the chat because it

4:47 ↗ doesn't get

4:48 ↗ uh recorded in the same way and i will

4:50 ↗ use the chat to call on people

4:52 ↗ but i reserve the right to um change the

4:54 ↗ order

4:56 ↗ the default would be by uh calling

4:57 ↗ people in order in the chat

4:59 ↗ but i would change that up if i feel

5:01 ↗ like we need to hear

5:02 ↗ from some people we hadn't heard from um

5:04 ↗ and with that i will go ahead and

5:06 ↗ turn it over to staff for the first

5:09 ↗ let's see i'm just

5:10 ↗ toggling over to my oh i'm sorry public

5:13 ↗ comment um do we have any public comment

5:15 ↗ this evening it looks like we do have

5:16 ↗ one

5:16 ↗ visitor i think connie marsh is on here

5:21 ↗ keep that from popping up um

5:25 ↗ okay okay uh

5:28 ↗ i do want to speak i see i'm off off me

5:32 ↗ but i have video that's all right

5:35 ↗ can you hear me i can hear you nothing

5:39 ↗ okay good so my name is connors and um

5:43 ↗ i'm to the tour of projects

5:46 ↗ shortly for the title

5:49 ↗ 18 update so i'm gonna be fast

5:53 ↗ as usual and uh you can file

5:57 ↗ these in the agenda order if you

6:00 ↗ remember

6:01 ↗ now i don't understand an update from

6:03 ↗ mayor college

6:04 ↗ uh i heard that in another is that

6:08 ↗ audience com needn't be responded to

6:13 ↗ but for a community member who speaks

6:15 ↗ that sort of puts comments into a void

6:18 ↗ that you never hear any feed con and so

6:22 ↗ that's frustrating i

6:23 ↗ know what a person is supposed to do if

6:26 ↗ they spend

6:27 ↗ their commenting and it's never it's

6:29 ↗ just like goes away

6:31 ↗ i mean sort of like what the point so i

6:32 ↗ didn't really understand that part of

6:34 ↗ the

6:35 ↗ leadership update now to begin so

6:39 ↗ um i see that this talks about man-made

6:43 ↗ projects but uh

6:47 ↗ i feel like concurrency

6:50 ↗ requirements have created a different

6:54 ↗ list of mandated

6:55 ↗ across especially as it pertains to this

6:58 ↗ the sentencing

6:59 ↗ can and so i see there's an

7:03 ↗ item for future projects but

7:06 ↗ i don't understand if these mandated

7:08 ↗ interior

7:09 ↗ projects from the centralisation

7:12 ↗ environmental

7:12 ↗ impact that's the only only reason we do

7:15 ↗ it is we

7:16 ↗ said we would do these projects i'm not

7:18 ↗ sure that you have ever

7:20 ↗ had a discussion of what it

7:23 ↗ means to have a bunch of

7:27 ↗ extensive projects be mended in order

7:31 ↗ to build up the town exactly what the

7:33 ↗ projects are

7:35 ↗ i hope i'm just speaking gibberish

7:39 ↗ okay so i am going to hop

7:43 ↗ forward in the gaps conversation

7:48 ↗ i i s the little match you're supposed

7:51 ↗ to be using to

7:52 ↗ understand where the city shows gaps

7:56 ↗ i think i think a super greed and then

7:58 ↗ went to see if there were corresponding

8:01 ↗ projects

8:02 ↗ for those gaps

8:05 ↗ and i was unable to match

8:08 ↗ the potential list of projects with the

8:12 ↗ gaps and so when i'm trying to figure

8:14 ↗ out

8:15 ↗ which gaps we should fill

8:19 ↗ and i have sort of a memory of it but i

8:21 ↗ found that very hard

8:23 ↗ uh and i can't i can't imagine anybody

8:25 ↗ else to do that

8:27 ↗ successfully easily so if there could be

8:30 ↗ a map

8:30 ↗ of the project and then then a

8:32 ↗ discussion of of whether a

8:34 ↗ new project okay

8:37 ↗ probably um and then i want to emphasize

8:42 ↗ again

8:42 ↗ that the lane language shows us

8:46 ↗ for foreign products not

8:49 ↗ prioritized it is just sort of

8:52 ↗ slightly different styles projects

8:55 ↗ right now it's one three four so feels

8:59 ↗ prioritized

9:00 ↗ and um so i just wanted to remind you

9:03 ↗ of that and then i send an email which i

9:06 ↗ assume that you've got um

9:12 ↗ the question

9:16 ↗ is can little red lines that are the

9:20 ↗ gaps on the map he broke up and down

9:23 ↗ into easier to manage projects that can

9:27 ↗ have

9:28 ↗ impact he seemed to have been fed like

9:30 ↗ from the

9:31 ↗ walk-and-roll plan to large projects

9:34 ↗ like the um

9:36 ↗ the mountain drive project where there

9:38 ↗ is

9:39 ↗ basically no sidewalk on nightly walk

9:41 ↗ road and it's a big safety issue

9:44 ↗ some people's only pathway to a park is

9:47 ↗ not connecting

9:48 ↗ a safety issue somehow in your list

9:51 ↗ and uh in the walking plan they said it

9:54 ↗ was a six

9:54 ↗ million dollar pride because they wanted

9:57 ↗ to do bike

9:58 ↗ lanes on both sides as i recall

10:01 ↗ really the main safety issue is just to

10:04 ↗ people to walk safely their neighborhood

10:08 ↗ road now the only way to walk safely is

10:10 ↗ the short shortcut a cemetery

10:12 ↗ which the park steps to park doesn't

10:14 ↗ like and so

10:16 ↗ as the example and that project broken

10:20 ↗ down to something way smaller to address

10:23 ↗ a large neighborhood safety concern and

10:26 ↗ i would like to understand

10:28 ↗ um how that type of a good conversation

10:31 ↗ for a myriad of those projects that's on

10:34 ↗ red squiggly

10:36 ↗ map and then

10:41 ↗ that's it look at that i hope that was

10:44 ↗ too horrifying and enjoy eating i am

10:47 ↗ going to go walk in sunshine

10:49 ↗ bye y'all thank you connie

10:55 ↗ okay any other public comment

10:59 ↗ and it would isabelle have the

11:02 ↗ um list i don't think we have um

11:05 ↗ access to the non-panelists

11:08 ↗ i don't see anyone else

11:12 ↗ joining in okay well when we get back

11:15 ↗ together in person in september it'll be

11:16 ↗ a lot easier to see if there's people i

11:18 ↗ want to speak and we won't have to rely

11:19 ↗ on technology

11:20 ↗ and i um i want to just acknowledge that

11:24 ↗ it was

11:24 ↗ um challenging to follow because um

11:28 ↗ the um connie was definitely breaking up

11:31 ↗ and we were struggling a little bit with

11:32 ↗ that

11:33 ↗ um also try to remember to remind public

11:36 ↗ commenters that

11:37 ↗ we have chosen for this board to limit

11:39 ↗ comments to three minutes

11:41 ↗ um anyway uh so now we're moving on to

11:44 ↗ regular business um it looks like

11:47 ↗ steven is up um for the tip

11:51 ↗ um unless i'm looking at the wrong well

11:54 ↗ that that's

11:55 ↗ actually john sorry i am looking at the

11:58 ↗ la the wrong i

11:59 ↗ call up another agenda

12:03 ↗ [Music]

12:05 ↗ anyway right thank you

12:16 ↗ thank you very much and

12:20 ↗ stephen or isabel or one of you able to

12:23 ↗ make it so i can share my screen

12:35 ↗ that working no

12:38 ↗ it's not oh wait there it goes

12:42 ↗ perfect lower point

12:46 ↗ b2 there

12:58 ↗ can everyone see my presentation

13:01 ↗ wonderful good evening everyone i'm john

13:04 ↗ mortensen transportation engineering

13:06 ↗ manager

13:07 ↗ and the tab is working through reviewing

13:10 ↗ the

13:11 ↗ projects in the transportation

13:13 ↗ improvement program

13:14 ↗ and this presentation kind of kicks off

13:17 ↗ that process

13:19 ↗ the overview for or the agenda for this

13:22 ↗ presentation

13:24 ↗ are to give an overview of the tip

13:26 ↗ process

13:27 ↗ or the transportation improvement

13:29 ↗ program process that we go through

13:31 ↗ and to talk about the projects and

13:34 ↗ tonight we'll talk about the projects

13:35 ↗ that we just

13:36 ↗ put into the bucket of annual or

13:38 ↗ mandated projects that we're going to

13:41 ↗ review

13:44 ↗ every year the city has puts together a

13:47 ↗ six-year transportation improvement

13:49 ↗ program

13:50 ↗ and as part of that

13:54 ↗ we look at projects that we do every

13:56 ↗ year like the

13:58 ↗ pavement management program and in the

14:02 ↗ mobility master plan it talked about how

14:05 ↗ we would continue with projects that are

14:07 ↗ underway

14:08 ↗ we had another bucket that we called

14:10 ↗ mandated projects and

14:13 ↗ for that bucket we really were looking

14:16 ↗ at

14:16 ↗ projects that from a safety or

14:19 ↗ legal point of view we need to do

14:22 ↗ whether it's

14:22 ↗ upgrading the curb ramps in the city as

14:24 ↗ part of the ada

14:26 ↗ improvements project or

14:29 ↗ replacing the black nugget wall as a

14:31 ↗ safety

14:32 ↗ and then we also have the new priority

14:35 ↗ projects

14:37 ↗ that as part of the mobility master plan

14:41 ↗ we identified projects that are new

14:44 ↗ priorities

14:45 ↗ and these could be existing projects

14:47 ↗ that are have a higher priority now

14:49 ↗ or it could be new projects that were

14:52 ↗ identified in the mobility master plan

14:56 ↗ this process began last month when we

14:59 ↗ talked about

15:00 ↗ the newport way maple to sunset project

15:03 ↗ as a project underway to talk

15:05 ↗ and we discussed the undergrounding of

15:08 ↗ overhead utilities gave an

15:10 ↗ overview of the project and talked about

15:12 ↗ the retaining wall requirements in

15:14 ↗ central esqua

15:16 ↗ this month as i mentioned we're working

15:18 ↗ on the mandated and annual projects

15:22 ↗ next month we'll talk about the future

15:24 ↗ year projects

15:25 ↗ which in a lot of ways is a good time to

15:28 ↗ talk about those projects that are also

15:31 ↗ required by the environmental approval

15:34 ↗ for centralized law that

15:37 ↗ connie commented on that those are

15:39 ↗ projects that

15:40 ↗ we are aware of that they do need to get

15:42 ↗ built as part of the build out for

15:44 ↗ centralistic law

15:45 ↗ and in september we'll continue the

15:48 ↗ discussion

15:49 ↗ and we're going to hold opportunity in

15:52 ↗ october in case we need to

15:54 ↗ continue the discussion then

15:59 ↗ for the projects that we classified as

16:01 ↗ annual or mandated

16:04 ↗ we're not going to talk about doing any

16:06 ↗ changes to the pavement management

16:08 ↗ program or the concrete maintenance

16:10 ↗ program

16:11 ↗ that those ones are follow

16:14 ↗ a lot more of a data driven program

16:18 ↗ where the concrete maintenance program

16:21 ↗ will work on upgrading the curb ramps as

16:24 ↗ part of the pavement management program

16:26 ↗ and also takes care of the high edges on

16:29 ↗ our sidewalks throughout the community

16:32 ↗ the pavement management program that

16:35 ↗ looks at data

16:36 ↗ for the condition of the pavement and

16:38 ↗ the recommended time

16:39 ↗ to do a treatment and

16:42 ↗ for example pretty soon in the city

16:45 ↗ there's going to be a contractor doing

16:46 ↗ some crack billing

16:48 ↗ and then later on this year another

16:50 ↗ contractor will be doing some overlays

16:53 ↗ tonight we're going to talk about the a

16:56 ↗ new project for the city it's called the

16:58 ↗ strategic small capital

17:00 ↗ project this is a project that came out

17:03 ↗ of the city's strategic plan

17:05 ↗ the city's strategic plan one of the

17:09 ↗ things that came out of it is

17:10 ↗ a lot of times we'll have these big

17:12 ↗ expensive ambitious

17:14 ↗ projects but the community has a strong

17:16 ↗ desire

17:17 ↗ to make improvements

17:20 ↗ that make a big difference whether it's

17:23 ↗ a sidewalk gap

17:24 ↗ or improving a crossing or making some

17:27 ↗ safety improvements

17:29 ↗ another one of the mandated or annual

17:32 ↗ projects is the ada improvements project

17:35 ↗ and this is one that we don't have

17:37 ↗ budget for this year

17:39 ↗ but next year we're going to be doing a

17:41 ↗ lot of work on the

17:42 ↗ ada improvements we've got the project

17:46 ↗ and we're going to do some work on our

17:48 ↗ ada transition plan

17:50 ↗ and then for bridge repairs and slide

17:53 ↗ repairs

17:54 ↗ we're not going to change those projects

17:55 ↗ because those are more driven by

17:58 ↗ maintaining the city's assets and

18:02 ↗ safety

18:05 ↗ for the transportation improvement

18:07 ↗ program

18:08 ↗ process that we're going through with

18:10 ↗ the board

18:11 ↗ timing and next steps

18:14 ↗ next month we're going to talk about the

18:17 ↗ future projects and that's one that i'm

18:21 ↗ really looking forward to because i

18:22 ↗ think there's

18:23 ↗ some really good conversations and

18:25 ↗ feedback and

18:27 ↗ that we can get from the board next

18:29 ↗ month

18:30 ↗ for the process to update the tip next

18:33 ↗ year because the

18:35 ↗ 2022 to 2027 tip has been approved

18:41 ↗ in february we'll meet again with the

18:43 ↗ board

18:44 ↗ we'll review the transportation

18:47 ↗ improvement program

18:50 ↗ get the board's feedback on

18:51 ↗ recommendations and then work with

18:53 ↗ council to get the

18:56 ↗ the tip adopted again next year

19:00 ↗ and that concludes my presentation

19:15 ↗ so i assume john that you're ready to

19:16 ↗ take questions

19:18 ↗ yes um go ahead and put um

19:24 ↗ is my chat functioning properly um

19:27 ↗ does anybody have any questions looks

19:29 ↗ like julian

19:30 ↗ um has a hand up uh am i missing uh

19:34 ↗ it's yeah i don't know where to put the

19:36 ↗ hand up uh

19:37 ↗ thing no um actually i prefer to you to

19:40 ↗ put it in the chat

19:41 ↗ i just was not seeing anything in the

19:43 ↗ chat

19:44 ↗ and i want to make sure i wasn't missing

19:46 ↗ i was seeing some other earlier chats

19:48 ↗ um tom has a question um

19:51 ↗ and i think julian had his hand up

19:54 ↗ uh julian why don't you go first and

19:56 ↗ then tom

19:58 ↗ and then julian just tell me for my own

19:59 ↗ technical keeping up did you

20:01 ↗ put anything in the chat or just i just

20:03 ↗ saw your hands

20:06 ↗ um yeah that's fine um i do prefer the

20:10 ↗ chat just because it's easy for me to

20:11 ↗ track but

20:12 ↗ that's fine you go ahead go ahead julian

20:14 ↗ so uh john clarifying question

20:16 ↗ does the pavement slash concrete

20:19 ↗ maintenance also include

20:21 ↗ structural repairs of the road you know

20:23 ↗ the base issues that

20:26 ↗ these roads have

20:30 ↗ sort of as part of the pavement

20:32 ↗ management program

20:34 ↗ they'll do full depth pavement repairs

20:36 ↗ but if a road gets

20:38 ↗ to a point where it's really bad

20:41 ↗ it's best to just rebuild it and have a

20:44 ↗ separate project

20:45 ↗ instead of trying to incorporate into a

20:48 ↗ smaller project that

20:49 ↗ tries to mostly do overlays so that

20:53 ↗ i guess to answer your question there's

20:55 ↗ a line at some point where the pavement

20:57 ↗ management program would take care of it

20:59 ↗ and once the roadway condition gets

21:03 ↗ bad enough then you'd want to have a

21:04 ↗ full reconstruction of the road

21:07 ↗ and this would presumably not just fit

21:09 ↗ into small capital

21:10 ↗ projects or can you say that again

21:14 ↗ i need to put my headphones on a little

21:16 ↗ better

21:17 ↗ this would fit into small capital

21:20 ↗ projects

21:20 ↗ or you know what we're talking about

21:22 ↗ today

21:26 ↗ are you for your question are you

21:29 ↗ talking

21:30 ↗ still about the pavement management

21:31 ↗ stuff or like if it needed to be

21:34 ↗ rebuilt or you just yeah it's a new

21:36 ↗ general built it's a need

21:38 ↗ then that wouldn't be the small capital

21:40 ↗ project it would be

21:42 ↗ its own capital project and

21:56 ↗ tom sorry it's okay i just want to make

22:00 ↗ sure that uh

22:01 ↗ that so uh

22:04 ↗ i think what i hear is you know once it

22:06 ↗ becomes beyond the

22:08 ↗ payment rehab is basically becomes its

22:09 ↗ own project and it becomes a more of a

22:11 ↗ capital project as opposed to the

22:13 ↗ the annual or mandated projects

22:17 ↗ and the question is for today for a

22:19 ↗ purpose of today are we going to look at

22:21 ↗ any of these

22:22 ↗ annual or mandated to have any blessing

22:26 ↗ on those or a concurrence on those or

22:28 ↗ that or moral sleep just just to kind of

22:30 ↗ prepare us of the

22:33 ↗ step in the process

22:37 ↗ um my headphones were kind of quiet can

22:39 ↗ you repeat the question

22:42 ↗ sure um um i think i guess my question

22:45 ↗ for today

22:46 ↗ for today's meeting you know we're

22:47 ↗ talking about the annual mandated

22:49 ↗ projects

22:50 ↗ is it anything that we're going to look

22:51 ↗ at and review and

22:53 ↗ give concurrence or have questions on or

22:55 ↗ is that this kind of more of update that

22:57 ↗ uh that those are just ongoing

23:01 ↗ more of just an update that those are

23:03 ↗ ongoing that

23:04 ↗ tonight's big discussion to get the tabs

23:07 ↗ feedback is for prioritizing

23:10 ↗ small improvements as part of the small

23:12 ↗ strategic capital project

23:19 ↗ and that's part of the tip project

23:21 ↗ review coming up in

23:24 ↗ yeah it's a small strategic capital it's

23:27 ↗ it's it's own project but it's a project

23:30 ↗ that has a lot of flexibility

23:32 ↗ where it doesn't have a defined

23:35 ↗ location it's to go throughout the city

23:38 ↗ where there's need

23:40 ↗ which is why we're really wanting the

23:42 ↗ feedback from the tab because

23:44 ↗ i think you guys have a good deal for

23:46 ↗ where we should prioritize the

23:48 ↗ money in that project that's my other

23:50 ↗ question is there's a list of projects

23:51 ↗ and we'd look at

23:52 ↗ would help prioritize which one should

23:54 ↗ be done first which ones are more

23:55 ↗ critical

23:55 ↗ okay yes i'm good

23:59 ↗ thanks

24:03 ↗ so i'm not saying any other questions

24:04 ↗ but i think part of it is because i'm

24:06 ↗ not hearing

24:07 ↗ the staff asking us to weigh in about i

24:10 ↗ mean the

24:11 ↗ the document that's a table of six is

24:13 ↗ pretty straightforward

24:15 ↗ and then the time dedicated um

24:18 ↗ after we hear from isabel for the small

24:21 ↗ capital project

24:22 ↗ is essentially one of the projects on

24:24 ↗ that table i myself

24:26 ↗ spend a lot of time trying to sort

24:27 ↗ through and figure out you know what i'm

24:28 ↗ looking at and what i'm being asked to

24:29 ↗ respond to

24:30 ↗ so um i

24:34 ↗ had a discussion and i should be

24:37 ↗ not asking this question because i

24:39 ↗ already met with staff about this but

24:41 ↗ now i'm trying to figure out why we

24:42 ↗ dedicated 40 minutes

24:43 ↗ to this part of the meeting and i was

24:46 ↗ getting confused so i guess my question

24:47 ↗ is to either isabel or

24:49 ↗ john um it sounded like you didn't need

24:53 ↗ any more for us

24:53 ↗ on 4a but help remind me why we

24:57 ↗ dedicated 40 minutes to 4a it may have

24:59 ↗ been because i thought we were

25:00 ↗ people would probably just have a

25:02 ↗ tendency to want to chew on some of that

25:03 ↗ stuff a little bit

25:05 ↗ um but that's not really where we're

25:07 ↗ directing the

25:08 ↗ tabs attention so maybe

25:11 ↗ um if we if we want somebody can remind

25:14 ↗ one of you can remind me

25:16 ↗ why we dedicated all that time and if

25:18 ↗ you've gotten what you need on 4a

25:23 ↗ cynthia uh we just missed to update the

25:25 ↗ agenda when we first

25:27 ↗ discussed uh the items on the agenda

25:29 ↗ this was going to be

25:31 ↗ a discussion item but then uh as we

25:34 ↗ prepare for this meeting

25:35 ↗ uh we changed it to be an

25:38 ↗ informational item okay

25:42 ↗ so we probably didn't need 40 minutes

25:43 ↗ i'm not missing something i just kept

25:45 ↗ thinking i was missing a big piece of

25:46 ↗ content um but it sounds like we just

25:48 ↗ yeah i didn't catch that so it sounds

25:50 ↗ like

25:51 ↗ um uh so maybe you can just before we

25:54 ↗ move on

25:55 ↗ tell us there is that

25:59 ↗ um appendix b future year projects

26:03 ↗ um and i'm sure like most of us

26:09 ↗ i spent a little time just looking

26:11 ↗ through it and understanding it a lot of

26:12 ↗ these are familiar

26:13 ↗ um maybe just wrap up by telling us kind

26:16 ↗ of what we should be doing in our minds

26:18 ↗ with those projects

26:19 ↗ that's what we're going to be talking

26:20 ↗ about in the future

26:24 ↗ for the for the 2022 tip

26:33 ↗ i'm going to make sure i'm looking at

26:35 ↗ the so to make sure i understand

26:37 ↗ when peop when i get materials

26:41 ↗ sent to me and i probably should have

26:43 ↗ asked you this before this meeting but

26:45 ↗ um there's a lot of substance in there

26:47 ↗ and i think all of us on the tab are

26:49 ↗ wondering like are we supposed to

26:50 ↗ discuss that later like do you want any

26:53 ↗ you know we haven't taken the time to go

26:55 ↗ through the future projects and so

26:56 ↗ i want to make sure i understand why you

26:58 ↗ included them in the

27:01 ↗ materials to go out to the tab because i

27:03 ↗ don't want us to miss anything

27:05 ↗ or opportunities to discuss or share

27:07 ↗ feedback

27:11 ↗ yeah my comment that i was just posting

27:14 ↗ is uh

27:16 ↗ any questions that people might have on

27:18 ↗ the 4a a and four a b

27:21 ↗ mandate projects in the approved tip

27:24 ↗ projects

27:27 ↗ but that's those two tables are just

27:29 ↗ both for our information if there's

27:30 ↗ anybody that has questions on those

27:34 ↗ well i think isabel is going to give a

27:35 ↗ presentation about this

27:38 ↗ small capital project specifically i was

27:41 ↗ just trying to

27:41 ↗ figure out what we're supposed to be

27:43 ↗ right um right

27:45 ↗ now i thought i'm sorry she's going to

27:48 ↗ give a presentation on 4b

27:49 ↗ which is a subset of the overall

27:52 ↗ um projects in 4a

27:56 ↗ i'm struggling a little bit with what

27:57 ↗ i'm supposed to be doing with that

27:59 ↗ list of future projects at this time or

28:02 ↗ b

28:02 ↗ right or four no not four b no

28:06 ↗ it's in four a it's in the materials for

28:08 ↗ four a right

28:09 ↗ i call that b because it's there's an a

28:11 ↗ tip and then the b is 20 22 27 that's

28:13 ↗ what i'm calling for i'm sorry

28:14 ↗ the

28:21 ↗ lowercase a is is the first agenda item

28:25 ↗ and there are two uppercase a

28:28 ↗ attachments to 4a

28:30 ↗ that's where the confusion so

28:34 ↗ i'm going to let john answer my question

28:37 ↗ sure so is the i want to make sure maybe

28:40 ↗ i'll just

28:40 ↗ share my slide or screen to make sure

28:43 ↗ i'm looking at the

28:45 ↗ right materials this oops sure

28:49 ↗ is this the one you're asking about no

28:51 ↗ i'm asking about the next one

28:53 ↗ the next one which is for a b

28:56 ↗ or tom's right

29:02 ↗ yep right there

29:07 ↗ oh okay there we go so that

29:10 ↗ is here let me stop sharing my screen

29:14 ↗ just more of a a reference as we keep

29:17 ↗ going through this

29:18 ↗ that way we can have kind of as

29:22 ↗ uh to show that way people can be

29:25 ↗ familiar for each meeting

29:27 ↗ about the complete list of the projects

29:30 ↗ and to give the tab the opportunity to

29:33 ↗ get familiar with stuff

29:35 ↗ and give them more time to prepare for

29:36 ↗ the discussions coming up ahead

29:39 ↗ okay i thought so i just wanted to make

29:41 ↗ sure

29:43 ↗ and um i will just make one

29:46 ↗ small request and that's just make sure

29:48 ↗ the headings i i spent

29:50 ↗ a bunch of time because i kept trying to

29:52 ↗ jot make everything jive and make sure i

29:54 ↗ understood

29:55 ↗ and it took me a while to figure out

29:57 ↗ just to be to attach the

30:00 ↗ the titles and the appendices and like

30:03 ↗ just be

30:04 ↗ make it maybe it's just a tiny bit more

30:05 ↗ idiot proof yeah i mean that might be

30:09 ↗ kind of what you're saying but that

30:11 ↗ might be like a

30:12 ↗ for d and just additional information or

30:16 ↗ you can but i thought it was part of the

30:20 ↗ initial presentation that's why i was

30:23 ↗ asking what we were supposed to do with

30:24 ↗ this additional information

30:28 ↗ i didn't understand why it was in the

30:30 ↗ section 4a

30:34 ↗ but really is really just

30:37 ↗ kind of information just for upcoming

30:40 ↗ projects to keep in mind

30:44 ↗ at the risk of beating this to death i

30:46 ↗ just want to just point out that

30:47 ↗ if you look at the memo it says

30:49 ↗ attachments and it says a

30:51 ↗ and then there's a title and then and

30:54 ↗ especially b

30:54 ↗ and then there's a title um

30:58 ↗ it's not they don't always jive so we

31:00 ↗ just want to tighten that up

31:02 ↗ a little bit um oh thanks for the

31:05 ↗ feedback we'll

31:06 ↗ work on trying to make it more clear for

31:08 ↗ next time i know you guys work really

31:10 ↗ hard to make it clear

31:11 ↗ um i think we're really close but uh

31:13 ↗ just

31:14 ↗ attachment numbers titles make sure

31:17 ↗ things reference each

31:18 ↗ other so we just we know where to direct

31:19 ↗ our attention

31:21 ↗ very good feedback because for a lot of

31:23 ↗ times it makes complete sense to us

31:25 ↗ and then yes that you guys are the true

31:27 ↗ test and

31:29 ↗ thank you yes all right so we've beat

31:31 ↗ that one pretty good let's go ahead and

31:33 ↗ move on

31:34 ↗ to agenda item for

31:37 ↗ a b sorry for b for

31:40 ↗ b unless um anybody had any other

31:44 ↗ questions

31:46 ↗ seeing none go ahead

31:50 ↗ okay enough writer

31:54 ↗ share my screen

31:57 ↗ depend would you me the ability to share

32:01 ↗ my screen

32:13 ↗ all right

32:19 ↗ can you see the beginning of the

32:23 ↗ presentation

32:25 ↗ can you hear me well yes good

32:28 ↗ okay let me know if i need to

32:32 ↗ speak uh louder um

32:36 ↗ so okay so i am isabelle

32:39 ↗ uh i will be speaking about the

32:41 ↗ strategic small

32:42 ↗ capital projects

32:47 ↗ right so as john explained earlier in

32:50 ↗ this

32:50 ↗ year transportation improvement program

32:53 ↗ projects have been

32:54 ↗ classified into five categories there's

32:57 ↗ the annual

32:58 ↗ projects projects underway mandated

33:01 ↗ responsibilities

33:02 ↗ new priority projects and long-term

33:05 ↗ projects

33:06 ↗ we may recall that annual projects are

33:09 ↗ those that meet the requirements to be

33:11 ↗ funded by a program

33:15 ↗ these strategic small capitals projects

33:18 ↗ is a new annual

33:21 ↗ capital improvement program that

33:22 ↗ strategically designs and construct

33:25 ↗ small capital improvements the purpose

33:27 ↗ of this program is to complete near-term

33:29 ↗ connections and efficiencies in the

33:31 ↗ mobility system

33:33 ↗ consistent with the strategic plan

33:35 ↗ mobility goals and objectives

33:37 ↗ the project this project focuses on

33:40 ↗ addressing gaps in the mobility system

33:42 ↗ and implementing

33:43 ↗ small safety improvements

33:48 ↗ as a result from previous discussed

33:51 ↗ discussions we have

33:52 ↗ received feedback from the board in

33:55 ↗ about prioritizing new network gaps

33:59 ↗ connectivity safety and to incorporate

34:02 ↗ equity

34:03 ↗ in the strategic strategic small capital

34:06 ↗ projects list

34:07 ↗ the board identified the need to dive

34:11 ↗ to to provide diversity on in terms of

34:14 ↗ project types and size

34:16 ↗ and would support the allocation of more

34:18 ↗ funding towards implementation

34:20 ↗ of smaller projects after having

34:22 ↗ evaluated those

34:24 ↗ with network gaps identified in the

34:26 ↗ mobility master plan

34:31 ↗ the mobility master plan identifies no

34:34 ↗ walking policies categorized

34:36 ↗ into four tiers so tier one

34:39 ↗ includes enhanced pedestrian facilities

34:42 ↗ on both sides of the roads for arterials

34:44 ↗ and collectors

34:45 ↗ inside central issaquah old town

34:49 ↗ and issaquah highlands neighborhoods

34:52 ↗ tier 2

34:53 ↗ includes standard sidewalks on both

34:55 ↗ sides of the streets

34:57 ↗ inside the streets that are within one

35:00 ↗ quarter of a mile of schools senior

35:03 ↗ centers

35:04 ↗ and public and public community

35:07 ↗ amenities

35:08 ↗ such as hospitals and transit centers

35:13 ↗ also for those local streets that are

35:16 ↗ inside central issaquah old town and

35:18 ↗ issaquah highlands

35:20 ↗ so trt tier 3 includes standard

35:23 ↗ sidewalks on one side of arterials

35:26 ↗ and collectors that are outside of

35:29 ↗ central

35:30 ↗ issaquah oldtown and issaquah highlands

35:33 ↗ and tier four include to lower speed

35:36 ↗ limits to 20 miles per hour or less

35:38 ↗ on local streets including commercial

35:41 ↗ areas outside of central issaquah old

35:44 ↗ town

35:45 ↗ and issaquah highlands it's important

35:47 ↗ that we note

35:48 ↗ that these these tiers although they are

35:51 ↗ categorized

35:52 ↗ by numbers we are not implying any

35:56 ↗ type of priority or ranking systems with

36:00 ↗ these tiers it's just a way to

36:01 ↗ kind of group those policies together

36:09 ↗ um okay i know this map may be a little

36:12 ↗ bit difficult to see

36:14 ↗ through the presentation um but you have

36:16 ↗ those mater on your on your

36:19 ↗ um agenda materials this map is included

36:22 ↗ in the

36:22 ↗ mobility master plan to identify the

36:24 ↗ projects by tier

36:26 ↗ which we could use as a guidance for

36:28 ↗ strategic ball capital projects list

36:31 ↗ to tier 1 projects we can tell right

36:35 ↗ away that tier 1 projects would not be

36:37 ↗ easy

36:38 ↗ nor cheap to construct and there is

36:41 ↗ basically a reason

36:42 ↗ why um uh

36:45 ↗ they they they are included on this list

36:48 ↗ as

36:48 ↗ gaps and and often those would include

36:52 ↗ uh critical areas prevented

36:54 ↗ that would prevent those sidewalks from

36:56 ↗ getting built uh

36:57 ↗ as as we can see in the blue for tier

37:00 ↗ one projects

37:01 ↗ uh actually i'm sorry so now christy has

37:05 ↗ a question and i have a feeling she was

37:07 ↗ um maybe a clarifying thing to answer at

37:09 ↗ this time i'm going to

37:10 ↗ hazard a guess yes i don't see the

37:13 ↗ the the comments she's going to tell me

37:15 ↗ no no no it's okay she sent it to me

37:18 ↗ hey isabel i don't know if this is the

37:20 ↗ right time in your presentation

37:22 ↗ so i apologize for interrupting

37:25 ↗ um i'm curious and and again this it

37:28 ↗ might be

37:29 ↗ too far in the detail in the details

37:33 ↗ but in terms of a tier one project and i

37:36 ↗ know you just talked about

37:37 ↗ critical areas being a level difficulty

37:40 ↗ 17th avenue northwest being labeled as a

37:44 ↗ tier one um

37:49 ↗ i wanted to how do i want to say this i

37:52 ↗ was a little taken aback

37:53 ↗ given the large um pedestrian bridge

37:57 ↗ just to the west on that same road

38:01 ↗ and the huge investment with that and

38:03 ↗ then also knowing that there's another

38:06 ↗ pedestrian bike crossing

38:08 ↗ that event that is on the park strategic

38:11 ↗ plan but also on the tip is the future

38:14 ↗ plan

38:14 ↗ for a crossing at that location as well

38:17 ↗ so it seems like

38:18 ↗ a pretty large investment so i'm

38:20 ↗ wondering is there a policy in the mmp

38:22 ↗ to address those kinds of conflicts

38:25 ↗ potentially

38:27 ↗ does that make sense well yes uh if you

38:31 ↗ could

38:32 ↗ clarify your question about the policy

38:34 ↗ so the reason if

38:35 ↗ just to help you uh with the reason why

38:38 ↗ these are identified as tier one

38:40 ↗ is because we don't have sidewalk on

38:42 ↗ both sides of the street we do have

38:44 ↗ on one side um the pedestrian connection

38:48 ↗ um but we don't have on the east side of

38:50 ↗ that area we don't have any

38:52 ↗ uh pedestrian facilities and if you

38:56 ↗ could help uh

38:57 ↗ sure sure so i'll take that one one step

39:00 ↗ level

39:01 ↗ so in situations where there is um

39:05 ↗ a bridge per se and then also

39:08 ↗ nearby local connectivity is part of the

39:11 ↗ network

39:13 ↗ and there's potentially huge conflicts

39:16 ↗ with the um on on-ramp and the off-ramp

39:21 ↗ right there at that location on the east

39:23 ↗ side

39:26 ↗ it seems that that project is um

39:29 ↗ too much so i'm wondering is there a

39:32 ↗ policy that allows

39:33 ↗ for um that not to happen in a tier one

39:38 ↗ when there's

39:38 ↗ a conflict um

39:44 ↗ can i suggest this is cynthia can i

39:46 ↗ suggest we put a pin in that because i

39:48 ↗ had a similar

39:48 ↗ uh reaction if i'm reading it correctly

39:51 ↗ to the highlands because there's that

39:53 ↗ pedestrian facility that gets you down

39:55 ↗ the hill and i'm wondering if um

39:58 ↗ we should put a pin in that note that

40:00 ↗ unless you smell you want to answer the

40:02 ↗ question

40:02 ↗ um but i think it's pointing out a

40:05 ↗ broader

40:06 ↗ um question which is like where are we

40:09 ↗ at

40:10 ↗ exactly with um

40:14 ↗ yeah with this because um that may not

40:17 ↗ be the only situation

40:18 ↗ and so there may be the need to enhance

40:22 ↗ what we put in the mmp with some

40:24 ↗ interpretation

40:26 ↗ um or some qualifiers and i also had a

40:30 ↗ comment about something that maybe

40:32 ↗ was an interpretation of what we put in

40:33 ↗ the mmp regarding

40:35 ↗ the sidewalk tiers and the mmp policy

40:37 ↗ 4.1 that that

40:39 ↗ came from so um

40:43 ↗ would it be okay christie if we put a

40:44 ↗ pin in that and and then um

40:46 ↗ came back and figure out the best way to

40:47 ↗ discuss it is that okay isabel

40:49 ↗ yes okay

40:58 ↗ sorry we got you off your groove you

41:00 ↗ gotta the screen's not up on our screen

41:02 ↗ anymore

41:03 ↗ the presentation is no longer

41:12 ↗ can you see the presentation yep now we

41:15 ↗ can

41:15 ↗ okay so okay so first of all let me just

41:20 ↗ uh clarify um so these are the

41:23 ↗ tiers identified in the mobility master

41:26 ↗ plan

41:26 ↗ and and we are using this as a guideline

41:30 ↗ to include some projects if we may on

41:34 ↗ the

41:35 ↗ strategic small capitals project list uh

41:39 ↗ with us as cynthia and christy had

41:42 ↗ mentioned before

41:44 ↗ yes you are right about like uh the tier

41:47 ↗ one projects

41:48 ↗ seem like too much to do uh they are

41:51 ↗ and particularly because those are will

41:54 ↗ be including

41:55 ↗ sidewalks on both sides of the road

41:57 ↗ there is a

41:59 ↗ huge uh critical uh there are some of

42:01 ↗ them most of them has

42:02 ↗ critical areas and those are also um

42:06 ↗ con arterials and collectors roads

42:10 ↗ um see i can go

42:13 ↗ uh so i'm sorry

42:18 ↗ so um as we can also see the highest

42:20 ↗ volume of the projects are in tier

42:23 ↗ two uh which are those identified in the

42:27 ↗ magenta color and it's basically because

42:30 ↗ those

42:31 ↗ are projects that would include all

42:34 ↗ other

42:35 ↗ all local roads inside central issaquah

42:38 ↗ old town and issaquah highlands and also

42:41 ↗ those in proximity is to sensitive

42:44 ↗ locations like school

42:46 ↗ close to schools and and senior

42:48 ↗ communities

42:49 ↗ and community centers

42:53 ↗ from among all these neighborhoods

42:56 ↗ we could say that central isa issaqua

42:59 ↗ would be more expensive to construct

43:01 ↗ since we'll need to also include planner

43:03 ↗ strips

43:04 ↗ that's part of our standards to build

43:08 ↗ inside issaquah

43:09 ↗ along with the construction of sidewalks

43:11 ↗ we will need to

43:12 ↗ build planner strips as well

43:16 ↗ so tier 3 includes a few projects you

43:20 ↗ can see

43:21 ↗ here on sr 900 all the way

43:25 ↗ and there's also a few gaps in

43:28 ↗ brown street and inside um

43:32 ↗ old town neighborhood as well

43:36 ↗ so uh tier four is not on this map

43:40 ↗ and that's basically because uh lowering

43:42 ↗ speed limits would involve

43:44 ↗ changes to our code so it's not uh

43:48 ↗ in particular to specific locations

43:58 ↗ we have also identified a list of

44:00 ↗ relatively

44:01 ↗ easy to implement strategic safety

44:04 ↗ improvement projects with the purpose of

44:06 ↗ addressing

44:07 ↗ those needs that are not covered with

44:10 ↗ existing programs

44:11 ↗ and without having to uh

44:15 ↗ to uh invest like significant

44:19 ↗ cost uh investments using and

44:23 ↗ and with using our existing staff um

44:26 ↗ so we have identified four of these

44:28 ↗ projects and i would like to

44:31 ↗ uh note that we have done a change on

44:34 ↗ this slide um

44:36 ↗ and we have because we removed uh the

44:38 ↗ highlands drive and discovery

44:40 ↗ drives top line project as we um

44:43 ↗ confirmed with public works operations

44:46 ↗ that that project in particular was

44:48 ↗ already completed

44:49 ↗ so we deleted that uh project from this

44:51 ↗ list

44:52 ↗ which size it down to four

44:55 ↗ projects inside this this list

44:59 ↗ so one of the projects is the city hall

45:01 ↗ ada

45:02 ↗ route and this project is to clearly

45:05 ↗ identify ada routes

45:07 ↗ and mitigate high edges within city hall

45:11 ↗ lot the next project will be

45:14 ↗ park drive and park drive crosswalk

45:17 ↗ improvements

45:18 ↗ this one is to eliminate parking areas

45:21 ↗ that are blocking pedestrian crosswalks

45:23 ↗ along park drive as you can see in the

45:26 ↗ picture

45:27 ↗ or you might not be able to see it

45:31 ↗ believe it or not

45:32 ↗ behind that minivan there is a crosswalk

45:35 ↗ so you can see that it's a potential

45:36 ↗ hazard to

45:38 ↗ pedestrians using that crosswall

45:46 ↗ 25th avenue and cube would place

45:49 ↗ pedestrian crossing

45:51 ↗ uh project in issaquah highlands is to

45:54 ↗ improve the crossing at the end of

45:56 ↗ kirkwood winner as you can see in this

46:00 ↗ picture here there is a

46:03 ↗ pedestrian ramp right in the middle of

46:06 ↗ the entrance

46:07 ↗ of that water so what we would

46:10 ↗ like to pursue with this project would

46:14 ↗ be

46:14 ↗ uh possibly relocating that crosswalk

46:18 ↗ even a few feet away from

46:22 ↗ from the entrance of the winner would

46:24 ↗ would help with

46:25 ↗ um with the pedestrian

46:28 ↗ routes

46:32 ↗ eastlake samamish parkway and southeast

46:34 ↗ 56th

46:36 ↗ no right led

46:39 ↗ sign this is to install this type of

46:42 ↗ signs that we

46:43 ↗ see on on the slide this is to install

46:47 ↗ an alright turn

46:48 ↗ led blank out signs for is like some

46:51 ↗ amish parkway going southbound

46:53 ↗ and southeast 56 going eastbound

46:56 ↗ to prohibit motorists from turning right

46:59 ↗ when crossing

47:00 ↗ well when the crossing signal for the

47:03 ↗ trail for the east lakes and amsterdam

47:05 ↗ is on and this would provide

47:08 ↗ this would minimize the pedestrian

47:10 ↗ vehicle

47:11 ↗ conflicts so

47:14 ↗ um these type of projects since those

47:18 ↗ projects will uh basically be done

47:21 ↗ in-house uh the main cost for this

47:24 ↗ project would be for materials

47:26 ↗ and the cost for each one would range

47:30 ↗ between

47:30 ↗ five uh two fifteen uh thousand dollars

47:34 ↗ and if we were to implement all of the

47:36 ↗ projects we can

47:38 ↗ think that uh the cost for

47:41 ↗ for all these all these four projects

47:44 ↗ specifically could range between 25 and

47:47 ↗ 30 thousand dollars

47:51 ↗ i see there is a question

47:55 ↗ or a comment in the chat box

47:58 ↗ is now a good time do because should we

48:00 ↗ open up the questions

48:02 ↗ yeah i i put in the point i'll ask them

48:05 ↗ and

48:06 ↗ comment after the presentation yeah i

48:08 ↗ was just wondering isabelle are you

48:10 ↗ ready for that or do you want to

48:12 ↗ continue it

48:13 ↗ well if there's a question now we uh we

48:16 ↗ will provide an opportunity for your

48:18 ↗ feedback if that's

48:20 ↗ the best timing for you but if you have

48:22 ↗ any questions about the slides that we

48:24 ↗ are presenting or any project in

48:26 ↗ particular

48:26 ↗ yeah feel free to uh

48:30 ↗ to provide that question at the time

48:34 ↗ go ahead julian okay well

48:37 ↗ i guess i had a question about the east

48:40 ↗ lake smamish

48:41 ↗ southeast 56. um

48:44 ↗ i'm in chicago right now and i've been

48:46 ↗ observing a ton of these

48:49 ↗ various lights they always the

48:51 ↗ pedestrian lights

48:52 ↗ always turn on i don't know five seconds

48:55 ↗ before

48:56 ↗ the general traffic lights turn on to

48:59 ↗ green

49:01 ↗ would that be something possible to

49:04 ↗ incorporate with this

49:05 ↗ uh no right led side project

49:10 ↗ i know that we uh there has been

49:12 ↗ discussion

49:13 ↗ and it does i i don't have the name for

49:16 ↗ that

49:17 ↗ right now but there has been discussions

49:20 ↗ about uh the possibility of of including

49:23 ↗ this but we have we there will be

49:26 ↗ something like

49:26 ↗ really new for us um but that's

49:29 ↗ something that we can certainly

49:31 ↗ evaluate um

49:37 ↗ because this sort of project would

49:39 ↗ definitely enhance

49:40 ↗ um safety on that on that crossblock it

49:43 ↗ always seems very risky

49:45 ↗ you always have to wait for cars and um

49:49 ↗ and that does help to uh make sure we

49:52 ↗ start providing the pedestrian enough

49:53 ↗ time to cross and

49:55 ↗ and why is always

49:58 ↗ like stay red for the traffic and give

50:00 ↗ the pedestrians a chance to start

50:02 ↗ walking before it

50:02 ↗ turns and that way they're already here

50:05 ↗ in the crosswalk and the way

50:08 ↗ the light turns is that what the delay

50:11 ↗ does

50:13 ↗ i'm i'm sorry tom uh oh no there's a

50:15 ↗ question for julian

50:16 ↗ as far as what he's different in chicago

50:18 ↗ does that give him a chance to be

50:20 ↗ walking across the

50:21 ↗ sidewalk before the green light with

50:23 ↗ vehicles

50:24 ↗ yeah basically what what i've been doing

50:27 ↗ or

50:27 ↗ you know experiencing is i get to start

50:31 ↗ you know five seconds before the people

50:34 ↗ start turning right

50:37 ↗ so i get a lot of headway into the

50:39 ↗ crosswalk

50:42 ↗ yes and stephen just helped me out

50:45 ↗ with the name for that term and is

50:47 ↗ pedestrian lead

50:48 ↗ so they they provide the pedestrian

50:52 ↗ signal phase a couple of seconds before

50:54 ↗ the traffic uh that can

50:58 ↗ also help with uh making sure

51:01 ↗ that the green that we provide to

51:03 ↗ traffic has the least

51:04 ↗ conflict with turning uh with

51:06 ↗ pedestrians

51:10 ↗ and i will share my screen again because

51:13 ↗ somehow it keeps

51:15 ↗ blocking my uh presentation all

51:18 ↗ off and i'll try this again

51:22 ↗ can you see thank you jumping away

51:26 ↗ can you see the presentation

51:29 ↗ yes okay great oh is there any other

51:33 ↗ questions before i

51:35 ↗ move on looks like there's a few

51:39 ↗ comments and questions you're um i'm

51:41 ↗ going to suggest you just i think you

51:43 ↗ only have one more slide and i suspect

51:45 ↗ everyone's we can go we can bounce back

51:47 ↗ so why not you just go to the next slide

51:49 ↗ and then we'll open it up to the rest of

51:51 ↗ the questions and i see

51:52 ↗ uh three or four people queued up um if

51:54 ↗ it's okay with you guys

51:56 ↗ we should um okay

51:59 ↗ let's do that and through the discussion

52:02 ↗ also if we need to go

52:03 ↗ back to any of the slides we can do that

52:05 ↗ certainly

52:08 ↗ yes and of course uh the next uh

52:11 ↗ item would be the discussion that we

52:13 ↗ would like to have

52:15 ↗ today um goes around these two questions

52:18 ↗ first of all we would like to know what

52:20 ↗ the board thinks about the projects that

52:22 ↗ we have presented tonight

52:23 ↗ to be included in the strategic small

52:25 ↗ capital projects list

52:27 ↗ are these projects enough or

52:31 ↗ should we consider including any other

52:34 ↗ projects

52:34 ↗ uh with our uh strategic small capital

52:38 ↗ projects list

52:39 ↗ and the other question would be how

52:43 ↗ can these projects uh

52:46 ↗ would be prioritized how what

52:49 ↗ what kind of strat strategy could we use

52:52 ↗ to prioritize these projects

52:55 ↗ and now i'll open up for

52:58 ↗ the board to discuss david if i'm

53:02 ↗ tracking correctly was the first one

53:05 ↗ go ahead david

53:10 ↗ thanks uh i'm not

53:14 ↗ so familiar with the 25th avenue

53:17 ↗ project up on the in the highlands i

53:20 ↗ know where it is

53:22 ↗ i'm i'm got to take your word for it

53:25 ↗ however i will tell you that 56

53:29 ↗ and

53:33 ↗ make some east lakes and amish i'm

53:35 ↗ extremely familiar with that

53:38 ↗ and that light would definitely help a

53:41 ↗ lot

53:42 ↗ i ride bicycle a lot

53:45 ↗ down through the trail and that

53:49 ↗ intersection

53:50 ↗ of course has some history because

53:53 ↗ we've actually had a bicycle rider

53:56 ↗ killed

53:57 ↗ at that intersection

54:00 ↗ i think that even though you get the

54:04 ↗ walk sign

54:06 ↗ to go across it's extremely dangerous

54:08 ↗ because there's a lot of people

54:11 ↗ who want to make that free right turn

54:13 ↗ whether you're

54:14 ↗ whether you're there or not and you have

54:18 ↗ to watch that like a hawk

54:20 ↗ so i think a light there is going to be

54:24 ↗ immense help keeping those

54:28 ↗ uh motorists attentive

54:32 ↗ to the fact that there will be people

54:34 ↗ coming across

54:35 ↗ it they're they're more focused on that

54:38 ↗ right turn

54:39 ↗ than they are anybody standing there

54:41 ↗ waiting for the light

54:42 ↗ so uh i would be all in favor of that

54:47 ↗ uh project going forward

54:50 ↗ as soon as possible um once again

54:53 ↗ we lost an individual at that

54:56 ↗ intersection

54:57 ↗ and i sure would hate to see that happen

54:59 ↗ again thank you

55:02 ↗ and i've never nearly been hit there at

55:04 ↗ the same intersection i know it very

55:06 ↗ well

55:06 ↗ as well so maybe i'm going to take a

55:09 ↗ moment and just say

55:10 ↗ um i

55:13 ↗ i have the same comment and there may be

55:15 ↗ some others that are um i see micah

55:17 ↗ jerry a few others but maybe just take a

55:19 ↗ moment and um

55:21 ↗ i also think that that's a huge priority

55:23 ↗ other other

55:24 ↗ a lot of people and now um

55:27 ↗ is that widely agreed upon to be a huge

55:29 ↗ priority that

55:31 ↗ fixing that i mean is there anyone that

55:32 ↗ doesn't think that that's probably

55:34 ↗ of the things you've shown me that seems

55:36 ↗ yeah i'm

55:37 ↗ getting a lot of nods so rather than

55:39 ↗ each of us have to take time to do that

55:41 ↗ i wanted to check that out

55:42 ↗ um and then i think julian made a good

55:44 ↗ point about

55:45 ↗ there may be more than one way to design

55:47 ↗ that

55:49 ↗ the specific thing that you have in the

55:51 ↗ presentation

55:52 ↗ i think is unique which could make it

55:55 ↗ really good but i also think that

55:58 ↗ design is different than prioritizing

56:00 ↗ the project

56:01 ↗ to make sure people stop there so um

56:04 ↗ i don't know those are separate

56:05 ↗ discussions or not but it sounds like

56:07 ↗ we're pretty in pretty agreement that

56:09 ↗ that's a high priority so

56:10 ↗ um i just wanted to to check the

56:12 ↗ temperature of the group and see if

56:14 ↗ folks agreed um

56:18 ↗ and so with that we'll go which it

56:20 ↗ sounds like they do

56:21 ↗ lots of nods and thumbs up so with that

56:23 ↗ we'll go to micah

56:25 ↗ for his question the uh no

56:28 ↗ turn no right turn light is that

56:31 ↗ always going to be tied to a signaled

56:34 ↗ crosswalk like a push button crosswalk

56:37 ↗ oh we we could tie it in different ways

56:41 ↗ like

56:42 ↗ for example i have seen it in redmond

56:46 ↗ uh to be tied not to a crosswalk

56:49 ↗ specifically

56:50 ↗ but to turning to a left turning

56:52 ↗ movement to have

56:54 ↗ not uh those conflicting right turning

56:58 ↗ going at the same time to

57:00 ↗ the other side of the street turning

57:02 ↗ left so

57:03 ↗ it doesn't necessarily have to be for a

57:05 ↗ crosswalk um

57:07 ↗ but yeah there's many uh other ways that

57:10 ↗ we could uh

57:10 ↗ it does it do get does get tied to a

57:14 ↗ signal phase uh if that's the question

57:17 ↗ yeah i i just um

57:18 ↗ i i'm i certainly agree with the value

57:22 ↗ of those i think they're an important

57:23 ↗ safety feature

57:25 ↗ but i also i've

57:28 ↗ seen a lot of intersections where

57:32 ↗ you have a feature like that that just

57:35 ↗ it's on a schedule

57:36 ↗ or you know it's to time of the day or

57:39 ↗ the light cycle

57:40 ↗ and there might be whole sections of the

57:42 ↗ day where there are not people crossing

57:45 ↗ and so i don't want to have something

57:46 ↗ that's the purpose is a safety feature

57:49 ↗ to also impact traffic when it has no

57:52 ↗ impact on safety

57:54 ↗ yes i understand where you're going with

57:56 ↗ this like uh if there's a certain time

57:59 ↗ of the day that it might not be

58:01 ↗ as needed uh as any other i am not

58:04 ↗ quite sure if that would be possible but

58:07 ↗ that's something we can look into

58:11 ↗ do uh intersections that have a push

58:15 ↗ button

58:16 ↗ um are those

58:20 ↗ generally safer for pedestrians than

58:23 ↗ your screen sharing the chats again um

58:28 ↗ are those generally safer than

58:31 ↗ ones without like because the

58:33 ↗ pedestrians going i have to push this

58:35 ↗ button

58:36 ↗ i have to wait that makes it safer

58:40 ↗ or is that not really a factor

58:46 ↗ sorry micah can you repeat i just

58:50 ↗ got blocked with my presentation again

58:53 ↗ blocking out i don't know what's

58:55 ↗ happening this is just really just a

58:57 ↗ follow-up question so are

58:59 ↗ crosswalks where there's a push button

59:02 ↗ uh

59:02 ↗ that you know you push you have to wait

59:04 ↗ for a signal

59:06 ↗ are those safer than you know the most

59:08 ↗ closely equivalent

59:09 ↗ crosswalk without uh that signal for

59:12 ↗ pedestrians because pedestrians go

59:15 ↗ i shouldn't cross now this says don't

59:17 ↗ cross or does that end up not

59:19 ↗ actually in increasing safety

59:22 ↗ yes i and that's my

59:26 ↗ uh like professional opinion like having

59:29 ↗ those

59:29 ↗ on when there's no pedestrian that could

59:32 ↗ give uh the

59:33 ↗ the driver a sense of

59:37 ↗ of of not trusting like the signal if

59:40 ↗ the pedestrian signal is on they would

59:43 ↗ uh feel like on another look on other

59:46 ↗ locations it will be on with no

59:48 ↗ pedestrians and

59:49 ↗ that would be my only like safety

59:52 ↗ concern

59:53 ↗ with having uh the pedestrian signal

59:56 ↗ turned on

59:57 ↗ uh without the the push button like

1:00:00 ↗ going

1:00:01 ↗ all the time uh when the the the

1:00:05 ↗ when it is allowed it would be allowed

1:00:07 ↗ but yeah it would be it would be my only

1:00:08 ↗ concern would be

1:00:09 ↗ would be just that that if the signal is

1:00:12 ↗ on and the

1:00:13 ↗ um uh straight uh

1:00:16 ↗ the through traffic uh the the the

1:00:19 ↗ traffic that would go with the

1:00:22 ↗ pedestrian crossing

1:00:23 ↗ um and if there's no pedestrian there uh

1:00:26 ↗ they could

1:00:28 ↗ think that that's going to be the case

1:00:30 ↗ on any other times

1:00:34 ↗ we have a if we're ready to move on to

1:00:38 ↗ jerry's question uh

1:00:42 ↗ sure um please forgive the clock

1:00:46 ↗ it's it's almost done if you can hear it

1:00:49 ↗ so um isabel i i was mainly

1:00:52 ↗ curious as to how

1:00:55 ↗ you did select the projects you did

1:00:59 ↗ so i can really understand 56th avenue

1:01:02 ↗ because

1:01:03 ↗ we've been through that a lot you you

1:01:05 ↗ probably have recorded

1:01:07 ↗ accidents there are quite a few so you

1:01:09 ↗ would it's a safety

1:01:11 ↗ issue but that other crossover and one

1:01:16 ↗ at 125th have neighbors called and

1:01:19 ↗ complained and said it was

1:01:20 ↗ a dangerous area or you know

1:01:24 ↗ so you're wondering how we should be

1:01:26 ↗ prioritizing

1:01:28 ↗ all these projects and so

1:01:31 ↗ i suppose safety is the number one issue

1:01:35 ↗ but how do you

1:01:36 ↗ find out that there's a safety problem

1:01:39 ↗ unless somebody calls you and complains

1:01:41 ↗ correct

1:01:43 ↗ is is that's really what that is part of

1:01:45 ↗ it

1:01:46 ↗ and i and i might not have the detailed

1:01:49 ↗ information

1:01:50 ↗ of all the history about each one of the

1:01:52 ↗ projects

1:01:53 ↗ but it could be a combination of that

1:01:56 ↗ citizens calling complaining

1:01:58 ↗ um about safety uh concerns at that

1:02:01 ↗ location

1:02:03 ↗ of course when we hear more than

1:02:06 ↗ one uh uh concerned yeah that

1:02:10 ↗ that's a uh kind of a a reason for us to

1:02:14 ↗ dive deeper into that uh specific

1:02:16 ↗ concern

1:02:17 ↗ also from staff also uh even staff

1:02:21 ↗ looking at uh different uh

1:02:25 ↗ or potential locations where we could

1:02:28 ↗ improve operations

1:02:30 ↗ too and it could be across across

1:02:33 ↗ cross-departmental uh other departments

1:02:35 ↗ might

1:02:36 ↗ like the police department could uh

1:02:38 ↗ notice oh we

1:02:39 ↗ we are dealing uh with a lot of

1:02:42 ↗ accidents going at this location

1:02:44 ↗ uh communication with the police

1:02:46 ↗ department also

1:02:48 ↗ could bring into new projects that we

1:02:51 ↗ are

1:02:52 ↗ including on this list do you gather

1:02:56 ↗ safety information or accident

1:02:58 ↗ information or

1:03:00 ↗ we do we do uh have and

1:03:03 ↗ that included on our um gis

1:03:08 ↗ oh okay interesting

1:03:12 ↗ okay that that's great so it is the

1:03:15 ↗ public aware i guess they would be

1:03:18 ↗ so concerned citizens would call

1:03:22 ↗ if they saw an unsafe location right

1:03:25 ↗ i would like to add that the public is

1:03:29 ↗ the it's the the biggest users of the

1:03:33 ↗ system so

1:03:34 ↗ uh you are much more aware

1:03:37 ↗ of traffic issues and we and that's the

1:03:40 ↗ reason why we're having this

1:03:41 ↗ conversation with the board and getting

1:03:43 ↗ your feedback

1:03:44 ↗ because you are the ones who see our

1:03:47 ↗ system

1:03:48 ↗ uh more often way more often than we do

1:03:54 ↗ that's true but then um yeah i i would

1:03:57 ↗ say you

1:03:58 ↗ definitely would prioritize by safety

1:04:01 ↗ concerns

1:04:02 ↗ from the public but then perhaps if

1:04:06 ↗ there's a way

1:04:08 ↗ a busier street if you know if it's just

1:04:11 ↗ a residential street

1:04:14 ↗ and there's maybe only 10 homes on it

1:04:17 ↗ it's not going to be as high priority as

1:04:20 ↗ a

1:04:20 ↗ larger street where it feeds into

1:04:24 ↗ you know 100 homes or something

1:04:27 ↗ so that's something and then the whole

1:04:29 ↗ school idea being close to a school

1:04:31 ↗ would actually trigger safety also

1:04:35 ↗ so those those are things that uh

1:04:38 ↗ are considered well when we uh put our

1:04:41 ↗ projects together

1:04:42 ↗ like how is there a safety risk how many

1:04:45 ↗ accidents are in this area how many

1:04:47 ↗ people does it serve

1:04:48 ↗ um and things like that

1:04:53 ↗ yeah so but it it sounds like you

1:04:57 ↗ already have a good

1:04:58 ↗ prioritization plan um

1:05:01 ↗ we don't have a priority uh so far we

1:05:05 ↗ can we are hearing tonight from the

1:05:07 ↗ board that the

1:05:08 ↗ the 56th and east lakes and amish

1:05:10 ↗ parkway uh is one

1:05:12 ↗ uh that we should bump up in the

1:05:14 ↗ priority system but we

1:05:16 ↗ don't necessarily have those prioritized

1:05:19 ↗ right now

1:05:19 ↗ that's what we are seeking from uh the

1:05:22 ↗ board tonight

1:05:23 ↗ uh how we can prioritize these projects

1:05:28 ↗ okay so so my comment was you know

1:05:31 ↗ safety number one you know if there's

1:05:34 ↗ been a lot of accidents

1:05:35 ↗ right just you know you could prioritize

1:05:38 ↗ based on the number of accidents

1:05:40 ↗ and then you could also prioritize based

1:05:44 ↗ on how busy the road is

1:05:47 ↗ so that's that's my comment

1:05:50 ↗ for prioritization thanks sherry

1:05:53 ↗ christie

1:05:55 ↗ yes thank you so um building on

1:05:58 ↗ jerry's input um i also

1:06:01 ↗ think well first of all i want to say

1:06:03 ↗ i'm really happy to see that this

1:06:05 ↗ program has been implemented i think

1:06:06 ↗ that

1:06:07 ↗ the city needs to have a tool that

1:06:09 ↗ allows

1:06:10 ↗ them to address emerging needs or maybe

1:06:13 ↗ some unintended consequences

1:06:16 ↗ so um in terms of additional

1:06:18 ↗ prioritization

1:06:20 ↗ i think public comment number of public

1:06:23 ↗ comments

1:06:24 ↗ and type should be an aspect

1:06:27 ↗ i think if council or the mayor's office

1:06:31 ↗ has addressed

1:06:32 ↗ um a situation that needs resolve

1:06:36 ↗ in the very short term i also

1:06:39 ↗ think that dollar amount or

1:06:42 ↗ estimated dollar amount makes sense

1:06:46 ↗ and also if there's the opportunity to

1:06:50 ↗ couple with say a private development

1:06:53 ↗ or investment that's happening if the

1:06:55 ↗ city has an opportunity

1:06:57 ↗ and only needs to throw in a little bit

1:07:00 ↗ to really

1:07:01 ↗ say complete a full line for the city

1:07:04 ↗ that maybe is outside of the development

1:07:07 ↗ envelope that that gives the city some

1:07:09 ↗ resources to work with

1:07:11 ↗ as well um

1:07:14 ↗ and then one question i had

1:07:17 ↗ um which i didn't see and i think connie

1:07:19 ↗ marsh asked was

1:07:20 ↗ what was the dollar amount for the

1:07:23 ↗ budget

1:07:25 ↗ for the for um the capital

1:07:28 ↗ projects so i think that's

1:07:32 ↗ how much

1:07:35 ↗ i yes so for i believe and john would

1:07:38 ↗ correct me if i'm wrong uh

1:07:41 ↗ but it it would be up about a hundred

1:07:44 ↗ thousand dollars john does that sound

1:07:47 ↗ right

1:07:49 ↗ that's correct and i can't remember if

1:07:51 ↗ it was a hundred thousand plus a little

1:07:53 ↗ bit for inflation or if it was just a

1:07:54 ↗ hundred thousand but

1:07:56 ↗ pretty close to a hundred thousand for

1:07:58 ↗ this project yeah so that's going to go

1:08:01 ↗ really quick

1:08:02 ↗ yes yes definitely so um i think that

1:08:07 ↗ amount needs to definitely be in that

1:08:10 ↗ prioritization

1:08:11 ↗ and then um so

1:08:14 ↗ and then one other thing i wanted to

1:08:16 ↗ provide input

1:08:17 ↗ uh on the first question what about what

1:08:20 ↗ other projects should be considered

1:08:23 ↗ initially when i was looking at the

1:08:26 ↗ gaps that needed to be completed i was

1:08:28 ↗ thinking

1:08:29 ↗ east lake sammamish and the newport

1:08:32 ↗ sr900 connections

1:08:34 ↗ but understanding or maybe being

1:08:37 ↗ reminded

1:08:38 ↗ again that that dollar amount is 100

1:08:39 ↗ grand i don't think those apply

1:08:42 ↗ um at this time

1:08:45 ↗ and then i just wanted to make a note i

1:08:47 ↗ also noticed

1:08:48 ↗ on the tier plan and in

1:08:52 ↗ in your presentation that 18

1:08:55 ↗ in the highla crossing neighborhood was

1:08:57 ↗ noted is not having

1:08:59 ↗ um connectivity and i just wanted to

1:09:02 ↗ share

1:09:02 ↗ that that particular road

1:09:07 ↗ is grandfathered in the rally properties

1:09:10 ↗ development

1:09:11 ↗ agreement

1:09:15 ↗ so you may want to or you may want to

1:09:17 ↗ look at that a little deeper

1:09:20 ↗ okay sure um is it

1:09:23 ↗ like uh showing up

1:09:27 ↗ if you uh it was so if you go to 17th

1:09:30 ↗ avenue northwest

1:09:32 ↗ and then you go to the west

1:09:39 ↗ uh that's 19 go to your right the one in

1:09:41 ↗ the middle

1:09:42 ↗ that's oh it's there

1:09:47 ↗ uh over to the west right oh

1:09:50 ↗ it's not it's like here yeah i don't

1:09:52 ↗ know what but it's

1:09:53 ↗ like where that little blue dot is yeah

1:09:56 ↗ and then go up

1:09:57 ↗ yeah oh okay this area here

1:10:01 ↗ yeah and we can talk about that offline

1:10:03 ↗ but i just wanted to bring that up

1:10:04 ↗ that that may be something you want to

1:10:06 ↗ remove from the sidewalk projects

1:10:12 ↗ less money to spend yes thank you

1:10:16 ↗ trying to help that's it

1:10:21 ↗ okay so i'm next and then erica and then

1:10:24 ↗ julian

1:10:24 ↗ um so i have a comment and another

1:10:26 ↗ project to

1:10:28 ↗ bring up for considering my overall

1:10:30 ↗ comment is and i really appreciated

1:10:32 ↗ jerry's question is how did you

1:10:34 ↗ um come up with this list because i

1:10:35 ↗ think it is um that's a little unclear

1:10:38 ↗ to me

1:10:39 ↗ i really think this is a great program

1:10:42 ↗ um

1:10:42 ↗ for a lot of reasons uh the way at least

1:10:45 ↗ the way i understand it um

1:10:47 ↗ and i just think that maybe we should

1:10:50 ↗ finish the task at hand uh on you know

1:10:53 ↗ on time

1:10:54 ↗ but i think in the future since as this

1:10:57 ↗ is an annual program

1:10:58 ↗ we may want to have a rudimentary

1:11:01 ↗ prioritization

1:11:02 ↗ methodology and i would suggest it

1:11:05 ↗ doesn't need to be the same

1:11:07 ↗ rigorous methodology as you would have

1:11:08 ↗ for larger projects because that's the

1:11:10 ↗ whole thing it's to be nimble and

1:11:12 ↗ efficient and opportunistic and it could

1:11:14 ↗ be observations it could be

1:11:16 ↗ complaint driven it could be tab brought

1:11:18 ↗ forward um

1:11:19 ↗ it could also be things that were

1:11:21 ↗ permanent design are going to be fairly

1:11:23 ↗ straightforward

1:11:24 ↗ where there's in-house capability so i'm

1:11:27 ↗ just i just kind of made a few notes of

1:11:28 ↗ things

1:11:29 ↗ highly leveraged opportunistic so um

1:11:33 ↗ i think that having some sort of

1:11:35 ↗ objective methodology for

1:11:37 ↗ random opportunities is probably a good

1:11:40 ↗ way to go about this

1:11:42 ↗ um and i don't have

1:11:45 ↗ another opinion i think the tabs

1:11:46 ↗ feedback is super super important but i

1:11:48 ↗ always try to be mindful of the fact

1:11:49 ↗ that i'm representing people i don't

1:11:51 ↗ even know

1:11:52 ↗ so um i don't you know um i don't

1:11:55 ↗ want to have it just be the individual

1:11:57 ↗ tab members kind of pet

1:11:59 ↗ projects because we may or may not

1:12:00 ↗ represent an appropriately diverse

1:12:03 ↗ um geographic or user base you know

1:12:06 ↗ of the community that we are here to

1:12:08 ↗ serve um

1:12:09 ↗ that we're all endeavoring to serve um

1:12:12 ↗ but with that i will say that i have my

1:12:14 ↗ own project that i think

1:12:16 ↗ is a super important project and i met

1:12:18 ↗ with some of the folks and now i can't

1:12:20 ↗ remember

1:12:20 ↗ kurt seaman and um people who are not

1:12:23 ↗ there anymore but

1:12:24 ↗ i know this is a washed out

1:12:26 ↗ responsibility but um

1:12:29 ↗ i'm just gonna throw it out there the

1:12:30 ↗ the um the crossing

1:12:33 ↗ let's see i guess when sunset ends and

1:12:35 ↗ you're going under i-90

1:12:37 ↗ to the highlands when you're on the

1:12:38 ↗ south side and you're getting ready to

1:12:41 ↗ cross

1:12:41 ↗ the exit 18 and there's a major

1:12:45 ↗ pedestrian facility

1:12:46 ↗ it's both a recreational facility

1:12:50 ↗ as well as um you know it's it can

1:12:52 ↗ connect

1:12:53 ↗ um to transit as well and so i think

1:12:56 ↗ it's a pretty

1:12:57 ↗ important intersection and it's a

1:12:59 ↗ terrifying

1:13:00 ↗ terrifying intersection so when you're

1:13:02 ↗ exiting i-90 and you're going to go

1:13:03 ↗ north on

1:13:04 ↗ highlands drive you have a channel turn

1:13:07 ↗ there you turn right

1:13:08 ↗ and getting across there you you have

1:13:11 ↗ very

1:13:12 ↗ poor sight lines on the north side of

1:13:13 ↗ that intersection

1:13:15 ↗ and you also have the absent right-hand

1:13:17 ↗ turn driver getting ready to merge onto

1:13:18 ↗ i-90

1:13:20 ↗ and and the pedestrians um facing

1:13:23 ↗ completely the wrong way so the the

1:13:25 ↗ traffic that's the threat

1:13:26 ↗ is over your far over your left shoulder

1:13:29 ↗ and i walked it with staff

1:13:31 ↗ maybe three years ago and they talked

1:13:34 ↗ about

1:13:34 ↗ having it be a priority that they could

1:13:37 ↗ try to um

1:13:38 ↗ convince washed out because they said

1:13:39 ↗ that even though it's a washout they do

1:13:40 ↗ take influence

1:13:41 ↗ and so i don't know if that's the kind

1:13:43 ↗ of thing that can be on

1:13:44 ↗ small capital projects and maybe simply

1:13:47 ↗ because the city doesn't have that power

1:13:49 ↗ to physically implement it

1:13:50 ↗ it wouldn't be eligible but that just

1:13:53 ↗ just like

1:13:53 ↗ fixing signage paint landscaping to

1:13:56 ↗ increase visibility getting washed out

1:13:59 ↗ to do those

1:14:00 ↗ things i think would be huge and i'm not

1:14:02 ↗ aware of um

1:14:04 ↗ of actual accidents but i crossed that

1:14:07 ↗ intersection a lot and it's

1:14:09 ↗ always treacherous

1:14:12 ↗ thank you thank you cynthia and we have

1:14:16 ↗ uh this is not the first time we have uh

1:14:18 ↗ heard

1:14:20 ↗ of a concern of this location and

1:14:23 ↗ um uh most probably this is

1:14:26 ↗ the strategic small capital projects is

1:14:29 ↗ not

1:14:29 ↗ uh the right location

1:14:32 ↗ for this type of project since again

1:14:36 ↗ it's it's inside watch those right of

1:14:37 ↗ way

1:14:38 ↗ uh but that's something that we can

1:14:40 ↗ certainly uh reach out to watchdog

1:14:43 ↗ which we have uh yeah you're just

1:14:45 ↗ wondering if it gets on someone's list

1:14:47 ↗ even though it may not meet the criteria

1:14:49 ↗ like it feels like if it gets on a list

1:14:51 ↗ it's got a much better chance of having

1:14:53 ↗ even if it's literally just

1:14:55 ↗ time staff time to dedicate to hounding

1:14:57 ↗ them

1:14:58 ↗ you know monthly weekly whatever i just

1:15:00 ↗ and maybe this isn't the place for it

1:15:02 ↗ but

1:15:02 ↗ um it's certainly a bit of an oddball um

1:15:05 ↗ and yet if it doesn't get onto a list if

1:15:07 ↗ it's not

1:15:08 ↗ respond you know if the staff isn't

1:15:10 ↗ responsible for it it just

1:15:12 ↗ it just gets that's why it hasn't gotten

1:15:14 ↗ addressed i think probably because it's

1:15:16 ↗ not really

1:15:16 ↗ anyone's job but if we made it a small

1:15:19 ↗ capital project even though the city

1:15:22 ↗ staff doesn't

1:15:23 ↗ necessarily have ultimate um authority

1:15:25 ↗ or um

1:15:26 ↗ jurisdiction i don't know just a thought

1:15:30 ↗ yeah like we can include it on and uh

1:15:33 ↗ even though if we don't uh necessarily

1:15:35 ↗ uh

1:15:36 ↗ allocate some money to it but we do have

1:15:39 ↗ it as a project that's some coordination

1:15:41 ↗ project with watchdog

1:15:43 ↗ that could keep us

1:15:48 ↗ continuing that coordination effort with

1:15:50 ↗ them

1:15:54 ↗ thanks okay so erica

1:15:58 ↗ um i was gonna ask what crosswalks on

1:16:02 ↗ park drive i know i recognize one of the

1:16:04 ↗ one in the photo um

1:16:05 ↗ like that's the one i think closest to

1:16:07 ↗ the school if you're like

1:16:09 ↗ well yeah up the hill from the school um

1:16:12 ↗ and then it said like you'll remove

1:16:14 ↗ so is it just that one crosswalk or

1:16:16 ↗ you're going to remove like

1:16:18 ↗ cars on like parking spots on either

1:16:20 ↗ side of like three different

1:16:21 ↗ ones i'm just trying to do the math of

1:16:22 ↗ that in my head it'll be more like

1:16:25 ↗ strategically looking at the area what

1:16:28 ↗ are those crosswalks that are most

1:16:30 ↗ impacted

1:16:31 ↗ uh with uh vehicles parking

1:16:34 ↗ uh too close to the crosswalk okay so

1:16:37 ↗ the specific ones haven't been

1:16:38 ↗ identified yet it's just

1:16:40 ↗ we know that this is a problem okay i

1:16:42 ↗ really appreciate i think i brought that

1:16:43 ↗ up a couple tab meetings ago

1:16:45 ↗ um just about like when i've walked

1:16:46 ↗ there and like yeah it's really hard

1:16:48 ↗ you'll go and like it feels like you're

1:16:50 ↗ running out like if you're a driver like

1:16:52 ↗ the pedestrian is just running out but

1:16:53 ↗ it's not true you've just been behind

1:16:54 ↗ you know that van like that was in that

1:16:56 ↗ photo and so

1:16:57 ↗ um yeah i really appreciate that being a

1:17:00 ↗ priority

1:17:05 ↗ julian

1:17:08 ↗ okay um so i think

1:17:12 ↗ safety should be number one priority of

1:17:15 ↗ course

1:17:16 ↗ um again with the 52nd street

1:17:20 ↗ uh intersection i always

1:17:23 ↗ tend to try to get around that somehow i

1:17:27 ↗ usually go down 220

1:17:28 ↗ 220th and then hop back onto east lake

1:17:31 ↗ smamish

1:17:32 ↗ from there so that's a big priority but

1:17:36 ↗ um also the so with the tier system

1:17:40 ↗ i think there's some issues with that

1:17:44 ↗ and that

1:17:44 ↗ we don't need a sidewalk on both sides

1:17:48 ↗ on sr 900 900 i think there's some

1:17:52 ↗ it's very difficult to bike across

1:17:56 ↗ the different small crosswalks

1:18:00 ↗ from on the on s900

1:18:03 ↗ just on boardwalks it can be very unsafe

1:18:06 ↗ to do that

1:18:08 ↗ because of cars that don't see you very

1:18:10 ↗ well so

1:18:12 ↗ how are you incorporating that sort of

1:18:16 ↗ idea into your system

1:18:23 ↗ i asked for that uh about

1:18:26 ↗ stephen to help me out with that

1:18:28 ↗ question since he was more familiarized

1:18:30 ↗ with the mobility master plan

1:18:34 ↗ work hi everyone uh so with the

1:18:38 ↗ the tier system with the mobility master

1:18:40 ↗ plan the intention was

1:18:42 ↗ actually to identify projects the city

1:18:44 ↗ is going to be doing that was one of the

1:18:46 ↗ sr900 is primarily a washdot kind of

1:18:49 ↗ jurisdiction of projects

1:18:51 ↗ so those are one of the things we'll be

1:18:53 ↗ updating in our maps the next time we

1:18:55 ↗ update the mobility master plan

1:18:57 ↗ the in terms of what's considered unsafe

1:19:00 ↗ washta actually can

1:19:02 ↗ has identified a lot of those corridors

1:19:03 ↗ within urban areas to have

1:19:06 ↗ crosswalk have sidewalks on both sides

1:19:09 ↗ not crosswalks

1:19:11 ↗ in order to satisfy kind of their own

1:19:13 ↗ goals the city supports

1:19:15 ↗ a lot of them having um

1:19:18 ↗ the sidewalks on both sides particularly

1:19:20 ↗ for is is

1:19:22 ↗ somewhat important because we have mixed

1:19:24 ↗ development

1:19:25 ↗ along the corridor and what we want to

1:19:29 ↗ do is actually influence

1:19:30 ↗ how washdog does their crossings more

1:19:32 ↗ than where they put the sidewalks

1:19:34 ↗ because we think that's where a lot of a

1:19:36 ↗ lot more of the conflicts are going to

1:19:38 ↗ be

1:19:38 ↗ experienced when it comes to safety

1:19:41 ↗ improvements at least in the quarters

1:19:42 ↗ throughout the city

1:19:44 ↗ but that is one of the one of the

1:19:46 ↗ projects at least on our map that we'll

1:19:48 ↗ be updating in the next process

1:19:50 ↗ when we update the mobility master plan

1:19:52 ↗ so that's that's kind of on our list

1:19:56 ↗ i'm just simply concerned that

1:19:59 ↗ with the tier system it's just going to

1:20:01 ↗ be two unsafe

1:20:03 ↗ boardwalks on either side with all the

1:20:07 ↗ different turn-ins of intersections you

1:20:09 ↗ know gun boulevard for example

1:20:12 ↗ and on the other end of the intersection

1:20:14 ↗ there's

1:20:15 ↗ that as well there's right turning lanes

1:20:18 ↗ rendering cars and then left turning

1:20:19 ↗ cars

1:20:21 ↗ it can be quite unsafe to go there um

1:20:24 ↗ anyways another big concern is uh cost

1:20:27 ↗ of maintenance how are you incorporating

1:20:29 ↗ that

1:20:30 ↗ cost of maintenance because uh there's

1:20:32 ↗ you only

1:20:35 ↗ what good is a comprehensive sidewalk

1:20:37 ↗ network

1:20:38 ↗ without having that incorporated

1:20:42 ↗ that is a good question and for these uh

1:20:45 ↗ costs that we have come up with we are

1:20:47 ↗ not considering since those are

1:20:49 ↗ small uh projects um

1:20:52 ↗ we are not considering the maintenance

1:20:54 ↗ on the cost

1:20:59 ↗ but yeah that's something that we uh

1:21:02 ↗ uh need to uh uh

1:21:05 ↗ keep in mind the maintenance

1:21:08 ↗ of the the cost of maintenance of these

1:21:12 ↗ projects

1:21:15 ↗ yeah um i think that's it for now

1:21:18 ↗ thanks julian uh let's see if i'm

1:21:21 ↗ tracking correctly

1:21:22 ↗ i think the next is joseph and then

1:21:25 ↗ [Music]

1:21:26 ↗ david

1:21:28 ↗ um yeah so i had like a really quick

1:21:30 ↗ question and a comment i know that

1:21:32 ↗ jerry already asked a really similar

1:21:34 ↗ question

1:21:35 ↗ but my internet got bad i didn't really

1:21:38 ↗ hear the answer

1:21:39 ↗ um i was curious so for the um

1:21:43 ↗ sort of like safety plans that were

1:21:45 ↗ brought up or the strategic safety

1:21:47 ↗ improvements

1:21:48 ↗ that were brought up in the presentation

1:21:51 ↗ were those based on like

1:21:53 ↗ um like i guess

1:21:56 ↗ were they brought up based off of like

1:21:58 ↗ cost or like

1:21:59 ↗ being more easily like replaceable or

1:22:02 ↗ fixed

1:22:03 ↗ or they like brought up um because there

1:22:06 ↗ have been like

1:22:07 ↗ safety issues brought up by the public

1:22:09 ↗ before sort of like

1:22:11 ↗ why those were selected to be rob in the

1:22:14 ↗ presentation

1:22:16 ↗ and i would say that all all of those

1:22:19 ↗ aspects that you have asked about do

1:22:22 ↗ have to do

1:22:22 ↗ uh with the list of this project because

1:22:25 ↗ yes because since we are

1:22:27 ↗ talking about small strategic capital uh

1:22:31 ↗ projects uh we're uh asking of those

1:22:34 ↗ projects that we could do in-house and

1:22:37 ↗ the the

1:22:38 ↗ main investment would be the materials

1:22:40 ↗ uh so

1:22:41 ↗ so for the cause since this is an

1:22:43 ↗ ongoing program as well

1:22:45 ↗ uh so we are not uh looking at like

1:22:48 ↗ uh bigger capital projects that they

1:22:51 ↗ would be

1:22:52 ↗ uh like a capital project by themselves

1:22:55 ↗ because of the cost

1:22:57 ↗ uh also uh the safety because

1:23:00 ↗ that's one of the uh main goals of this

1:23:04 ↗ program to improve safety too and

1:23:07 ↗ um as we were discussing uh

1:23:11 ↗ uh responding to jerry's comment

1:23:14 ↗ uh yes it is part of of

1:23:17 ↗ concerns brought up by the public

1:23:19 ↗ observations from staff

1:23:22 ↗ as well from other departments

1:23:25 ↗ and we do

1:23:29 ↗ take into consideration

1:23:32 ↗ safety measures like traffic accidents

1:23:35 ↗ that have occurred in

1:23:36 ↗ the location um how many users

1:23:40 ↗ the locations have like how the traffic

1:23:42 ↗ volumes on

1:23:43 ↗ on those trees how big is the impact

1:23:47 ↗ of the concerns

1:23:50 ↗ yeah okay well then i guess i want to

1:23:52 ↗ make like a really quick

1:23:53 ↗ call or like some other comments i think

1:23:56 ↗ that

1:23:56 ↗ i really agree with what david wagner

1:23:59 ↗ said earlier about like

1:24:00 ↗ the um like no right turn

1:24:04 ↗ signal i think that like a lot of people

1:24:06 ↗ decide to take the

1:24:08 ↗ right turn on a red light so it's kind

1:24:10 ↗ of important to have that sign up

1:24:12 ↗ also like relating to what julian said

1:24:14 ↗ earlier i think that

1:24:16 ↗ it's really important to have like

1:24:18 ↗ prioritize safety but on top of that i

1:24:20 ↗ also think it's important

1:24:22 ↗ to try and prioritize equity since we

1:24:25 ↗ said something that the board's like

1:24:26 ↗ talked about

1:24:28 ↗ in um earlier meetings so if that's like

1:24:30 ↗ applicable in any way

1:24:32 ↗ it should be considered maybe like

1:24:35 ↗ whatever projects help the greatest

1:24:36 ↗ amount of people or

1:24:38 ↗ prioritizing like areas that don't get a

1:24:41 ↗ lot of projects in them

1:24:42 ↗ but still need some consideration

1:24:45 ↗ towards like renovation

1:24:46 ↗ or like improvement of like

1:24:48 ↗ transportation infrastructure

1:24:50 ↗ also i guess one possible project i

1:24:53 ↗ think should be considered

1:24:54 ↗ i know that it's on the transportation

1:24:56 ↗ improvement plan

1:24:58 ↗ but i'm not entirely sure what the idea

1:25:01 ↗ for it was

1:25:03 ↗ but the intersection from sunset

1:25:06 ↗ way to newport way there's an

1:25:08 ↗ intersection

1:25:10 ↗ that goes into the city where

1:25:13 ↗ whenever there's a green light the car

1:25:15 ↗ can take a

1:25:16 ↗ right turn go straight or take a left

1:25:18 ↗ turn and i think that

1:25:20 ↗ that is kind of dangerous for

1:25:22 ↗ pedestrians and should be like

1:25:24 ↗ reconsidered

1:25:25 ↗ um since like cars can turn like

1:25:29 ↗ any direction

1:25:34 ↗ yes on that if you can uh let me know

1:25:36 ↗ but a specific location that's something

1:25:39 ↗ uh if it's

1:25:40 ↗ uh something we can look into yes

1:25:43 ↗ sure we can include that on on our

1:25:47 ↗ list of projects or observe what we

1:25:50 ↗ could

1:25:51 ↗ uh do to help improving the operations

1:25:57 ↗ thank you

1:26:00 ↗ david you're up thanks cynthia

1:26:03 ↗ thank you cynthia i want to be uh very

1:26:07 ↗ courteous to time i know that stephen's

1:26:09 ↗ still going to

1:26:10 ↗ talk about transit i don't want to take

1:26:13 ↗ any more time on this but

1:26:14 ↗ i do have a small project for safety

1:26:18 ↗ that i would like to talk about

1:26:20 ↗ and it doesn't have to be tonight but

1:26:22 ↗ definitely would like to

1:26:23 ↗ uh get our get my foot in the door to

1:26:26 ↗ talk about it

1:26:27 ↗ and i have a a a longer comment

1:26:30 ↗ about that right turn light and use

1:26:33 ↗ uh the gilman

1:26:37 ↗ uh

1:26:42 ↗ that the new turn signal the new

1:26:46 ↗ intersection light at gilman and

1:26:54 ↗ correct i i would like to talk about

1:26:57 ↗ that

1:26:59 ↗ with the thought process of that 56th

1:27:02 ↗ avenue uh

1:27:04 ↗ in mind so i want to be a sensitive to

1:27:07 ↗ time

1:27:07 ↗ so i'll be glad to relinquish my

1:27:10 ↗ questions so we can go on

1:27:11 ↗ but i would like to have some other time

1:27:14 ↗ in the future to talk about this very

1:27:16 ↗ same subject

1:27:18 ↗ dave can i encourage you to go ahead and

1:27:20 ↗ talk about it now because we did discuss

1:27:22 ↗ this

1:27:22 ↗ with um uh stephen and the

1:27:25 ↗ on our terrorist meeting that this is

1:27:28 ↗ the priority

1:27:29 ↗ and they do need to get i think some

1:27:32 ↗ you know to get to a place um

1:27:35 ↗ and the transit can wait so why don't

1:27:37 ↗ you go ahead

1:27:38 ↗ okay thank you um uh i really wanted to

1:27:43 ↗ get the transit as a retired transit

1:27:45 ↗ operator

1:27:46 ↗ but uh let me go ahead with this so

1:27:49 ↗ um the comment i have with that red turn

1:27:52 ↗ light

1:27:53 ↗ i've been uh very impressed with that

1:27:56 ↗ new intersection

1:27:58 ↗ with uh gilman and juniper

1:28:02 ↗ and watching that turn light it seems to

1:28:04 ↗ me when

1:28:05 ↗ nobody pushes the walk sign because

1:28:09 ↗ that that's a little different for the

1:28:11 ↗ intersection because they walk

1:28:13 ↗ all directions but when nobody pushes

1:28:16 ↗ that

1:28:17 ↗ uh button then that right turn light

1:28:21 ↗ doesn't come on it's just a signal

1:28:24 ↗ change

1:28:24 ↗ like correct me if i'm wrong john maybe

1:28:28 ↗ knows more about it than i do but

1:28:32 ↗ that has decreased all the

1:28:35 ↗ accident potential that's been happening

1:28:38 ↗ for many many years at that intersection

1:28:41 ↗ i would

1:28:42 ↗ love to see that same thought process

1:28:46 ↗ at 56

1:28:49 ↗ i have personally almost been hit at 56

1:28:54 ↗ and many friends almost hit at 56

1:28:57 ↗ and i'm all in favor of however we do it

1:29:01 ↗ prioritizing isabel that we make that

1:29:05 ↗ one of the first things out of the out

1:29:07 ↗ of the gate

1:29:08 ↗ because that is really going to save

1:29:10 ↗ lives over there

1:29:12 ↗ more than any of the other projects you

1:29:14 ↗ talked about tonight

1:29:16 ↗ but that's my opinion um

1:29:19 ↗ and i see that as important my project

1:29:22 ↗ that i'm very selfish about like cynthia

1:29:26 ↗ was with hers

1:29:28 ↗ i live off of dogwood street

1:29:31 ↗ when you're westbound on northwest

1:29:34 ↗ dogwood street

1:29:35 ↗ you come to newport you

1:29:38 ↗ cannot see the street or

1:29:42 ↗ the sidewalk it's not really a sidewalk

1:29:45 ↗ it's a path now you cannot see

1:29:49 ↗ that in either direction unless you

1:29:52 ↗ pull in to the crosswalk and ease out so

1:29:55 ↗ you can see

1:29:57 ↗ that i have seen more accidents there in

1:30:00 ↗ the last

1:30:01 ↗ uh 17 years than

1:30:04 ↗ what needs to happen what

1:30:07 ↗ needs to be cleared is the house if

1:30:10 ↗ you're going westbound

1:30:12 ↗ on dogwood street and you look

1:30:15 ↗ there's a holly tree big clump of holly

1:30:18 ↗ tree right there

1:30:19 ↗ that will not let you to allow you to

1:30:22 ↗ see

1:30:23 ↗ up that road and at night since it's not

1:30:26 ↗ well lit

1:30:27 ↗ you can't see pedestrians coming

1:30:31 ↗ up to that uh roadway

1:30:35 ↗ i think that small project

1:30:38 ↗ because i don't see it being much more

1:30:40 ↗ than clearing

1:30:41 ↗ and lighting that intersection that

1:30:44 ↗ would save

1:30:45 ↗ a lot of grief for our citizens um

1:30:48 ↗ and with that i'll shut up did you guys

1:30:52 ↗ catch that because i didn't catch

1:30:54 ↗ precisely could you just repeat the

1:30:56 ↗ percep precise

1:30:58 ↗ uh proposal it is the uh

1:31:03 ↗ right turn left turn from northwest

1:31:06 ↗ dogwood

1:31:07 ↗ at newport it's uh you have to turn left

1:31:11 ↗ or you have to turn right

1:31:13 ↗ yep the other thing i forgot to mention

1:31:15 ↗ is

1:31:16 ↗ if you're coming on newport way and

1:31:19 ↗ wanting to make

1:31:20 ↗ a left turn or a right turn onto dogwood

1:31:24 ↗ you have that same vision issue

1:31:27 ↗ you cannot see it's been a safety issue

1:31:30 ↗ for years and the city needs to address

1:31:33 ↗ it

1:31:34 ↗ very very soon multiple accidents

1:31:37 ↗ there i don't believe we've lost any

1:31:39 ↗ lives there

1:31:40 ↗ like we have on 56 but uh

1:31:44 ↗ very very poorly designed uh

1:31:47 ↗ intersection is that where you're coming

1:31:50 ↗ up in newport is if you're traveling

1:31:52 ↗ southbound newport way and you're coming

1:31:53 ↗ up to

1:31:54 ↗ dogwood to take a left here to go to the

1:31:57 ↗ library

1:31:58 ↗ correct that intersection okay and it's

1:32:00 ↗ on right vertical curve right through

1:32:01 ↗ the intersection because you have the

1:32:03 ↗ down slope so it's

1:32:04 ↗ the sight distance vertical sight

1:32:06 ↗ distance no not

1:32:08 ↗ no i think you're thinking if you're

1:32:09 ↗ going to library that's a different one

1:32:11 ↗ thomas

1:32:12 ↗ yes there's a law office right on the

1:32:14 ↗ corner it's very difficult to see

1:32:19 ↗ i know which one you're talking about i

1:32:21 ↗ also want to say that when i first moved

1:32:23 ↗ to the area

1:32:24 ↗ because i lived just a few blocks from

1:32:25 ↗ there uh

1:32:27 ↗ there was a car in the ditch so the

1:32:29 ↗ drainage ditches are really steep right

1:32:31 ↗ there and every now and again

1:32:32 ↗ and my neighbor said oh yeah that

1:32:33 ↗ happens about once every other year

1:32:35 ↗ somebody ends up in that ditch and

1:32:36 ↗ and yeah it sure seems to me that it

1:32:39 ↗ would be um

1:32:40 ↗ even though we don't have a formal

1:32:41 ↗ criteria sorry i'm next so i'm

1:32:44 ↗ just um i guess i'm sort of speaking out

1:32:47 ↗ of turn but yeah i'm concurring

1:32:48 ↗ with him and it seems like

1:32:52 ↗ simple fixes even though that whole

1:32:55 ↗ corridor is slated to be upgraded

1:32:56 ↗ if it's a low-cost you know something

1:32:58 ↗ can be done in the house

1:33:00 ↗ um it's very difficult to spot where

1:33:03 ↗ dogwood is when you're coming from

1:33:04 ↗ either direction

1:33:07 ↗ correct even though i live on dogwood i

1:33:10 ↗ still have trouble

1:33:12 ↗ seeing it and remembering exactly where

1:33:14 ↗ to break and signal

1:33:15 ↗ and whether i'm on my bike or my car

1:33:20 ↗ um

1:33:22 ↗ and not well lit at all

1:33:26 ↗ yeah so i was just going to make a

1:33:30 ↗ general comment

1:33:31 ↗ that i do think it's important to

1:33:32 ↗ separate a little bit design from

1:33:34 ↗ projects so we may want to we may

1:33:38 ↗ have an opportunity to figure out or

1:33:40 ↗ maybe not

1:33:41 ↗ you know i'm not sure exactly what the

1:33:42 ↗ um assignment will be for the tab but

1:33:46 ↗ i think it's important to figure out

1:33:47 ↗ which projects are the priority

1:33:50 ↗ and then let the experts who do this for

1:33:53 ↗ their day job

1:33:54 ↗ propose the actual method to you know to

1:33:56 ↗ achieve the objective that we

1:33:58 ↗ are agreeing um and maybe this is a good

1:34:01 ↗ time isabelle for you to

1:34:03 ↗ reflect back i guess me i wanted to make

1:34:05 ↗ a last call for

1:34:06 ↗ um other projects that people

1:34:10 ↗ are aware of that are not included in

1:34:12 ↗ here

1:34:13 ↗ oh julian had a comment oh

1:34:17 ↗ yes julian why don't you go ahead and

1:34:19 ↗ make your comment

1:34:20 ↗ and then um why don't we make a last

1:34:24 ↗ call for a specific thank you christy

1:34:27 ↗ go ahead and julie julian so so i forgot

1:34:30 ↗ to mention one thing my

1:34:32 ↗ comments um and that's connectivity

1:34:36 ↗ so i think that's a very high priority

1:34:37 ↗ not just from home to destination but

1:34:39 ↗ just in general

1:34:41 ↗ the network of sidewalks and

1:34:45 ↗ bike lanes i'm my planes aren't included

1:34:47 ↗ of course but

1:34:48 ↗ um you know the 60-second roundabout

1:34:52 ↗ um you know there's that there's a

1:34:54 ↗ bikeway from eastlake's manage goes into

1:34:57 ↗ the roundabouts i'm not sure if anyone

1:35:00 ↗ uses that because it just seems to end

1:35:04 ↗ nowhere really so i think

1:35:07 ↗ it's really important to make sure that

1:35:12 ↗ this kind of applies to the sidewalks

1:35:13 ↗ too it's important to make sure that

1:35:16 ↗ we fill on every single gap and

1:35:19 ↗ you know maybe we spend a little more to

1:35:21 ↗ get that final

1:35:23 ↗ few few hundred feet or so a few dozen

1:35:26 ↗ feeds um

1:35:28 ↗ because ending sidewalks in the middle

1:35:30 ↗ of nowhere is kind of

1:35:32 ↗ not very great anyways

1:35:43 ↗ thanks julian do we have any other um

1:35:45 ↗ burning projects at people because that

1:35:47 ↗ was one of

1:35:48 ↗ her questions um

1:35:52 ↗ are we missing anything so

1:35:55 ↗ i just wanted to kind of make a last

1:35:56 ↗ call before we wrap up and then maybe

1:35:58 ↗ um as well i don't know if you want to

1:35:59 ↗ summarize kind of what you're hearing

1:36:01 ↗ and what you think

1:36:01 ↗ would be next it looks like erica's got

1:36:03 ↗ a comment but erica can you

1:36:05 ↗ rather than have us read that can you go

1:36:07 ↗ ahead and um

1:36:09 ↗ sure real time i can't it's not i don't

1:36:12 ↗ think this is an issue for tab but i

1:36:14 ↗ think one of the problems as well as

1:36:16 ↗ um for the uh sammamish 56 is that

1:36:19 ↗ um i've been in that turn line trying to

1:36:21 ↗ take like double checking to

1:36:23 ↗ before i take that free right because i

1:36:25 ↗ know like of like there's

1:36:26 ↗ you know been pedestrians there but then

1:36:27 ↗ the guy behind me will honk like it's

1:36:29 ↗ such an entitlement

1:36:30 ↗ and i i just think that's probably more

1:36:32 ↗ like a driver awareness thing or that

1:36:33 ↗ needs to like be re-taught

1:36:34 ↗ and like driving school or something but

1:36:37 ↗ i think that also might add to like some

1:36:38 ↗ of the pressure of that situation or if

1:36:40 ↗ like you just depends on who's behind

1:36:42 ↗ you because they can't see

1:36:43 ↗ who is um who's crossing the crosswalk

1:36:54 ↗ thanks

1:37:02 ↗ so it sounds like we've um good job

1:37:04 ↗ everybody we heard from everybody so

1:37:06 ↗ thank you

1:37:07 ↗ um what um

1:37:10 ↗ i think we heard some common themes um i

1:37:13 ↗ see as well as taking notes do you want

1:37:15 ↗ to

1:37:15 ↗ um kind of summarize what you heard uh

1:37:18 ↗ doesn't sound like we actually take

1:37:19 ↗ formal action but it is good to know

1:37:22 ↗ because you know we all have slightly

1:37:24 ↗ different opinions and

1:37:25 ↗ um we want to act as a board to provide

1:37:29 ↗ kind of a unified feedback to to you all

1:37:32 ↗ so

1:37:33 ↗ i'll summarize what i've heard and if i

1:37:34 ↗ am missing anything or if

1:37:36 ↗ or if anything uh sounds like it's not

1:37:40 ↗ right let me know um it seems from the

1:37:43 ↗ project

1:37:44 ↗ list that we have uh presented the

1:37:46 ↗ southeast 56th

1:37:48 ↗ and east lake smanish parkway had a

1:37:51 ↗ general

1:37:53 ↗ goal go ahead with the board like a

1:37:56 ↗ general priority

1:37:58 ↗ on that one in terms of additional

1:38:01 ↗ projects

1:38:02 ↗ we have heard like dogwood at newport

1:38:06 ↗ um to provide or enhance visibility

1:38:09 ↗ uh seems like street lighting and

1:38:13 ↗ obstructions visibility obstructions at

1:38:16 ↗ that intersection going

1:38:17 ↗ westbound um is a a huge concern

1:38:22 ↗ and also the i90 ramps and front street

1:38:25 ↗ uh

1:38:25 ↗ although that intersection uh is not uh

1:38:30 ↗ in uh is inside city right of way

1:38:33 ↗ uh just keeping keeping it on our list

1:38:37 ↗ of projects to do uh in coordination

1:38:40 ↗ with what

1:38:40 ↗ would keep us moving from doing doing

1:38:43 ↗ something on that

1:38:44 ↗ in terms of priority seems like uh

1:38:47 ↗ we should take into consideration the

1:38:50 ↗ cost

1:38:50 ↗ traffic volumes uh number of traffic

1:38:53 ↗ accidents or

1:38:54 ↗ accident history on those locations and

1:38:57 ↗ sidewalk to provide

1:38:59 ↗ a priority to sidewalk connectivity

1:39:03 ↗ and that's about my summary if i am

1:39:07 ↗ missing anything

1:39:08 ↗ um please feel free

1:39:12 ↗ to jump in

1:39:15 ↗ can i ask by connectivity do you mean

1:39:18 ↗ like connectivity to

1:39:20 ↗ services or like gaps in the same gap

1:39:22 ↗ sorry

1:39:23 ↗ gaps gaps missing gaps on sidewalk

1:39:34 ↗ is there anything else i should

1:39:39 ↗ include on us to summarize

1:40:02 ↗ so now we're in this betwixt in between

1:40:05 ↗ because we don't quite have enough time

1:40:06 ↗ for transit

1:40:08 ↗ item 4c um

1:40:12 ↗ we've got about just under 20 minutes

1:40:15 ↗ left to go um steven

1:40:20 ↗ tony

1:40:34 ↗ do you want to get it started or do we

1:40:37 ↗ want to

1:40:39 ↗ get out of class early

1:40:46 ↗ i'm concerned if we start it we might

1:40:49 ↗ like build up some questions

1:40:51 ↗ and then run out of time um and then

1:40:55 ↗ like i'm gonna do my best to write stuff

1:40:56 ↗ down but like stuff might just fly out

1:40:57 ↗ my head

1:40:58 ↗ time we get to next month if when we

1:41:00 ↗ take this up again that's my only

1:41:02 ↗ concern

1:41:10 ↗ stephen how about if you um just frame

1:41:12 ↗ it

1:41:13 ↗ and then um remind us what the

1:41:17 ↗ what the task is i know this was just

1:41:19 ↗ going to be um

1:41:21 ↗ information maybe just frame it and

1:41:24 ↗ we'll

1:41:24 ↗ um bring it in next time

1:41:37 ↗ sure would it help for me to um

1:41:41 ↗ show a couple slides so to help kind of

1:41:43 ↗ frame it all

1:41:44 ↗ it's easier to kind of show than me talk

1:41:46 ↗ about it than anything else

1:41:48 ↗ the kind of the main see if i can

1:41:53 ↗ share my screen

1:42:07 ↗ all right so um the main thing is that

1:42:10 ↗ with the pandemic the

1:42:13 ↗ cds cause kind of experienced a huge

1:42:16 ↗ cut or not cup but suspension of

1:42:18 ↗ multiple services

1:42:20 ↗ which resulted in

1:42:24 ↗ only three routes actually staying in

1:42:26 ↗ service throughout the pandemic and

1:42:28 ↗ with this upcoming fall service change

1:42:31 ↗ we'll

1:42:32 ↗ actually be getting most of those

1:42:33 ↗ services back some will be partial

1:42:35 ↗ um only two routes will remain suspended

1:42:37 ↗ that's about 200

1:42:39 ↗ and route 219 which will be considered

1:42:41 ↗ for

1:42:42 ↗ potential

1:42:45 ↗ potentially bringing them back next

1:42:47 ↗ spring or

1:42:48 ↗ at the latest next fall king county

1:42:51 ↗ council did approve in the budget to

1:42:53 ↗ bring back

1:42:53 ↗ all suspended services but if they

1:42:55 ↗ didn't leave out

1:42:57 ↗ any of the potential options for

1:43:00 ↗ cutting any services that were had had

1:43:03 ↗ low ridership

1:43:04 ↗ uh or had low performance and uh with

1:43:06 ↗ with the

1:43:07 ↗ consideration of reinvesting that that's

1:43:10 ↗ those services

1:43:10 ↗ into something else in the community and

1:43:12 ↗ so we'll be kind of updating the board

1:43:14 ↗ later on about that

1:43:16 ↗ the biggest thing i wanted to kind of

1:43:18 ↗ bring to the board's attention was

1:43:20 ↗ just the city's efforts to advance

1:43:23 ↗ transit

1:43:23 ↗ and i won't go into that tonight

1:43:26 ↗ i'll go into that next time when i have

1:43:28 ↗ the presentation just so

1:43:30 ↗ i don't go too much onto the board's

1:43:33 ↗ time and

1:43:34 ↗ um cause you all to have more questions

1:43:39 ↗ are there any questions at least on the

1:43:42 ↗ the current side of transit services

1:43:47 ↗ go ahead julian um so i was looking at

1:43:51 ↗ the slide deck earlier

1:43:52 ↗ this week um before i went on my trip

1:43:56 ↗ then you include sound transit

1:43:58 ↗ realignment what is this city doing

1:44:00 ↗ um in terms of you know uh

1:44:05 ↗ its position to the county or to sound

1:44:08 ↗ transit itself

1:44:09 ↗ in terms of realignment and what options

1:44:12 ↗ we could have

1:44:14 ↗ sure so the the city count several civic

1:44:18 ↗ city council members have membership on

1:44:19 ↗ regional boards

1:44:22 ↗ since we don't have a position on the

1:44:24 ↗ sound transit board we're

1:44:25 ↗ actually leveraging um

1:44:28 ↗ a lot of partnerships within the region

1:44:31 ↗ to

1:44:32 ↗ work with the sound transit board and

1:44:35 ↗ sound transit staff

1:44:36 ↗ on a timeline for implementation of the

1:44:39 ↗ sound transit 3

1:44:40 ↗ package which includes the light rail

1:44:42 ↗ coming to isoqual

1:44:44 ↗ currently the package is

1:44:47 ↗ there's no proposed change yet

1:44:50 ↗ there is a chair if you look at the last

1:44:53 ↗ sound transit board meeting there you

1:44:55 ↗ you can find a

1:44:56 ↗ chairs uh realignment proposal

1:45:00 ↗ that's not the final proposal it's still

1:45:02 ↗ being worked on

1:45:03 ↗ um so when i have more information about

1:45:06 ↗ that on

1:45:06 ↗ on what's going to be considered for a

1:45:08 ↗ charitable i'll send that out to the

1:45:14 ↗ board

1:45:16 ↗ i see micah and david

1:45:21 ↗ so how are the decisions being made like

1:45:24 ↗ what are you looking at to decide which

1:45:26 ↗ routes

1:45:26 ↗ to bring back and what's the

1:45:30 ↗ what's the plan for responding to demand

1:45:34 ↗ as opposed to just having you know some

1:45:36 ↗ set date

1:45:38 ↗ for return to service so metro

1:45:42 ↗ uh several a few months back

1:45:45 ↗ sent out uh regional surveys to

1:45:47 ↗ everybody in consideration of recovery

1:45:50 ↗ and they used that in their budgeting

1:45:52 ↗ proposal with the king county council

1:45:55 ↗ which was approved a couple months ago

1:46:00 ↗ and part of that proposal was actually

1:46:02 ↗ the decision to bring back certain

1:46:03 ↗ services

1:46:05 ↗ using kind of their evaluation tools

1:46:08 ↗ they have in place right now

1:46:10 ↗ some of that is considering equity uh

1:46:12 ↗ other that is considering performance

1:46:14 ↗ metrics

1:46:15 ↗ uh which is looking at ridership which

1:46:17 ↗ is looking at

1:46:18 ↗ the amount of um

1:46:22 ↗ what's kind of been the trend over over

1:46:23 ↗ the last few years

1:46:25 ↗ or what's ridership is it growing is it

1:46:27 ↗ getting worse

1:46:28 ↗ what's the planned land use if any

1:46:31 ↗ development

1:46:32 ↗ in the considered area so metro is

1:46:34 ↗ actually looking

1:46:35 ↗ doing much better when considering

1:46:38 ↗ changes to

1:46:39 ↗ upcoming ridership but at the same time

1:46:42 ↗ there's still more to be done they're

1:46:43 ↗ actually considering making changes to a

1:46:45 ↗ lot of those policies at this time

1:46:51 ↗ uh but to answer your question the city

1:46:54 ↗ didn't

1:46:55 ↗ have um we don't have control over which

1:46:58 ↗ routes come back when

1:46:59 ↗ it's it's uh king county metro that

1:47:01 ↗ controls all that uh

1:47:03 ↗ we do try to work with metro in terms of

1:47:05 ↗ like we pushed out

1:47:07 ↗ the metro survey to the community to to

1:47:09 ↗ respond both to metro and

1:47:11 ↗ sound transit surveys on how they wanted

1:47:14 ↗ to approach recovery

1:47:16 ↗ and we also worked with metro staff

1:47:19 ↗ when it comes to considerations for the

1:47:22 ↗ different routes and impacts it might

1:47:23 ↗ have on

1:47:24 ↗ different community members

1:47:34 ↗ i think dave wagner had a question yeah

1:47:37 ↗ okay

1:47:38 ↗ um thanks stephen it's more of a comment

1:47:42 ↗ uh you have on that suspended

1:47:45 ↗ uh list the 218

1:47:48 ↗ i know that they're running the 218 now

1:47:51 ↗ from

1:47:52 ↗ the highlands park and ride in uh

1:47:54 ↗ they're only running 40 footers

1:47:57 ↗ uh but that tells me that that's back on

1:47:59 ↗ track

1:48:00 ↗ so actually you've got four on active

1:48:04 ↗ service

1:48:06 ↗ with that 218 so it's not suspended

1:48:08 ↗ anymore

1:48:11 ↗ some of some of the budget requests that

1:48:13 ↗ metro put in place was to potentially

1:48:16 ↗ bring back services starting last month

1:48:19 ↗ so the 218 was probably one of those

1:48:21 ↗ routes that they were able to make

1:48:22 ↗ make happen sooner than later

1:48:25 ↗ but thank you for bringing that up and

1:48:27 ↗ that's a very important route because it

1:48:30 ↗ doesn't do the doesn't stop really in

1:48:33 ↗ downtown is a quad doesn't do the

1:48:35 ↗ flyover stop

1:48:36 ↗ on the way out of town at eastgate so

1:48:39 ↗ it's uh

1:48:40 ↗ really a very popular route to get

1:48:43 ↗ people to ride

1:48:57 ↗ great is there any other questions

1:49:10 ↗ going from julian

1:49:13 ↗ so for it's going to be a while until

1:49:17 ↗ all the services is going to be restored

1:49:19 ↗ particularly

1:49:20 ↗ route 200

1:49:24 ↗ next year as you said are there any

1:49:27 ↗ alternative methods of intel mobility

1:49:31 ↗ that you're considering

1:49:32 ↗ like uh i'm we're not really much of a

1:49:35 ↗ big

1:49:35 ↗ city yet but like bike share or

1:49:38 ↗ something like that

1:49:47 ↗ as we keep growing as a city

1:49:52 ↗ bike share so um first last mile options

1:49:55 ↗ like bike share have been

1:49:56 ↗ discussed at the city um with our

1:49:58 ↗ regional partners but also

1:50:01 ↗ um in response to

1:50:04 ↗ the the growth of those type of mode

1:50:07 ↗ share modes or travel options

1:50:10 ↗ throughout the region the city esqua

1:50:14 ↗ hasn't really come to a decision on when

1:50:16 ↗ or when bike share should be kind of

1:50:18 ↗ implemented within the city it's

1:50:19 ↗ something that's

1:50:20 ↗ still in consideration but there's

1:50:22 ↗ hesitation just because

1:50:24 ↗ we have not had the as much development

1:50:26 ↗ with our infrastructure to support

1:50:28 ↗ bike share systems as a lot of our

1:50:30 ↗ surrounding cities

1:50:32 ↗ and so that's a big concern um something

1:50:34 ↗ that we're hoping to make improvements

1:50:35 ↗ on the net in

1:50:36 ↗ kind of the near future um and some of

1:50:40 ↗ the fluctuation with bike share

1:50:41 ↗ companies

1:50:43 ↗ and or even scooter share companies have

1:50:45 ↗ kind of been in question too and so

1:50:47 ↗ some of it is waiting to see how the

1:50:49 ↗ market plays but also giving us time to

1:50:51 ↗ build up our infrastructure

1:50:53 ↗ to make it a more comfortable system for

1:50:56 ↗ bike share and

1:50:57 ↗ scooter show to even operate

1:51:04 ↗ i've got something to share

1:51:07 ↗ um uh i know the highlands um

1:51:11 ↗ has a uh van like it's something that

1:51:14 ↗ you can use for like vanpool

1:51:15 ↗ options um but that is something that i

1:51:18 ↗ think they got from

1:51:20 ↗ king county metro themselves it's like a

1:51:22 ↗ retired van that's been kind of rehabbed

1:51:25 ↗ um but that is um

1:51:28 ↗ kind of appointment only or getting in

1:51:30 ↗ contact with the executive director

1:51:32 ↗ of the um at blakely hall there

1:51:35 ↗ so that's an option i think they're

1:51:38 ↗ still kind of sussing out how they're

1:51:39 ↗ going to fully use that

1:51:41 ↗ but i know it was doing runs or was an

1:51:43 ↗ option for

1:51:44 ↗ um taking folks to the cooling center

1:51:47 ↗ things like that i think it's

1:51:48 ↗ um seniors it's like a target

1:51:52 ↗ but it's more of a like neighborhood

1:51:54 ↗ option

1:51:58 ↗ and thank you you reminded me of jul the

1:52:01 ↗ other part of julian's question

1:52:03 ↗ um so it's in in terms of what what else

1:52:05 ↗ the city is considering

1:52:07 ↗ city council actually just approved for

1:52:09 ↗ staff to

1:52:11 ↗ look into a partnership with king county

1:52:13 ↗ metro to consider some type of shuttle

1:52:14 ↗ service

1:52:15 ↗ or flexible service with metro

1:52:19 ↗ to pilot within the city potentially in

1:52:22 ↗ the talus

1:52:24 ↗ squawk neighborhoods but also to

1:52:26 ↗ consider expanding expansion of some

1:52:28 ↗ type of that type of program

1:52:30 ↗ in more parts of the city more

1:52:32 ↗ information will kind of come out once

1:52:33 ↗ we get more details

1:52:35 ↗ as we develop the partnership with metro

1:52:46 ↗ yeah i i saw all of those items in the

1:52:50 ↗ budget particularly the the community

1:52:52 ↗ shuttle

1:52:53 ↗ you know highlands and the king county's

1:52:57 ↗ program to

1:52:58 ↗ retire various vans um and let various

1:53:02 ↗ community groups

1:53:03 ↗ use those um i'm just saying that

1:53:07 ↗ bike share in particular is quite um

1:53:11 ↗ amazing for just in-time mobility i've

1:53:13 ↗ been using it around chicago

1:53:24 ↗ so

1:53:26 ↗ are we gonna move on for now on transit

1:53:29 ↗ and come back to it then another time

1:53:32 ↗ that's it for me unless uh the board

1:53:34 ↗ would like more information

1:53:42 ↗ i'm not seeing any more questions yeah

1:53:45 ↗ so not seeing any it sounds like we'll

1:53:46 ↗ move on to

1:53:47 ↗ 5a you want to review the work plan and

1:53:50 ↗ uh now we already know there's one

1:53:52 ↗ change

1:54:00 ↗ is that isabelle or stephen yes i am

1:54:03 ↗ trying to pull that up

1:54:04 ↗ from the website and

1:54:08 ↗ to

1:54:13 ↗ okay so next

1:54:17 ↗ up for uh the august

1:54:20 ↗ meeting so now we will be moving

1:54:23 ↗ uh the transit discussion the more

1:54:26 ↗ detailed transit

1:54:27 ↗ transit discussion for the next meeting

1:54:30 ↗ uh we

1:54:30 ↗ had on our list to also

1:54:35 ↗ include the continue with the uh

1:54:38 ↗ discussion about the transportation

1:54:40 ↗ improvement project program

1:54:42 ↗ project update uh in the project of

1:54:45 ↗ northwest some amish road non-motorized

1:54:48 ↗ project

1:54:48 ↗ discussion and actually we did have

1:54:52 ↗ uh uh the transit discussion for that

1:54:55 ↗ one the continuation of that one so it

1:54:57 ↗ seems like we

1:54:58 ↗ will still have those uh three topics on

1:55:01 ↗ the agenda for

1:55:03 ↗ next meeting

1:55:18 ↗ is there anything else to discuss on the

1:55:19 ↗ work plan

1:55:21 ↗ um do we go into the

1:55:24 ↗ next uh for the rest of the year on this

1:55:28 ↗ one

1:55:28 ↗ i can i can go uh

1:55:32 ↗ into all all of them i just think it's

1:55:34 ↗ important maybe and steven i don't know

1:55:36 ↗ if you want to go through this i just

1:55:37 ↗ think it is important to just note that

1:55:40 ↗ sounds like we'll be um revisiting the

1:55:43 ↗ racial equity discussion which is i know

1:55:45 ↗ a high priority

1:55:47 ↗ yes and we have that for september uh

1:55:51 ↗ meeting scheduled for september meeting

1:55:54 ↗ for now

1:55:58 ↗ and i was just i'll i was also just

1:56:00 ↗ going to add with the

1:56:01 ↗ in the staff report tonight um just kind

1:56:03 ↗ of a brief update

1:56:10 ↗ all right are we there do we want to get

1:56:12 ↗ to that

1:56:15 ↗ sure um just to follow from our previous

1:56:19 ↗ discussions on on racial equity and kind

1:56:21 ↗ of continuing the momentum

1:56:23 ↗ um i wasn't able to have a meeting with

1:56:25 ↗ our consultant yet that's scheduled

1:56:28 ↗ in the next few weeks there was some

1:56:31 ↗ scoping issues why i couldn't meet with

1:56:33 ↗ her yet but i'm gonna

1:56:34 ↗ be continuing the conversation with her

1:56:36 ↗ on figuring out how to

1:56:38 ↗ keep up the momentum with the

1:56:39 ↗ transportation advisory board to discuss

1:56:41 ↗ racial equity

1:56:42 ↗ but also figure out uh other

1:56:45 ↗ discussion items that the board could be

1:56:47 ↗ considering as we wait

1:56:48 ↗ for the city to develop its its own

1:56:51 ↗ equity assessment framework

1:56:53 ↗ and if you want more information about

1:56:56 ↗ that the

1:56:57 ↗ city staff small group of city staff

1:56:59 ↗ actually met with the city council

1:57:00 ↗ earlier this week to discuss that

1:57:02 ↗ um and it was an interesting

1:57:04 ↗ conversation i won't go too much into it

1:57:06 ↗ but

1:57:06 ↗ if you'd like to learn more i would look

1:57:08 ↗ at the study session materials from

1:57:10 ↗ earlier this week

1:57:17 ↗ that's it from me anything from john

1:57:19 ↗ roosevelt yes

1:57:20 ↗ i've got oh go ahead john yeah i've got

1:57:23 ↗ one to add and i think isabelle might

1:57:25 ↗ have one

1:57:26 ↗ earlier this year the city applied for

1:57:30 ↗ three different grants to do overlays on

1:57:33 ↗ city streets

1:57:34 ↗ and two of our projects were selected

1:57:37 ↗ which means soon we'll begin

1:57:39 ↗ designed to do an overlay on east lake

1:57:43 ↗ sammamish parkway from black nugget road

1:57:46 ↗ to 50th and then

1:57:49 ↗ on southeast 43rd from the roundabout

1:57:52 ↗ at east lake smamish parkway

1:57:56 ↗ up until just before the providence

1:57:59 ↗ ridge

1:58:00 ↗ subdivision okay

1:58:04 ↗ um

1:58:08 ↗ sorry i'm just saying that's cause for

1:58:09 ↗ celebration well done yes

1:58:11 ↗ yes it is um so for the street

1:58:14 ↗ escape plan uh that one is still moving

1:58:17 ↗ forward uh with

1:58:18 ↗ a construction plan to start within the

1:58:21 ↗ next couple of months

1:58:29 ↗ i think that's what we have for a

1:58:32 ↗ staff report

1:58:35 ↗ i don't have a chair report i made some

1:58:37 ↗ comments earlier about the training

1:58:38 ↗ and that was really useful and sujata

1:58:40 ↗ was able to attend as well that's

1:58:42 ↗ about it do we have a youth report um i

1:58:45 ↗ don't have a youth report today

1:58:50 ↗ all right any other announcements

1:58:56 ↗ you may make just one quick historical

1:58:59 ↗ comment

1:59:00 ↗ please so when i was a youth

1:59:05 ↗ uh and i lived out on hobart road

1:59:09 ↗ one of my greatest fears was breaking

1:59:12 ↗ down on the hobart road on the way home

1:59:15 ↗ because i knew that there would be no

1:59:17 ↗ cars coming by

1:59:18 ↗ to get a ride or rescue i just wanted

1:59:22 ↗ you guys to know that there was a time

1:59:24 ↗ in life

1:59:25 ↗ when that really existed it doesn't

1:59:28 ↗ exist anymore

1:59:29 ↗ but there was a time in life when that

1:59:31 ↗ existed

1:59:36 ↗ especially on a double date

1:59:43 ↗ oh my goodness all right well well done

1:59:46 ↗ team

1:59:47 ↗ um look it's eight o'clock sharp

1:59:50 ↗ um if there's nothing else i propose we

1:59:52 ↗ adjourn

1:59:54 ↗ thank you all appreciate all the great

1:59:57 ↗ thoughts and um

1:59:59 ↗ yeah looking forward we got one more

2:00:00 ↗ zoom and then then we'll be in

2:00:02 ↗ in the flesh

2:00:06 ↗ thank you very good good night everyone

2:00:08 ↗ good night thanks guys

Approved minutes

The minutes PDF below is the canonical record. Structured parsing of attendance and motions for this body's minutes format is not yet implemented — open the PDF for the full content.

Open PDF