Transportation Advisory Board · Wednesday, October 25, 2023 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of June 26, 2023

packet pp.3–5

▶ Watch from 0:19 Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 06-26-23 Transportation Advisory Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Transportation Advisory Board 6:00 PM Steelhead Room, 235 1st Ave SE, June 26, 2023 MINUTES Issaquah

Minutes of Sept 27, 2023

packet pp.7–9

▶ Watch from 1:10 Open packet at p.7 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES b) 09-27-23 Transportation Advisory Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Transportation Advisory Board 6:00 PM Tibbetts Manor, 750 17th Ave. September 27, 2023 MINUTES NW, Issaquah

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

Transportation Element Periodic Update

90 min · Thomas Valdriz, Senior Transportation Planner · packet pp.11–58

Topics: Transportation

▶ Watch from 2:01 Open packet at p.11 ↗

Staff report:

The purpose of the October 25, 2023, meeting is to review and discuss the first draft of transportation policies for the state required 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update.

5. REPORTS

Board Work Plan

packet pp.59

Open packet at p.59 ↗

Staff report:

Element ADA Transition No No Plan TBD Traffic Calming TAB Intro & TAB Program

Staff Report

Chair Report

Youth Report

1634 segments .txt ↗

0:02 ↗ is Julian M I'm the vice chair but uh

0:06 ↗ acting as chair due to C grass's absence

0:11 ↗ today um I'll call meeting to order uh

0:14 ↗ 6:12 p.m. um first thing that we have is

0:19 ↗ approval of the minutes uh of June 20 26

0:24 ↗ 2023 um so

0:28 ↗ by

0:30 ↗ that's correct

0:33 ↗ um yeah if we have a question about the

0:35 ↗ minutes yeah if you have a question yeah

0:38 ↗ this is Tom and I had a question about

0:39 ↗ minutes as far as I read on the it so it

0:44 ↗ pretty much

0:47 ↗ etty straightforward it is

0:51 ↗ or significance or

0:54 ↗ com I think that's for staff but my my

0:59 ↗ thing thinking is that there wasn't much

1:02 ↗ discussion over the it and went

1:06 ↗ tobly

1:13 ↗ quickly and so by name consent or if

1:17 ↗ there's no objection um then we'll adopt

1:22 ↗ the minutes of meeting um and then

1:26 ↗ now moving to um

1:30 ↗ with un consent um adopting for our

1:34 ↗ September meeting if there's any any

1:37 ↗ questions about

1:39 ↗ it okay good um well in that case no

1:44 ↗ objection we'll adopt the September

1:46 ↗ meeting

1:48 ↗ minutes do we have any public

1:51 ↗ comment is one online and no extra

1:55 ↗ people here so

1:56 ↗ no well in that case um we will go right

2:01 ↗ into the regular business the only item

2:04 ↗ that we have there is the transportation

2:06 ↗ element here like updates um presented

2:10 ↗ by Thomas

2:16 ↗ ales all right thanks so much everybody

2:18 ↗ for being here appreciate your

2:20 ↗ time um I will be going through the

2:24 ↗ transportation element uh periodic

2:26 ↗ update um so first I'll just provide

2:29 ↗ some background

2:31 ↗ information uh I I'll provide some

2:34 ↗ background information on the uh

2:37 ↗ comprehensive plan which is uh the the

2:40 ↗ broader uh document the transportation

2:42 ↗ element is within um provides some

2:45 ↗ history on that uh talk about like why

2:47 ↗ it is that we're updating this um and

2:50 ↗ then we'll get into the meat of like

2:52 ↗ what we're doing here today so uh in

2:55 ↗ addition to the uh information that was

2:58 ↗ provided I also printed out a track

3:01 ↗ changes version so we can walk through

3:02 ↗ that as well if that's

3:08 ↗ helpful um so again uh we're going to be

3:10 ↗ reviewing the proposed amendments to the

3:12 ↗ transportation element um and then I'll

3:16 ↗ ask the board a couple questions uh so

3:19 ↗ as I'm going through this please just

3:21 ↗ sort of consider these in the back of

3:24 ↗ your mind and we will come through later

3:27 ↗ um and hopefully get some good feedback

3:29 ↗ from you all uh so first question is

3:31 ↗ does the board have any feedback on the

3:33 ↗ proposed

3:34 ↗ updates um do the proposed goals and

3:37 ↗ policies address transport uh is cause

3:39 ↗ Transportation needs uh and are there

3:43 ↗ topics not addressed in the proposed

3:45 ↗ goals and policies for

3:50 ↗ transportation so uh to talk about the

3:54 ↗ comprehensive plan requires me to sort

3:56 ↗ of go back a little bit so to provide

3:59 ↗ some cont context um the state requires

4:03 ↗ that cities counties and regions plan

4:06 ↗ for growth uh so in 1990 the state of

4:11 ↗ Washington was uh seeing a lot of growth

4:15 ↗ happening and um there was not cohesive

4:19 ↗ planning policies to sort of guide

4:21 ↗ growth so uh 1990 the state required uh

4:26 ↗ planning for growth uh and the the

4:28 ↗ region the count and isqua we all are

4:32 ↗ aligned with that

4:36 ↗ um and so over the years the 1990 growth

4:39 ↗ management act has been updated to sort

4:41 ↗ of remain current with the the needs of

4:44 ↗ the state um but that's sort of just a

4:47 ↗ little bit of background information so

4:49 ↗ we are required by the state to uh to

4:51 ↗ update our comprehensive plan and the

4:55 ↗ comprehensive plan is providing a

4:56 ↗ framework for regional growth management

4:59 ↗ um requires that counties also consider

5:01 ↗ growth um there's several requirements

5:04 ↗ that are with uh within that that I'll

5:06 ↗ get into um and it also requires that

5:09 ↗ cities uh develop their own

5:11 ↗ comprehensive plans so this uh this

5:14 ↗ yellow area is sort of what we're

5:16 ↗ looking at so there's there's a cohesive

5:19 ↗ line between the state uh the region the

5:21 ↗ county and and local government and

5:24 ↗ we're really looking at um there's like

5:26 ↗ 14 things that we look at but generally

5:28 ↗ speaking it's about population growth

5:31 ↗ sprawl and quality of life or some of

5:33 ↗ the the topics that are covered within

5:38 ↗ this so today we're focused on Mobility

5:41 ↗ uh this is one of the chapters of the

5:45 ↗ comprehensive plan so in here there's

5:48 ↗ all these uh chapters that we call

5:50 ↗ Elements um so the mobility or

5:53 ↗ Transportation element is what we're

5:54 ↗ focused on today

5:57 ↗ um we

6:05 ↗ um within this uh there's several topics

6:10 ↗ uh

6:11 ↗ So within the comprehensive plan there's

6:14 ↗ you know multiple topics uh Mobility is

6:17 ↗ what we're focused on there's uh two of

6:20 ↗ these uh that the city currently tracks

6:23 ↗ um that are not required by the state so

6:25 ↗ human uh Human Services and cultural

6:28 ↗ element uh are two that the city finds

6:31 ↗ are important but uh not required so

6:34 ↗ there is some flexibility with how we do

6:36 ↗ this um the city uh we act independently

6:39 ↗ so we we want to have our own stamp on

6:42 ↗ uh how we carry this forward um many

6:45 ↗ cities have their own uh additional

6:47 ↗ elements they uh they track as well but

6:50 ↗ Mobility is one of the required elements

6:52 ↗ that we're close to

6:56 ↗ track and so today uh we'll be talking

6:59 ↗ about about specifically the periodic

7:01 ↗ update um of the transportation element

7:04 ↗ there's two types of uh updates that we

7:06 ↗ could do uh we tend to do annual updates

7:09 ↗ for some of the elements so some of you

7:12 ↗ may recall uh in 2020 we updated the

7:15 ↗ comprehensive plan when we implemented

7:18 ↗ the mobility master plan so this was uh

7:21 ↗ something that we did on our own uh that

7:23 ↗ was not required uh but we do want to

7:26 ↗ make sure that the transportation

7:27 ↗ element um is consistent with how we're

7:30 ↗ doing as a community we don't want to

7:33 ↗ wait too long to update it um so that

7:36 ↗ the comprehensive plan is sort of out of

7:38 ↗ line with how the community is growing

7:40 ↗ and all that uh we are required every 10

7:43 ↗ years to do a periodic update so that's

7:45 ↗ why we're here today um this is a

7:47 ↗ required update uh but again we did just

7:50 ↗ update the transportation element not

7:52 ↗ too long ago so we can sort of think of

7:54 ↗ this update as um being more minor of a

7:58 ↗ lift because we re recently updated

8:04 ↗ it

8:06 ↗ and this update is really just sort of

8:09 ↗ coordinating with recent plans that

8:11 ↗ we've put through um so again Mobility

8:13 ↗ master plan we did that three years ago

8:16 ↗ uh recently we've updated the street

8:18 ↗ standards um which provides engineering

8:21 ↗ guidance uh for the design of Roads um

8:24 ↗ so that was recently updated want to

8:26 ↗ make sure that our document is

8:28 ↗ consistent with that uh we also recently

8:31 ↗ did some land use code updates um also

8:33 ↗ this year and we have some plans in

8:35 ↗ development so we're constantly um

8:37 ↗ trying to approve on the policies and

8:40 ↗ regulations that we have um so just

8:42 ↗ making sure that our overarching goals

8:44 ↗ are aligned with that so that's sort of

8:46 ↗ the importance of of this what we're

8:49 ↗ doing

8:50 ↗ today uh just another visual to hammer

8:54 ↗ this home um so the comprehensive plan

8:57 ↗ provides a vision goals and policies

8:59 ↗ um for for how we want to provide

9:02 ↗ transportation in the

9:03 ↗ community and so the goals are providing

9:06 ↗ the high level intent of the

9:07 ↗ transportation system and policies are

9:09 ↗ guiding the

9:10 ↗ implementation um of the goals and so

9:13 ↗ functional plans like the mobility

9:15 ↗ master plan are really um implementing

9:18 ↗ the goals and policies of the

9:20 ↗ transportation

9:23 ↗ element and Mobility master plan

9:25 ↗ includes strategies actions and

9:27 ↗ resources so um there funding associated

9:30 ↗ with the actions uh and the strategies

9:33 ↗ that we're developing to implement the

9:35 ↗ policies are all sort of um making sure

9:38 ↗ that anything that we say we want to do

9:40 ↗ just in a general sense uh will be

9:42 ↗ implemented and there's like actions

9:44 ↗ behind

9:46 ↗ it and this again is sort of similar

9:50 ↗ it's just showing goals and policies

9:51 ↗ from the comprehensive plan are plugged

9:53 ↗ into the functional plan so um we're

9:56 ↗ doing technical analysis uh we're

9:59 ↗ engaging with the community we're we

10:01 ↗ have specific actions strategies and

10:03 ↗ funding um associated with the goals and

10:05 ↗ policies that we put

10:08 ↗ together so with all that thank you for

10:11 ↗ bearing with me um I would like to walk

10:16 ↗ through the goals and policies that

10:18 ↗ we're proposing to

10:20 ↗ update um and I can just start with what

10:25 ↗ we're planning to move um

10:27 ↗ so I should highlighted this earlier um

10:30 ↗ the environmental element I'll use my

10:33 ↗ cursor here environmental element is a

10:36 ↗ new element this year um it's receiving

10:40 ↗ policies from other elements uh because

10:43 ↗ it was not previously required so the

10:46 ↗ mobility element uh will be giving three

10:50 ↗ policies to the environmental element uh

10:54 ↗ so these three policies uh are existing

10:59 ↗ we're also proposing uh amending them to

11:02 ↗ be more actionable um but uh just I

11:06 ↗ guess my my first uh first three that

11:09 ↗ I'm here to get feedback on are on these

11:12 ↗ three so these are at the end I gave you

11:16 ↗ guys a uh piece of paper with track

11:19 ↗ changes um these are towards the end so

11:22 ↗ these

11:27 ↗ are oh yes sorry these are uh these are

11:31 ↗ in the first section section

11:33 ↗ B section what uh section B so this is a

11:37 ↗ climate change and quality of life so

11:38 ↗ that's going to be like oh yeah

11:41 ↗ yeah the third page um so the first

11:47 ↗ three in addition to moving them to the

11:50 ↗ environmental element so outside of the

11:52 ↗ uh Transportation element uh the goal is

11:55 ↗ to just make these more actionable so

11:57 ↗ previously uh we we talked about

12:01 ↗ um

12:02 ↗ achieving a 15% increase U but we didn't

12:07 ↗ specify what that number actually was um

12:09 ↗ so knowing a baseline uh is important so

12:13 ↗ um we just wanted to make sure that this

12:15 ↗ one was going to be

12:19 ↗ uh

12:22 ↗ yes sorry uh so question on

12:25 ↗ that 50% SOB still talking about

12:28 ↗ vehicles to me that's more

12:29 ↗ Transportation than environmental as

12:31 ↗ opposed

12:32 ↗ to U that might be Quantified as the

12:36 ↗ solution production from vehicles and

12:38 ↗ other

12:41 ↗ things kind of

12:44 ↗ consistent on the next one and the the

12:48 ↗ third F where producing emissions to me

12:51 ↗ that's more of a direct

12:56 ↗ [Music]

12:57 ↗ environmental yeah I mean you make a

12:59 ↗ good point um I could see it both ways

13:01 ↗ it initially was in the transportation

13:03 ↗ element however um in environmental

13:07 ↗ element uh this would be in a area that

13:09 ↗ is specific to greenhouse gas reductions

13:12 ↗ and a lot of the intents of tracking

13:14 ↗ these data

13:15 ↗ is for the reasons of greenhouse gas

13:18 ↗ emissions reduction so I can see it both

13:21 ↗ ways but um the direction uh that we've

13:23 ↗ been given is to move it into the

13:25 ↗ environmental element um but I I I

13:28 ↗ definitely hear yeah I wonder if there's

13:30 ↗ a way that we can keep

13:36 ↗ uh still the transportation still talk

13:39 ↗ about

13:41 ↗ vles in the transportation on the

13:44 ↗ environmental side um a reduction of

13:48 ↗ emissions because of reduction of s so

13:51 ↗ and addition of

13:54 ↗ hyper it's almost like but you can see

13:57 ↗ it both ways if you have one the

13:58 ↗ transation talking about Vehicles only

13:59 ↗ the other side is alternative vehicles

14:01 ↗ and reducing the number of

14:03 ↗ vehicles that's direct relationship

14:07 ↗ to yeah I I yeah I I get it yeah U I

14:13 ↗ think ultimately we want to reduce

14:15 ↗ redundancies through this whole Doc it's

14:17 ↗ all going in the same document and we

14:19 ↗ will be tracking it it's just whether or

14:20 ↗ not it lies in this document or another

14:23 ↗ um so I definitely hear you we'll record

14:25 ↗ that as like a comment but um that's

14:26 ↗ sort of where staff is coming from on

14:28 ↗ that but I understand

14:35 ↗ yeah

14:37 ↗ um I'll ask the the chair uh should we

14:40 ↗ maybe roll through all these and then

14:42 ↗ get feedback at the end or how would you

14:44 ↗ like to break this

14:45 ↗ up I think um we

14:49 ↗ can we can go Slide by slide or that's

14:52 ↗ easier yeah I think we can go Slide by

14:55 ↗ slide and get ask for input after every

14:57 ↗ slide

15:00 ↗ sure okay theend we can recap okay

15:05 ↗ sounds good great um so I will maybe

15:08 ↗ stop here on this slide

15:19 ↗ and yeah so maybe just get an initial

15:22 ↗ gut check so one of the things we heard

15:24 ↗ was about uh keeping it here but maybe

15:26 ↗ uh talking about um the intent of just a

15:31 ↗ mode shift generally but not not as it

15:34 ↗ relates to greenhouse gas emissions

15:36 ↗ right

15:37 ↗ um another thing was related

15:41 ↗ to

15:43 ↗ uh yeah

15:46 ↗ so yeah any other any other feedback on

15:50 ↗ on this

15:51 ↗ slide for the first policy achieved 50%

15:55 ↗ single occupancy vehicle mod share

15:59 ↗ by

16:00 ↗ 2030 so how are you comparing that 50%

16:04 ↗ is that from where where is

16:07 ↗ that yeah so I do apologize so this this

16:11 ↗ slide itself is shorthand for the

16:13 ↗ document uh that we have um so if we go

16:18 ↗ I don't have the attachment in front of

16:20 ↗ me here but if you go to attachment B um

16:23 ↗ in in the packet that that really talks

16:26 ↗ about the specifics here

16:29 ↗ um do you want to

16:32 ↗ maybe I guess you're tied up CU that's

16:35 ↗ your computer I know it's yeah um

16:39 ↗ here oh I'm gonna go around here do

16:44 ↗ this um let's put a pin in that and then

16:48 ↗ we'll come back does that work could you

16:52 ↗ maybe grab the attachment B

16:57 ↗ um

17:02 ↗ yeah it's in the

17:05 ↗ yeah unfortunately my computer is in the

17:09 ↗ shop it's it's

17:12 ↗ okay I had a question about the the mode

17:16 ↗ share breakdown so for single it

17:20 ↗ specifies you we on 50% single occupancy

17:23 ↗ vehicle mode share

17:25 ↗ um is there a

17:29 ↗ do you consider also adding on like the

17:31 ↗ other no shares like you know we want

17:34 ↗ maybe 50% and then we want to make the

17:37 ↗ biking mode share increas from like what

17:40 ↗ it is right now increase it to you know

17:43 ↗ 6% or something like that and then

17:45 ↗ Transit 20% that's sort of all yeah yeah

17:49 ↗ that's sort of all implied within the

17:50 ↗ other 50% so if if it's 50% single OCC

17:55 ↗ occupancy vehicle um I believe that

17:57 ↗ Baseline is

17:58 ↗ 2017 if I remember correctly

18:02 ↗ um it's it's in

18:05 ↗ the yeah so it's it's going to be

18:07 ↗ towards the end of that document at the

18:10 ↗ very

18:12 ↗ end yes yep so yeah this is all

18:15 ↗ shorthand for oh you know what let's can

18:18 ↗ you stop sharing so I don't know what is

18:21 ↗ being picked

18:27 ↗ up oh great sounds good thank you John

18:31 ↗ yeah um so again so this is that first

18:34 ↗ part so achieve a 15% increase in

18:37 ↗ non-drive alone mode share from 2017

18:40 ↗ Levels by

18:42 ↗ 2030 um and

18:44 ↗ so a

18:46 ↗ 15% uh increase in non- Drive alone uh I

18:52 ↗ looked it up because it wasn't apparent

18:54 ↗ um we are currently at 65% as of 20 2017

19:00 ↗ so condensing this statement into a

19:03 ↗ shorter statement is to say achieving a

19:06 ↗ 50% single occupancy vehicle mod share

19:09 ↗ by 2030 so it's it's equivalent um but

19:13 ↗ it actually tells you what the number is

19:16 ↗ if that makes

19:17 ↗ sense so if we were at

19:20 ↗ 65 in 2017 in 2017 uh and we want to be

19:24 ↗ at 50 I'm just saying we should be at 50

19:29 ↗ just making it a little bit shorter

19:32 ↗ wouldn't you

19:35 ↗ oh so wouldn't you use a real number

19:38 ↗ instead of a

19:41 ↗ percentage um percentage is sort of what

19:43 ↗ is used because population grows um so

19:47 ↗ to have a real number is kind of more

19:50 ↗ difficult but to say that we want half

19:51 ↗ of people um is more

19:57 ↗ achievable

20:01 ↗ this is on like all trips taken through

20:05 ↗ this because I know like I guess like

20:06 ↗ the statistic of like how many people

20:09 ↗ are just kind of like passing through

20:10 ↗ Isa right who like work here and don't

20:12 ↗ live here and

20:15 ↗ like don't have a question about this

20:17 ↗ but like that's just kind of the back of

20:18 ↗ my mind right now

20:19 ↗ yeah yeah this is all trips um yeah all

20:24 ↗ trips with an isquat it's it's a little

20:26 ↗ bit of a squishy number but this is

20:27 ↗ consider consistent with how we all do

20:29 ↗ it it's it's incredibly difficult to get

20:31 ↗ that hard number um you're using big

20:35 ↗ data to sort of get that number um but

20:39 ↗ we we do have sources that sort of uh

20:41 ↗ you know will give us a rough estimate

20:43 ↗ and that's um that's sort of what we're

20:45 ↗ going for so um so they track it by

20:49 ↗ counting traffics on on the roads yeah

20:51 ↗ there there's a variety of ways um but

20:54 ↗ lots of it is uh sort of um there's

20:58 ↗ there's indirect ways to do it with like

21:00 ↗ cell phone data there's also like

21:03 ↗ um there are travel demand models that

21:06 ↗ are using modeling assumptions to get

21:09 ↗ that information and then they Benchmark

21:12 ↗ it with real data that they collect so

21:15 ↗ um it gets very complicated very quickly

21:17 ↗ but um as far as what we're focused on I

21:21 ↗ we're just focused % we are we are not

21:24 ↗ changing this at all I'm just proposing

21:28 ↗ that we give it a hard and fast number

21:30 ↗ instead of a number that nobody would

21:32 ↗ know what it is if that makes

21:38 ↗ sense I have a question about the um the

21:43 ↗ second

21:45 ↗ policy why is it um per capita vehicle

21:50 ↗ miles travel rather than

21:54 ↗ overall uh it should have been written

21:56 ↗ as per capita that's that's the

21:58 ↗ consistent measure um it just wasn't

22:01 ↗ before

22:06 ↗ yeah um and then the third one

22:10 ↗ uh is pretty uh pretty simple

22:17 ↗ uh I'm just trying to simplify the the

22:20 ↗ uh The Way It Was Written a little bit

22:21 ↗ um then I'm also proposing adding

22:23 ↗ electric bikes um which was not

22:26 ↗ currently uh in the original document

22:30 ↗ but would also lead to

22:34 ↗ reduced greenhouse gas emissions um and

22:37 ↗ would be like another

22:39 ↗ sustainable uh alternative to driving

22:51 ↗ so

22:56 ↗ questions

23:04 ↗ okay I cycle through again so I will now

23:26 ↗ present

23:30 ↗ um so the

23:31 ↗ second set um these are new

23:38 ↗ policies um so this second set and these

23:42 ↗ would go in the existing uh go B

23:45 ↗ category uh so

23:49 ↗ see uh B1 and two are new policies

23:52 ↗ aligning with State and countywide gold

23:54 ↗ and directives that we've been given uh

23:57 ↗ and then B3 is new policies to ensure

24:01 ↗ that our existing commute trip Reduction

24:03 ↗ Program um continues to be aligned with

24:06 ↗ City's needs so uh just to provide a

24:10 ↗ little bit more information um yeah the

24:13 ↗ the first and second are just uh sort of

24:15 ↗ as we think about uh how we're aligning

24:18 ↗ with countywide and Regional and State

24:20 ↗ uh policies and directives these are

24:22 ↗ aligning with that and then this third

24:24 ↗ one um we currently have a program that

24:28 ↗ we are not updating regularly um so it's

24:31 ↗ uh Fallen a little bit behind in terms

24:33 ↗ of being updated so we would like to

24:35 ↗ formalize that um just to say that we

24:38 ↗ need to take a look at this every five

24:40 ↗ years to make sure it's uh up to date is

24:43 ↗ that similar to what other cities are

24:45 ↗ doing also like a fiveyear plan uh five

24:47 ↗ years was what uh for staff that's what

24:52 ↗ seemed to be a good fit for this

24:54 ↗ community um we are experiencing some

24:57 ↗ growth

24:58 ↗ uh now and we will be uh especially

25:01 ↗ within five years so uh five years has a

25:05 ↗ ring to it it seemed to be a good fit um

25:08 ↗ open to suggestions if we should change

25:10 ↗ that um but I think five years gives us

25:14 ↗ enough time to uh know specifically how

25:18 ↗ we're operating um it really gets at a

25:21 ↗ lot of the major Employers in the area

25:23 ↗ um so our current program uh has some

25:28 ↗ information on employe employment

25:30 ↗ numbers that are older um we're always

25:34 ↗ tracking how we're doing in terms of

25:36 ↗ commure production it's not that we're

25:38 ↗ not doing it um but the document itself

25:41 ↗ uh is a little bit old um

25:43 ↗ so I think at this point in the next

25:46 ↗ couple years updating the document

25:48 ↗ wouldn't change a whole lot but um in

25:50 ↗ five years we could experience more

25:52 ↗ growth and it would be good to update

25:54 ↗ the document um

25:56 ↗ regularly to make sure that yeah how

25:59 ↗ much does updating it factor into like

26:02 ↗ competitive for

26:03 ↗ Grants uh it it doesn't that I'm aware

26:06 ↗ of yeah it's it's more about aligning it

26:10 ↗ with how the community is doing and a

26:12 ↗ lot of it is related to the business

26:14 ↗ Community um and making sure that uh

26:17 ↗ larger businesses have alternative ways

26:20 ↗ to get to work instead of driving so

26:25 ↗ it's I have a comment yeah

26:28 ↗ on camera so John lars's friend um so as

26:32 ↗ the CTR program coordinator um this is

26:37 ↗ so CTR is is a state law like um it's

26:40 ↗ required for any company with over 100

26:45 ↗ employees at a given work site we have

26:47 ↗ eight of those in our city um I

26:51 ↗ think and um actually as a point of uh

26:56 ↗ uh interest uh we are required to update

27:01 ↗ our program basically report every four

27:04 ↗ years so that might I don't know if that

27:06 ↗ factors into this at all

27:10 ↗ but just

27:13 ↗ want you're saying the state law

27:15 ↗ requires you updated every four

27:17 ↗ years yes yes uh yes yeah

27:22 ↗ basically or at least the administrators

27:25 ↗ do I don't know if it's law

27:30 ↗ that's maybe one but I thought the part

27:32 ↗ of state law was what you were saying is

27:34 ↗ the companies that are over 100

27:37 ↗ have production

27:40 ↗ plan to see to achieve a

27:47 ↗ certain least in the law it says good

27:50 ↗ faith effort

27:53 ↗ inations could you talk more about what

27:56 ↗ goes into typical

28:01 ↗ evaluation that's a great question

28:04 ↗ because we haven't really done that at

28:06 ↗ the same level so that's why we're ring

28:08 ↗ it the document itself is very

28:13 ↗ old you're the person the person for

28:16 ↗ that I guess like turn this to but does

28:19 ↗ that feel doable given like any other

28:22 ↗ responsibilities that you have or is

28:25 ↗ that like we would maybe have to add

28:26 ↗ another f or something um not at this

28:30 ↗ point I don't think uh eight companies

28:32 ↗ is very manageable um even I think I

28:36 ↗ work maybe a third of my job on

28:39 ↗ it so yeah I think

28:44 ↗ that's and I will say Statewide commut

28:48 ↗ production is becoming more and more

28:50 ↗ important

28:52 ↗ um it's it's a very it's a very widely

28:56 ↗ used program and it's it's very

28:57 ↗ important that we keep up to date on

29:04 ↗ it any other feedback on these

29:10 ↗ three

29:13 ↗ okay all right we will move on to

29:18 ↗ multimodal balance system so this is

29:20 ↗ goal c um there are two new policies for

29:24 ↗ you to consider uh C4 uh this is a new

29:29 ↗ proposal based on feedback from the tab

29:31 ↗ and mobility and infrastructure

29:33 ↗ committee

29:35 ↗ um several months ago I I brought this

29:38 ↗ uh it was there was feedback about uh

29:40 ↗ potentially pursuing M micr Mobility

29:42 ↗ Partnerships or investments in the

29:44 ↗ future um so this is a direct result

29:47 ↗ from that um and then C5 uh this is a

29:51 ↗ new proposal based on what we've heard

29:54 ↗ so far from the transit study um

29:58 ↗ there's an importance of adopting land

30:00 ↗ use policies and multimetal connections

30:03 ↗ to uh a potential new stations so given

30:08 ↗ that this document is a 20-year document

30:10 ↗ um we're sort of thinking ahead about

30:13 ↗ what we could see with a new light rail

30:16 ↗ station uh we will need to support it

30:19 ↗ with land use and connections to the

30:21 ↗ station so we don't have any information

30:23 ↗ on where that station will be but we

30:25 ↗ just want to like sort of Tee It Up for

30:27 ↗ future discussions um by adding it to

30:30 ↗ the

30:32 ↗ document so with Goal C with both of

30:36 ↗ these I mean I guess C is pretty

30:39 ↗ sharpened but the light rail one

30:42 ↗ particular was talking about the support

30:44 ↗ of land use since it is a 20-year plan

30:48 ↗ it might be it might not be good to be

30:49 ↗ too prescriptive about what that means

30:51 ↗ but I do think supportive land use is

30:55 ↗ still a little bit vag um too vague and

31:00 ↗ so I I feel like it might be useful to

31:02 ↗ sharpen the language there and say like

31:05 ↗ you know we need an

31:07 ↗ actual walkable neighborhood like right

31:10 ↗ next to it um or some walkable detail

31:13 ↗ right next to it right yeah yeah I heard

31:17 ↗ I he just saying um I think the

31:19 ↗ vagueness is like you said it's sort of

31:22 ↗ built into why we're doing that um the

31:25 ↗ imple implementation

31:27 ↗ documents that we have associated with

31:29 ↗ it like the transit study or the

31:31 ↗ mobility master plan that's where you

31:33 ↗ would actually hash out like the

31:35 ↗ specifics on how you would get there um

31:37 ↗ so I think just in general like this

31:40 ↗ policy is meant to be pretty broad um

31:44 ↗ just like we're not saying like pursuing

31:46 ↗ micromobility Partnerships with a

31:47 ↗ specific provider um we just want to

31:50 ↗ like set the stage so that uh when we do

31:54 ↗ go down that line we can say that in the

31:57 ↗ transportation element we call for this

32:00 ↗ and um the actual way that we will

32:03 ↗ implement it will be decided um as as we

32:08 ↗ get there we don't we don't really want

32:09 ↗ to

32:10 ↗ like we don't want to say exactly how we

32:13 ↗ want to do it because the conditions

32:15 ↗ might change between now and 20 years

32:17 ↗ from now so it's um I think it's

32:21 ↗ important to be flexible uh with how

32:23 ↗ we're doing this um while also

32:26 ↗ acknowledging that like it's important

32:27 ↗ that we do it right but we just don't

32:29 ↗ know what the right approach is

32:36 ↗ yet in that ve like is it typical to

32:39 ↗ call out Sound Transit by name and I

32:41 ↗ know a couple these it says Metro like

32:44 ↗ could you make it so this is like my

32:46 ↗ legislative brain here but you can't

32:48 ↗ always call out specific organizations

32:50 ↗ within the text of the law like for like

32:52 ↗ a budget Proviso you have to like

32:54 ↗ basically narrowly tailor the

32:56 ↗ description to so that it can like only

32:58 ↗ fit that specific thing so it is the

33:01 ↗ thing but you can't name it by the name

33:03 ↗ it's Sil I that makes sense yeah I don't

33:06 ↗ so I all that is to say basically like

33:09 ↗ if s Trends it like rebrands in 10 years

33:11 ↗ where it's the same entity but are

33:14 ↗ calling themselves something different

33:15 ↗ and like I know that's really minute

33:16 ↗ change but it is it would then make this

33:19 ↗ outdated right like is that I don't know

33:21 ↗ if that's just like standard practice

33:23 ↗ Yeah call by name yeah you make a really

33:26 ↗ great Point um and just more background

33:28 ↗ information we're going to be running

33:30 ↗ all these through legal um to make sure

33:32 ↗ that this is fine um but you make a

33:34 ↗ really great Point um so we will we will

33:35 ↗ definitely not that um in case that is a

33:38 ↗ concern um I am not a lawyer so I did

33:41 ↗ not yeah yeah yeah that's a really great

33:44 ↗ point

33:46 ↗ though any any comments you saying that

33:50 ↗ use does that include considering the

33:52 ↗ topography where

33:54 ↗ you like high altit or the attitudes

33:58 ↗ like flood planes and stuff like that

34:00 ↗ yeah in a way that's all that's all

34:01 ↗ Incorporated um I guess sort of what

34:05 ↗ this is getting at is it's more about

34:09 ↗ um it's more about like what is built in

34:12 ↗ the area um but like as a as an adjacent

34:16 ↗ thing like that would be considered um

34:19 ↗ there are land use policies that are

34:21 ↗ related to environmental sort of things

34:23 ↗ um this one is more directed at like uh

34:26 ↗ within an

34:27 ↗ area adjacent to Transit um making sure

34:32 ↗ that uh there's enough jobs housing that

34:35 ↗ would actually use said transit so it's

34:39 ↗ it's more about um supporting Light Rail

34:43 ↗ through like uh yeah just like making it

34:48 ↗ making it a viable option to actually

34:50 ↗ have light rail there you wouldn't site

34:52 ↗ Light Rail in an area that was like an

34:55 ↗ dangered like environmental area

34:57 ↗ um so that that's all sort of related

34:59 ↗ but this one is more specific to like

35:02 ↗ sort of the the density and the housing

35:03 ↗ and the jobs kind of um

35:10 ↗ IDE so so this was kind of what I was

35:14 ↗ like uh talking about because our idea

35:17 ↗ of support of land use might change in

35:19 ↗ 20 years but I feel like it's still

35:22 ↗ important to capture our intent of like

35:25 ↗ and putting that into language here like

35:27 ↗ saying there have to be jobs near it

35:29 ↗ there have to be housing units near it

35:32 ↗ um we're not specifying how many in this

35:35 ↗ overarching document but we're just

35:37 ↗ saying that there has to be a sufficient

35:39 ↗ number of jobs and housing near the

35:42 ↗ Light Rail station I can

35:45 ↗ serve so yeah that's kind of like how I

35:48 ↗ think it should be okay yeah not sure

35:51 ↗ what others

35:55 ↗ folks

36:03 ↗ great okay keep moving on thank

36:08 ↗ you um so go d uh this is really just

36:12 ↗ adding um a couple words and

36:16 ↗ removing uh a couple words um so I'll

36:19 ↗ start with removing uh we currently have

36:21 ↗ a statement that is inconsistent with

36:23 ↗ state law we want to remove that uh that

36:26 ↗ seems pretty straightforward

36:28 ↗ um and the second part

36:31 ↗ is uh we had currently uh in the

36:34 ↗ document it says Transit stations uh and

36:39 ↗ this is in relation to a sidewalk

36:41 ↗ teering system so the way that we are

36:44 ↗ prioritizing where sidewalks are built

36:47 ↗ um we are currently prioritizing near

36:49 ↗ Transit stations so an example is uh you

36:53 ↗ know over here um at the at the a

36:57 ↗ parking ride um so that's a station uh

37:01 ↗ versus adding Transit stop which would

37:04 ↗ be all bus stops currently um so this is

37:08 ↗ just adding more emphasis on bus stops

37:12 ↗ uh in addition to

37:15 ↗ stations and that's language change from

37:17 ↗ hospitals trans and stops

37:20 ↗ fa

37:24 ↗ yeah and that way stop

37:39 ↗ okay I'll keep moving on thank

37:41 ↗ you um goal e uh just adding additional

37:45 ↗ language talking about the location of

37:48 ↗ potential Light Rail station uh which

37:51 ↗ we're not aware of but just sort of

37:52 ↗ again kind of like what we were talking

37:54 ↗ about with um believe it was like the

37:57 ↗ bike facilities um just teeing it up for

37:59 ↗ future conversations so that we can

38:01 ↗ connect the future light rail station

38:04 ↗ with the bike

38:09 ↗ network is there a question about this

38:12 ↗ is there anything kind of

38:14 ↗ related do you think there's anything

38:16 ↗ needed when you know the walking element

38:19 ↗ saying like you know we need sidewalks

38:22 ↗ within a quarter mile of trans Transit

38:25 ↗ stops is there a way

38:27 ↗ to that through here as

38:30 ↗ well yeah so that would be like more of

38:32 ↗ a specific um action item that we would

38:35 ↗ cover in the mobility master plan so

38:37 ↗ like that very specific thing that's

38:39 ↗ that's a great comment though um that

38:42 ↗ would be just an implementation kind of

38:44 ↗ thing

38:46 ↗ yeah but it sounds like there's emphasis

38:49 ↗ on uh walking walk shed sort of um

38:54 ↗ connections to to Transit

38:58 ↗ um yeah we can certainly add that to the

39:01 ↗ mobility master plan as a consideration

39:09 ↗ yeah any additional comments or

39:12 ↗ questions for this

39:16 ↗ one uh next one is Transit um so with

39:21 ↗ this one this is f section um really

39:27 ↗ just amending it to add uh more actions

39:31 ↗ uh so this is sort of spelling out some

39:33 ↗ things that we um would like to see as

39:37 ↗ we prepare for high-capacity Transit um

39:41 ↗ these are some general things that we

39:42 ↗ could be looking at um so these are just

39:45 ↗ like the action steps that we're

39:47 ↗ proposing

39:49 ↗ um again uh with

39:52 ↗ F2 uh adding language to

39:57 ↗ uh anticipate Light Rail and other

40:01 ↗ Transit service that would uh connect to

40:04 ↗ light rail so just sort of thinking

40:06 ↗ about that um in the 20-year window that

40:09 ↗ this document is all about

40:15 ↗ um F4 is yeah again this an F F4 and F5

40:20 ↗ are new um so these are establishing

40:23 ↗ Partnerships um these are sort of

40:25 ↗ formalizing relationships that we've

40:28 ↗ been developing

40:29 ↗ um for a long time but especially during

40:32 ↗ the trend study uh we've been

40:34 ↗ formalizing these Partnerships um in

40:38 ↗ collaborating with King County Metro and

40:40 ↗ Sound Transit there's a lot of ways that

40:42 ↗ staff can uh enhance Transit options

40:46 ↗ access and reliability um one example is

40:50 ↗ our new uh program or uh our new shuttle

40:54 ↗ program so it's super exciting um that

40:56 ↗ way was a partnership with Metro um and

40:59 ↗ the city um so this is sort of

41:02 ↗ formalizing those ways that you know we

41:03 ↗ can think about um other options for how

41:08 ↗ to get transit in the community um if

41:11 ↗ there's some access improvements we can

41:13 ↗ do um or if there's

41:15 ↗ reliability uh issues that the city can

41:17 ↗ help out with so that is F4 and then F5

41:23 ↗ is uh kind of more specific to things

41:26 ↗ that the city can control with Transit

41:28 ↗ so we would like to start measuring

41:30 ↗ Transit performance so that we can see

41:32 ↗ how we're doing um and if there's any

41:35 ↗ ways that we can improve it on our end

41:38 ↗ this is consistent with state

41:40 ↗ requirements so this is sort of just

41:42 ↗ formalizing that kind of

41:50 ↗ thing I'll jump in for F1 can we Transit

41:55 ↗ speed Rel reliability and access um I

41:59 ↗ reliability is kind of similar to it but

42:02 ↗ add frequency as

42:04 ↗ well so this for F4 no F1 F1 that hands

42:09 ↗ Transit speed frequency reliability and

42:13 ↗ access and access is related to

42:16 ↗ accessibility right that's the idea

42:20 ↗ there uh yes

42:22 ↗ yeah so sorry speed reliability access

42:25 ↗ and

42:35 ↗ frequency

42:39 ↗ comments talking about frequency of

42:41 ↗ service yeah

42:55 ↗ service

42:59 ↗ I was just curious how um you would

43:02 ↗ measure the trans the performance

43:04 ↗ metrics have five so supposedly that's

43:09 ↗ already been developed a way to measure

43:11 ↗ that uh it has not so there there are

43:13 ↗ standard measurements um we have yet to

43:16 ↗ determine what our measurements would be

43:18 ↗ so that's sort of a to be that would be

43:21 ↗ like hashed out at a later date but just

43:22 ↗ generally this document has an

43:24 ↗ overarching statement uh saying we want

43:27 ↗ to collect uh metrics so that we can

43:32 ↗ um monitor how we're doing how Transit

43:36 ↗ is doing and if there's anything that

43:38 ↗ the city can do to help out

43:41 ↗ understanding that we don't provide

43:42 ↗ Transit but there's certainly things

43:44 ↗ that we can do to sort of facilitate it

43:46 ↗ um so those metrics that the city has

43:49 ↗ control over we haven't uh formally

43:52 ↗ developed yet um but that will be

43:54 ↗ something that we will be doing

44:02 ↗ but you'll need more employees to do

44:05 ↗ that or it's it's not much of a lift uh

44:10 ↗ I mean depending on what data you're

44:12 ↗ trying to track so I think it'd be

44:14 ↗ important to track data that is uh

44:18 ↗ achievable and like it's not going to be

44:20 ↗ too crazy um we do already have a great

44:23 ↗ working relationship with our Transit

44:25 ↗ providers

44:26 ↗ um they do have full-time data staff

44:29 ↗ that help out with these requests so

44:31 ↗ it's really just uh depending on what

44:34 ↗ metric you're trying to track it can be

44:35 ↗ a very simple um simple ask but just

44:39 ↗ knowing where you're at is super

44:40 ↗ important for making decisions so um

44:43 ↗ this is just formalizing

44:52 ↗ that just keep moving on

44:54 ↗ then

44:56 ↗ uh gold G this is auto travel

45:00 ↗ um for G3 we're proposing

45:04 ↗ changing the policy language uh to be

45:07 ↗ more in line with what we have heard uh

45:10 ↗ with tile 18 land use code updates so

45:15 ↗ um I think most of you were here for

45:18 ↗ those conversations um but just to recap

45:22 ↗ um there was a huge emphasis on parking

45:26 ↗ during the tile 18 land use code updates

45:28 ↗ um a lot of it was related to

45:29 ↗ development required parking um and

45:35 ↗ council is very interested in doing a

45:37 ↗ parking study uh to right siiz parking

45:40 ↗ policies um so this policy uh change in

45:44 ↗ the comprehensive plan is really um sort

45:47 ↗ of formalizing uh what we've heard

45:49 ↗ through that process

45:51 ↗ um

45:53 ↗ and the original statement was was

45:56 ↗ related to a very specific part of the

45:58 ↗ city um and then it talked about like

46:01 ↗ General statements about

46:04 ↗ um different communities uh we're

46:07 ↗ interested in looking at the entire city

46:10 ↗ and rightsizing parking policiy so this

46:12 ↗ one is just uh the proposal is really

46:15 ↗ just to update the language um based on

46:17 ↗ what we've heard over the uh long tally

46:21 ↗ team

46:24 ↗ process so this is

46:27 ↗ basically not really it's not it's not

46:30 ↗ really dictating much it's just saying

46:34 ↗ um is just going to the um tile 18

46:39 ↗ policy

46:40 ↗ or yeah this this one is really saying

46:45 ↗ um ensure that parking is Right sized

46:50 ↗ and then the actions that would come out

46:53 ↗ of that would likely be the parking

46:54 ↗ study and then any anything that um is

46:57 ↗ recommended through

46:58 ↗ that um

47:00 ↗ so it's it's kind of hard because like

47:02 ↗ this is this is really supposed to be

47:04 ↗ like a broad statement

47:06 ↗ um and I think as we right siiz parking

47:11 ↗ many things could come out of

47:13 ↗ that um many many actions that would be

47:17 ↗ determined from other studies or um

47:20 ↗ through the

47:21 ↗ implementation um of the mobility master

47:23 ↗ plan or other other documents but this

47:26 ↗ is really just saying um you know in

47:28 ↗ general we want to make sure that

47:30 ↗ parking is adequate for our

47:35 ↗ needs and then the right side the right

47:37 ↗ side is also

47:39 ↗ saying we can also like a maximum or we

47:43 ↗ can yeah that that could be a a

47:46 ↗ recommendation of future actions yeah

47:49 ↗ yeah

47:51 ↗ yeah so question on the policy side do

47:54 ↗ we have

47:58 ↗ so certain business need right might be

48:02 ↗ spotsy side we say that if over certain

48:06 ↗ size double then would reduce

48:14 ↗ thef ring the

48:24 ↗ mass right

48:26 ↗ yeah those those very specific policies

48:29 ↗ are um all within the land use code uh

48:32 ↗ we do have provisions on um structured

48:36 ↗ parking

48:38 ↗ uh I think we all acknowledge that um

48:41 ↗ the parking policies that we have in the

48:43 ↗ land use code um they work for now uh

48:47 ↗ but I think council is interested in uh

48:50 ↗ taking a look at it and uh further

48:54 ↗ fine-tuning it um

48:56 ↗ yeah so that that that is that is one of

49:00 ↗ the things we will be looking at in

49:01 ↗ addition to everything else in that but

49:03 ↗ we're going to look at the whole thing

49:05 ↗ like just open it up and redo the whole

49:07 ↗ thing um if it still holds true we're

49:09 ↗ going to keep it um but if it doesn't if

49:13 ↗ there's a way to optimize it we're going

49:15 ↗ to propose changing that

49:24 ↗ too

49:28 ↗ um and then for G4 uh manage Street

49:31 ↗ curbs um this is a new policy and it's

49:36 ↗ really in acknowledgement of a need to

49:41 ↗ consider how our curves are being used

49:44 ↗ um this will be especially important as

49:47 ↗ uh for instance as Central isqua grows

49:51 ↗ um so an example could be um you know a

49:55 ↗ standard curb

49:57 ↗ if everything is parked out if there's

50:00 ↗ cars parking it um there becomes

50:03 ↗ concerns about where deliveries would

50:05 ↗ happen um I've seen it where delivery

50:09 ↗ vehicles are parked where they should

50:10 ↗ not be um it creates like concerns about

50:13 ↗ safety or um you know sort of other

50:17 ↗ other ways both for the driver and then

50:19 ↗ if there's like line of side issues um

50:22 ↗ so it's really important to like manage

50:24 ↗ curb space um it may not be important in

50:27 ↗ some neighborhoods but it could be more

50:29 ↗ important in others where there's a lot

50:31 ↗ of demand for it um so this statement

50:36 ↗ sort of like the other one is saying uh

50:39 ↗ consider uh managing Street curb space

50:43 ↗ um and just sort of formalizing that as

50:46 ↗ a statement um you obviously wouldn't

50:49 ↗ want to manage it if it's not needed it

50:51 ↗ just doesn't really make any sense um so

50:55 ↗ this sort of opens the door to um

50:58 ↗ ensuring that streets are operating

50:59 ↗ efficiently um through potential

51:01 ↗ Management

51:05 ↗ Solutions sort of like those three

51:08 ↗ minute parking signs exactly yeah that's

51:10 ↗ that's that's one option

51:17 ↗ yeah

51:18 ↗ like

51:22 ↗ y yeah there's a lot of needs for the

51:27 ↗ curb and if you have one solution for

51:29 ↗ everything it doesn't work well um so

51:32 ↗ depending on the need if there's a

51:34 ↗ specific hot spot we could look at that

51:37 ↗ and say this could be done better um

51:42 ↗ some examples that are like really easy

51:45 ↗ include like if there's 40 feet of curb

51:51 ↗ and somebody's parked right in the

51:53 ↗ middle you could fit two cars in there

51:56 ↗ but

51:57 ↗ like one person is just taking up two

51:59 ↗ spots like that that's like a real easy

52:02 ↗ example of like you could just he y that

52:06 ↗ would be like a good example of curve

52:08 ↗ management

52:09 ↗ just is there any like prescrip it

52:13 ↗ already exists but like uh like

52:16 ↗ prescriptive rules about like how often

52:17 ↗ you have to restripe parking spots I

52:20 ↗ know there is for like The Lawns on the

52:22 ↗ road and stuff but the ones in front of

52:25 ↗ my building are like really faded and I

52:27 ↗ don't that happens all the time where I

52:29 ↗ think people just like don't see them

52:32 ↗ yeah yeah I'm not I'm not sure what our

52:35 ↗ like maintenance schedule is for that um

52:38 ↗ yeah I unfortunately don't know that

52:39 ↗ information yeah I do know that we're

52:42 ↗ you know constantly Paving All Around

52:44 ↗ Town

52:45 ↗ um yeah a specific treatment for like

52:48 ↗ the example I was talking about would be

52:49 ↗ like a pavement type thing but then like

52:52 ↗ if you're yeah yeah sorry I I don't know

52:56 ↗ the specific instead of

52:58 ↗ P yeah yeah like you could you could do

53:01 ↗ a couple options for that yeah but um

53:04 ↗ yeah there's like uh the curb itself and

53:06 ↗ then there's like Street stuff too you

53:08 ↗ can do it's like sort of facilitating

53:10 ↗ both of those the library

53:14 ↗ drop people

53:17 ↗ returns just for

53:21 ↗ that Belle view just recently adopt some

53:24 ↗ curve Space Management

53:27 ↗ policy downtown I don't know I can look

53:29 ↗ into that yeah yeah yeah there's there's

53:32 ↗ a lot of really great examples

53:35 ↗ um we would obviously we don't want to

53:38 ↗ like over manage anything so like we

53:41 ↗ would want to do it for like where the

53:43 ↗ actual issues are um but again like we

53:47 ↗ we don't have any policy that talks

53:49 ↗ about curb space um and it will be or it

53:54 ↗ currently is an issue uh in certain

53:56 ↗ areas so I think it's just it's a good

54:00 ↗ way to think outside of just parking but

54:02 ↗ also like deliveries and like if there's

54:06 ↗ um you know short short-term kind of

54:09 ↗ things uh just making sure that there's

54:12 ↗ turnover so that there's a spot when you

54:15 ↗ need

54:24 ↗ it

54:25 ↗ uh so that brings us to the

54:29 ↗ end of those um so feedback I think

54:33 ↗ we've gotten feedback along the way um I

54:37 ↗ was talking a lot and I did not write

54:40 ↗ all my notes down um but I will

54:42 ↗ certainly review this

54:45 ↗ um this recording and I will go through

54:48 ↗ all the feedback um but I I think we

54:51 ↗ received a lot of good feedback thus far

54:54 ↗ um question for this group uh so do the

54:58 ↗ proposed goals and policies address

54:59 ↗ isqua's Transportation

55:03 ↗ needs I think

55:05 ↗ so we can

55:07 ↗ go round and just talk about the

55:12 ↗ overall

55:22 ↗ feedback well I don't I don't really

55:25 ↗ have anything to add it seems like this

55:27 ↗ is um already been pretty well thought

55:30 ↗ out um before we got it so um but maybe

55:36 ↗ if I was um maybe tomorrow on them out

55:40 ↗ walking or something think of something

55:43 ↗ right

55:43 ↗ now yeah and definitely like if you

55:46 ↗ think of anything let me know I'm happy

55:51 ↗ to record that if new information um or

55:56 ↗ you know new questions you have um I'm

55:58 ↗ happy to feel those as well

56:18 ↗ too the question of just follow was in

56:21 ↗ the polies in the master plan mobility

56:25 ↗ within the S grow better connected s

56:29 ↗ region environmental sustainability

56:33 ↗ environmental wisely and anticipate

56:42 ↗ transformation I think a lot of these

56:45 ↗ are the same that are in here although

56:46 ↗ they around a little bit and some uh

56:49 ↗ clarifications

56:51 ↗ of still

56:53 ↗ consistent

57:00 ↗ yeah it's um good information my only

57:03 ↗ concern that um when it comes to the

57:06 ↗ rate of growth that is

57:09 ↗ recorded uh and the plans we're trying

57:12 ↗ to accommodate that growth I don't know

57:15 ↗ if this is like fresh data or is it

57:17 ↗ outdated like it's the rate of growth

57:20 ↗ probably is much faster than the way we

57:23 ↗ react or yeah so it's like we're always

57:30 ↗ trying to catch

57:33 ↗ growth so but yeah very good

57:39 ↗ information thank

57:44 ↗ you yeah no

57:48 ↗ I arsing off or anything I like the um

57:53 ↗ like I know it's little word but the

57:56 ↗ um

57:59 ↗ changing uh visit stations to stops I

58:02 ↗ like that I think that's really in line

58:05 ↗ with the master Mobility plan and making

58:09 ↗ Transit a t

58:14 ↗ option yeah I mean I think generally

58:17 ↗ this is a good set of policies um you

58:24 ↗ know of course so there's a couple of

58:26 ↗ edits that should happen you know adding

58:29 ↗ Transit frequency on there and trying to

58:32 ↗ there clarify what we mean by support of

58:35 ↗ land use around the Light Rail station

58:37 ↗ some really key issues there and you

58:41 ↗ know this should be something that we're

58:43 ↗ trying to perceive in like 2040 what

58:46 ↗ this needs in 2040 right and so I do

58:51 ↗ like you know that trying to address

58:54 ↗ some of our prev previous shortcomings

58:56 ↗ when it comes to not adopting some of

58:58 ↗ these micromobility options and trying

59:01 ↗ to put this stuff into the plan so that

59:04 ↗ we actually end up having to do it

59:07 ↗ um and

59:09 ↗ so you know there's I think this is Gen

59:12 ↗ this these pules generally have good um

59:16 ↗ for sight in terms of what this will

59:18 ↗ need in

59:20 ↗ 2040 um yeah

59:23 ↗ definitely so sharpening language but

59:26 ↗ overall it's it's good my opinion great

59:29 ↗ thank you yeah and just to add we we do

59:34 ↗ regularly update these more than before

59:37 ↗ 2044 so uh as as the

59:41 ↗ community uh grows or needs change we

59:45 ↗ will definitely look at this again um it

59:48 ↗ is hard to say where we will be in 20

59:50 ↗ years we have projections we have ideas

59:53 ↗ um but

59:55 ↗ we are constantly

59:57 ↗ um looking at this and trying to update

1:00:00 ↗ it accordingly based on the best

1:00:03 ↗ knowledge that we have right

1:00:06 ↗ now my perception or my idea is like you

1:00:09 ↗ know this even if we can update it the

1:00:12 ↗ next time in 2030 or 2032 right I think

1:00:16 ↗ that'll be the next update the ne the

1:00:20 ↗ next required uh update but we typically

1:00:24 ↗ do it more often than that based on need

1:00:27 ↗ yeah that's that's just been the way

1:00:28 ↗ that we've done it because we don't want

1:00:30 ↗ to wait 10 years to update this thing

1:00:33 ↗ it's just that's sort of like the state

1:00:35 ↗ requirement but we're trying to do

1:00:37 ↗ better than

1:00:38 ↗ that I mean there's just more plans and

1:00:42 ↗ policies

1:00:44 ↗ that that the city will have to end up

1:00:47 ↗ or build up and so it should be should

1:00:51 ↗ have policy with goals with forite in

1:00:55 ↗ this um before we have to keep

1:00:58 ↗ updating yeah that's

1:01:02 ↗ my um and then last question are there

1:01:05 ↗ topics not being

1:01:13 ↗ addressed so I I'll put something out

1:01:18 ↗ there um

1:01:20 ↗ so I heard from one of my neighbors

1:01:25 ↗ who was a teacher in elementary school

1:01:27 ↗ is there's declining

1:01:30 ↗ enrollment in isqua so there is a chance

1:01:35 ↗ that isqua won't grow because it's it's

1:01:40 ↗ supposedly because of the housing prices

1:01:43 ↗ a lot of young families are not moving

1:01:45 ↗ in to isqua right now and so what has

1:01:48 ↗ been happening is there's been a

1:01:50 ↗ decrease in the number of um um

1:01:54 ↗ elementary school children so so we

1:01:57 ↗ really don't know if this was going to

1:02:00 ↗ grow

1:02:02 ↗ right the

1:02:08 ↗ exact definitely all over east

1:02:12 ↗ side

1:02:17 ↗ grami is but the Belle

1:02:20 ↗ viw um had a decrease maybe five years

1:02:23 ↗ before

1:02:26 ↗ or something right I think things are

1:02:28 ↗ reciprocal

1:02:30 ↗ so be

1:02:31 ↗ res so we look at this we're still

1:02:34 ↗ looking

1:02:35 ↗ at 10 20 years

1:02:38 ↗ out a lot of that is also the effects of

1:02:40 ↗ the pandemic a lot of students are being

1:02:42 ↗ home

1:02:43 ↗ schooled so while there is some

1:02:46 ↗ attachment to growth versus non-growth

1:02:48 ↗ it's also just stents as well yeah

1:02:51 ↗ you're right just opened up so I took a

1:02:53 ↗ long draw from

1:03:00 ↗ I want to throw something at the wall

1:03:03 ↗ for

1:03:05 ↗ this I think would be

1:03:07 ↗ useful maybe to start thinking about

1:03:10 ↗ safety policies around autonomous

1:03:15 ↗ vehicles that's a good one about what

1:03:18 ↗ kind of vehicles tons Vehicles

1:03:22 ↗ driving I think there should be some

1:03:25 ↗ goal about you know setting some safety

1:03:29 ↗ guidelines or well not safety guidelines

1:03:31 ↗ safety regulations around the use of

1:03:34 ↗ theous vehicles

1:03:36 ↗ within sa Squad and you know companies

1:03:39 ↗ who want to Pilot their

1:03:41 ↗ autonomous self-driving you know their

1:03:43 ↗ self-driving

1:03:45 ↗ Vehicles if anyone does but yeah it's

1:03:49 ↗ still useful

1:03:50 ↗ sure have safety regulations in place

1:03:56 ↗ we start thinking about that okay but

1:04:00 ↗ hopefully before we get the self driving

1:04:04 ↗ they they had tested

1:04:11 ↗ pretty I've seen them in other parts of

1:04:13 ↗ the country um yeah actively yeah I

1:04:18 ↗ think testing is they're constantly

1:04:21 ↗ reiterating over um

1:04:26 ↗ yeah any other topics that are not being

1:04:31 ↗ addressed I know it's kind of like BL

1:04:34 ↗ throughout some ways

1:04:38 ↗ um you know

1:04:42 ↗ like trans access to jobs Services for

1:04:47 ↗ Seniors people disabilities bols

1:04:50 ↗ but is there a initially like my thought

1:04:54 ↗ was just like a like cuz these are kind

1:04:55 ↗ of chunked out into sections right like

1:04:58 ↗ I guess quality of life is kind of

1:05:00 ↗ underneath this but like just like

1:05:02 ↗ accessibility and then now I'm kind of

1:05:04 ↗ Shifting to like well as it just like

1:05:05 ↗ overall kind like um not seeing that as

1:05:11 ↗ like like a bucket in here and I don't

1:05:14 ↗ know I don't know if it's just because

1:05:15 ↗ oh like good job of putting it within

1:05:19 ↗ the other buckets or you know this is

1:05:22 ↗ all I had um so sorry could I clear get

1:05:27 ↗ well because I don't really have a is it

1:05:30 ↗ is it kind of a concern about um I guess

1:05:33 ↗ it's not called out specifically yeah

1:05:35 ↗ but I'm seeing it is in some of like

1:05:37 ↗ individual policies

1:05:40 ↗ so yeah I don't but that's just a

1:05:43 ↗ thought that I had is that it's not in

1:05:46 ↗ there's no specific section for it at

1:05:49 ↗ least for Equity yeah Equity or even

1:05:51 ↗ just like accessibility um yeah yeah

1:05:56 ↗ like the part that would include the

1:05:59 ↗ like sure that like our Salk are all

1:06:00 ↗ buil out C Cuts

1:06:03 ↗ yeah yeah I guess sort of the line of

1:06:06 ↗ thought is like we're hoping that it's

1:06:09 ↗ inwoven into yeah everything that we're

1:06:11 ↗ doing um we want to build streets so

1:06:15 ↗ that everybody can use it so it's sort

1:06:16 ↗ of like just an assumed thing that you

1:06:19 ↗ would do already uh we do have specific

1:06:22 ↗ statements related to like complete

1:06:24 ↗ streets um uh just that is policies that

1:06:29 ↗ are in the land use code um that are

1:06:32 ↗ thinking the street standards as well um

1:06:34 ↗ this is sort of like that's a

1:06:36 ↗ requirement by the state and like we

1:06:38 ↗ want to do it anyways but um yeah this

1:06:40 ↗ one is sort of another general statement

1:06:43 ↗ saying that we want to do it um for

1:06:46 ↗ specific types of groups such as seniors

1:06:50 ↗ but also just like everybody in general

1:06:53 ↗ yeah

1:06:55 ↗ I'm not sure if it's something to add

1:06:56 ↗ this but the thing I

1:06:59 ↗ was was um

1:07:02 ↗ emergency uations on the city this last

1:07:06 ↗ summer being very dry we have on this

1:07:09 ↗ side

1:07:10 ↗ California

1:07:13 ↗ place but um but I think you have

1:07:15 ↗ emergency like that how we roads into

1:07:18 ↗ evacuation RS going

1:07:22 ↗ east yeah would be something we would

1:07:25 ↗ look at trans policy to have some sort

1:07:28 ↗ of guidelines or plan for that y yeah

1:07:32 ↗ that's that's great that's our B2 right

1:07:34 ↗ here um this is a new uh so I think yeah

1:07:38 ↗ we covered this uh right after talking

1:07:41 ↗ about moving things to the en

1:07:43 ↗ environmental element um so this is a

1:07:46 ↗ new State uh guidance is that we need to

1:07:50 ↗ think about uh evacuations resiliency

1:07:53 ↗ all that so uh this requirement is or

1:07:56 ↗ like this policy is specific to mapping

1:07:59 ↗ uh Transportation infrastructure and

1:08:02 ↗ designated routes where uh where like we

1:08:06 ↗ would need those to be open um or closed

1:08:09 ↗ so that people can

1:08:11 ↗ evacuate those

1:08:13 ↗ situations that's a good thought it's

1:08:16 ↗ it's on everybody's mind right now um

1:08:19 ↗ it's definitely something we want to

1:08:21 ↗ look into and we're hoping to like

1:08:22 ↗ formalize that in

1:08:25 ↗ here I also I will also add that um

1:08:29 ↗ sanish worked with a company recently to

1:08:32 ↗ put together a formal report about

1:08:34 ↗ evacuation routes and problem spots and

1:08:38 ↗ all that um so we the Ci's especially

1:08:42 ↗ Public Works has been in active talks

1:08:45 ↗ with that consultant to possibly partner

1:08:48 ↗ with them or some other company so those

1:08:51 ↗ discussions are are already

1:08:55 ↗ so yes

1:09:09 ↗ great do have a couple more slides this

1:09:11 ↗ is just this Rec cap the night here um

1:09:14 ↗ this is sort of what we're doing with

1:09:16 ↗ the comprehensive plan in general um so

1:09:19 ↗ we're at the bottom this is the

1:09:20 ↗ transportation Advisory Board um your

1:09:23 ↗ feed back will be provided to the

1:09:25 ↗ planning policy board uh there will be a

1:09:28 ↗ public hearing uh through the planning

1:09:30 ↗ policy board and then Council will adopt

1:09:33 ↗ the comprehensive plan uh which includes

1:09:35 ↗ the transportation element um and so

1:09:38 ↗ this is sort of

1:09:40 ↗ the the structure of like what we can

1:09:42 ↗ expect with this project um so we're in

1:09:44 ↗ the phase two engagement talking about

1:09:46 ↗ goals and policies um again PPC will do

1:09:51 ↗ the public hearing uh we think

1:09:54 ↗ sometime early next year uh we're then

1:09:57 ↗ going to adopt the entire uh

1:10:00 ↗ comprehensive plan and then it'll be

1:10:02 ↗ certified towards the end of the

1:10:05 ↗ year that's

1:10:09 ↗ it thank you thank

1:10:13 ↗ you

1:10:15 ↗ okay Thomas uh we'll move on to reports

1:10:20 ↗ now um the board work plan for the next

1:10:24 ↗ few

1:10:25 ↗ months just next one

1:10:40 ↗ month

1:10:43 ↗ okay uh thank you Julian um okay so

1:10:48 ↗ we it's almost November it's November um

1:10:52 ↗ so uh next next month Thomas will be

1:10:54 ↗ coming back to talk to us about Transit

1:10:56 ↗ plan once again with the performance

1:10:59 ↗ metrics and then uh I will be bringing

1:11:03 ↗ the new traffic caling program proposal

1:11:06 ↗ before you the Rewritten

1:11:08 ↗ policy um December you have off okay um

1:11:13 ↗ oh and November will be a special

1:11:14 ↗ meeting I think we you maybe Jerry you

1:11:16 ↗ mentioned that last uh last meeting I

1:11:19 ↗ think one

1:11:21 ↗ of that U after

1:11:32 ↗ miss it um so yeah it'll be the fifth

1:11:35 ↗ week of the fth leted say I guess of

1:11:37 ↗ November anyway December no Tab and then

1:11:41 ↗ January I mean we're we're looking to

1:11:44 ↗ toward the future or just looking at uh

1:11:47 ↗ what what next year looks like still so

1:11:50 ↗ uh since we're a few months out from

1:11:52 ↗ that be the 29th

1:11:59 ↗ yes that

1:12:02 ↗ sounds I think you got a notice already

1:12:06 ↗ yes I think I I rescheduled it

1:12:09 ↗ formally um so yeah hopefully we'll have

1:12:12 ↗ more information about January next

1:12:16 ↗ month but that concludes that

1:12:20 ↗ report thank you and then we'll move to

1:12:23 ↗ staff

1:12:25 ↗ report yes a couple of things let me

1:12:28 ↗ grab it usually I'd have it right in

1:12:30 ↗ front of me on here but since

1:12:33 ↗ we're um I got an email this morning

1:12:36 ↗ from John mortensson he wanted me to to

1:12:38 ↗ share a specific project that was part

1:12:41 ↗ of the Strategic small capital projects

1:12:43 ↗ that you looked at I think sometime the

1:12:45 ↗ last year or two um and he wanted me to

1:12:49 ↗ share that the um our senior signal Tech

1:12:53 ↗ Mission officially let us know that the

1:12:56 ↗ uh East Lake sanish uh Trail in 56th

1:13:01 ↗ over there um that cross well yeah where

1:13:04 ↗ the trail crosses 56 next to East M

1:13:08 ↗ Parkway um the modifications to that

1:13:11 ↗ intersection are now done is very

1:13:13 ↗ exciting uh those modifications included

1:13:16 ↗ um the installation of a no right on red

1:13:19 ↗ sign when it when it comes up to the

1:13:21 ↗ trail Crossing so if someone comes up to

1:13:23 ↗ the trail Crossing yeah no one if that

1:13:26 ↗ uh is illuminated then people have to

1:13:30 ↗ stop and let people go on the trail I

1:13:32 ↗ know what a crazy idea I love it

1:13:36 ↗ um along with that the southbound

1:13:38 ↗ dedicated right turn lane is now a

1:13:40 ↗ flashing yellow right arrow that comes

1:13:43 ↗ up when the southbound green is up and

1:13:46 ↗ there is not a pedestrian and when there

1:13:48 ↗ is a pedestrian uh the dedicated signal

1:13:51 ↗ display now goes red

1:13:53 ↗ with

1:13:55 ↗ those no turn on right uh signs as well

1:13:58 ↗ so there's multiple different beacons

1:14:00 ↗ that have been changed it's very

1:14:02 ↗ exciting

1:14:04 ↗ um like everywhere day I think not this

1:14:07 ↗ year but last year and having bikers be

1:14:09 ↗ like I'm about to almost get hit and

1:14:11 ↗ then they would almost go and get hit

1:14:13 ↗ you know that thing so that's very

1:14:16 ↗ exciting um and then the other thing of

1:14:18 ↗ course is uh Metroflex launched uh

1:14:21 ↗ almost two weeks ago now uh last Monday

1:14:25 ↗ um on Monday we had uh a formal launch

1:14:28 ↗ event that'll show up on YouTube the

1:14:30 ↗ YouTube page at some point uh thank you

1:14:32 ↗ to Julian and Erica and Dave who is not

1:14:36 ↗ here it's on my

1:14:39 ↗ phone um but uh yeah so thank you to

1:14:44 ↗ three that came out um and yeah it was

1:14:48 ↗ it was a nice little event for po City

1:14:49 ↗ Council on Monday and uh I will we

1:14:53 ↗ hopefully have some data for you next

1:14:55 ↗ month I I'm still waiting on our first

1:14:58 ↗ week's data and maybe we'll even have

1:15:00 ↗ first month data next month for you but

1:15:03 ↗ um it sounds like it's going very well

1:15:05 ↗ heard a lot of anecdotal stories about

1:15:07 ↗ people taking it um I went over to the

1:15:10 ↗ senior center today and uh one of the

1:15:13 ↗ staff or no one of the members of the

1:15:15 ↗ senior center was like oh someone one of

1:15:18 ↗ my friends called me and she needs to

1:15:20 ↗ talk to you about the problems that she

1:15:21 ↗ encountered so she like got me speaker

1:15:23 ↗ phone and I got to talk to her and she

1:15:25 ↗ was like I took it three times on Monday

1:15:27 ↗ and it went terribly and then I took it

1:15:29 ↗ yesterday it was great so you know there

1:15:31 ↗ L being worked out um but other other

1:15:35 ↗ than that it sounds like it's it's

1:15:37 ↗ pretty successful for the first couple

1:15:39 ↗ weeks so any I'll stop talking about it

1:15:40 ↗ it's all I think about these days um I

1:15:44 ↗ don't think I have anything else for

1:15:45 ↗ staff

1:15:48 ↗ report that's really good yeah it's very

1:15:52 ↗ exciting yeah

1:15:54 ↗ uh no chair reports and no youth report

1:15:58 ↗ so there will hopefully youth report

1:16:01 ↗ next month

1:16:02 ↗ hopefully have you chosen we have yeah

1:16:05 ↗ and we've recommended it to the mayor's

1:16:07 ↗ office I I remembered it as we were

1:16:09 ↗ sitting here and I sent a reminder to

1:16:11 ↗ the mayor's office asking hey what's the

1:16:13 ↗ status so hopefully the mayor will

1:16:15 ↗ approve that by the time next month

1:16:17 ↗ rolls around and our our youth represent

1:16:21 ↗ representative will hopefully join us

1:16:22 ↗ next so be

1:16:25 ↗ primary so we tried so we had yeah we

1:16:28 ↗ interviewed two youths um we wanted to

1:16:32 ↗ propose the idea of having a primary an

1:16:36 ↗ Al but the way we I guess the way the

1:16:40 ↗ city uh structured the the offering out

1:16:45 ↗ there um we they were like well that's

1:16:47 ↗ not what we asked so we're only going to

1:16:49 ↗ have the one and then we invited the

1:16:51 ↗ other one that we interviewed to apply

1:16:53 ↗ next year of course we'll promote in the

1:16:56 ↗ school districts

1:16:58 ↗ so yeah it's exciting glad to glad to

1:17:02 ↗ have that person start with

1:17:05 ↗ us and his term will be for a full year

1:17:09 ↗ or two-year term yeah twoe term so I

1:17:12 ↗ think that'll bring him into his senior

1:17:16 ↗ year I think is

1:17:20 ↗ how any other business or

1:17:23 ↗ yeah I just want to ask about the uh

1:17:26 ↗ last meeting public speaker the comment

1:17:29 ↗ or the complaint he was putting forward

1:17:32 ↗ how do we handle this what what's the

1:17:34 ↗ next

1:17:36 ↗ step Next Step will be so he is aware I

1:17:41 ↗ think he I think Emily moon talked to

1:17:43 ↗ him I don't know if uh Emily was able to

1:17:46 ↗ follow up with that gentleman or not um

1:17:49 ↗ Emily if you're there if you you did get

1:17:52 ↗ to talk to him after afterwards I'm not

1:17:56 ↗ sure hey John can you repeat

1:17:58 ↗ that uh hany was asking about um I can't

1:18:04 ↗ the gentleman who joined us for public

1:18:06 ↗ comment last month I believe you were

1:18:08 ↗ going to follow up with him

1:18:11 ↗ possibly yes I think largely we were

1:18:13 ↗ able to answer his questions I gave him

1:18:17 ↗ my card and asked him to call me if he

1:18:20 ↗ had additional ones he has not

1:18:23 ↗ okay um yeah but the real question is

1:18:27 ↗ you know will City be able to do

1:18:29 ↗ anything yeah a priority so um he the I

1:18:35 ↗ guess behind the scenes so he had

1:18:37 ↗ originally called he called me a couple

1:18:38 ↗ months ago so and I said come and talk

1:18:41 ↗ to tab if you want to so then he did um

1:18:45 ↗ so next steps I think will be I'm

1:18:47 ↗ bringing the new traffic calming policy

1:18:49 ↗ before you next month um this that's the

1:18:53 ↗ policy that affects his situation that

1:18:55 ↗ he's addressing and so hopefully um we

1:18:59 ↗ can get that adopted early next year and

1:19:01 ↗ then we we can actually address the

1:19:03 ↗ issue as as the process will will

1:19:06 ↗ dictate so um yeah it was great that we

1:19:10 ↗ had a we had an

1:19:12 ↗ actual public commentary for once it was

1:19:14 ↗ great is it possible to send

1:19:17 ↗ him like give him a heads up that

1:19:19 ↗ recovering

1:19:21 ↗ that yeah he's he's aware you know um

1:19:24 ↗ and so I I'll yeah I'll make sure to to

1:19:27 ↗ make sure that he knows I I thought he

1:19:29 ↗ was going to come and offer public

1:19:31 ↗ comment when I brought it so maybe I'll

1:19:35 ↗ I'll me talk to and say hey

1:19:39 ↗ nov oh I I have a so there seems to be

1:19:44 ↗ traffic caling there's a detour right

1:19:47 ↗ now due to construction on Juniper

1:19:49 ↗ Street right across from Gilman Village

1:19:53 ↗ so

1:19:54 ↗ then right so if you're driving north on

1:19:58 ↗ Juniper Street once you cross the bridge

1:20:01 ↗ then you make a right on the Second

1:20:03 ↗ Avenue is the detour because Juniper

1:20:06 ↗ Street are putting in that new

1:20:09 ↗ sidewalk right yeah okay so then they

1:20:13 ↗ have this detour and they seem to have

1:20:15 ↗ just installed traffic coming there is

1:20:19 ↗ that temporary traffic I am not involved

1:20:23 ↗ that's a i if if it is I think it is

1:20:26 ↗ temporary do you Emily you know you know

1:20:31 ↗ stuff I do I know some stuff this is a

1:20:34 ↗ stuff I know so yes uh those uh traffic

1:20:40 ↗ calming devices are temporary speed

1:20:44 ↗ table speed cushions speed humps and um

1:20:50 ↗ I requested that our staff and install

1:20:53 ↗ those uh just for the construction

1:20:56 ↗ project because it's a unique situation

1:20:59 ↗ where we are actually taking traffic

1:21:02 ↗ from a a kind of mixed use commercial

1:21:06 ↗ kind of collector Street and forcing it

1:21:08 ↗ into a residential area um which we try

1:21:12 ↗ to avoid but if you know the the

1:21:16 ↗ location in the uh geometry involved

1:21:19 ↗ there or there wasn't another choice so

1:21:22 ↗ um those will be removed after the

1:21:24 ↗ project is

1:21:26 ↗ completed the residents said like given

1:21:30 ↗ any feedback like oh no don't take them

1:21:32 ↗ or like I can't speak to U what we may

1:21:36 ↗ have heard from them so far but they

1:21:39 ↗ have been appreciative I know this I've

1:21:41 ↗ heard that they're appreciative of

1:21:43 ↗ having those devices there during the

1:21:45 ↗ project and the signage and the

1:21:48 ↗ communication from the city so I'm very

1:21:51 ↗ hopeful that they will recall call that

1:21:53 ↗ those will be removed I fully expect um

1:21:56 ↗ we'll have requests but they aren't the

1:21:58 ↗ only neighborhood who has requested

1:22:00 ↗ speed HPS and that's why it's really

1:22:02 ↗ important for us to get a um

1:22:05 ↗ comprehensive vetted and approved policy

1:22:08 ↗ so that um we are using those uh where

1:22:11 ↗ they're

1:22:20 ↗ appropriate any other business or

1:22:24 ↗ announcements oh question um so I go

1:22:27 ↗ back to Olympia temporarily during the

1:22:29 ↗ week of January through just March this

1:22:32 ↗ year um so I think January and February

1:22:36 ↗ I'll be down there I should be back just

1:22:37 ↗ going March and is it still approved to

1:22:41 ↗ join via

1:22:46 ↗ teams

1:22:48 ↗ question do we revote on our rules every

1:22:51 ↗ year

1:23:00 ↗ um uh let me let me think about let me

1:23:05 ↗ get back to you next one

1:23:09 ↗ okay

1:23:10 ↗ cool okay so I guess if we don't have

1:23:13 ↗ any other announcements or business uh

1:23:16 ↗ we'll Jo our meeting at

1:23:21 ↗ 7:35

1:23:24 ↗ thank you

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