Transportation Advisory Board · Wednesday, January 24, 2024 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of Dec. 14, 2023

packet pp.3–4

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 12-14-23 Transportation Advisory Board Minutes Page [0000] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Transportation Advisory Board 6:00 PM Tibbetts Manor, 750 17th Ave. December 14, 2023 MINUTES NW, Issaquah

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

Transportation Improvement Program

45 min · John Mortenson, Transportation Engineering Manager Greg Lucas, Senior Transportation Engineer · packet pp.5–71

Topics: Transportation

▶ Watch from 1:18 Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

Each year, the City Council adopts a six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) which is a list/description of projects, anticipated costs, anticipated funding sources and years in which planning, design, right of way, and construction will likely occur. The TIP includes projects identified in the Central Issaquah Plan, the Walk-n-Roll Plan, the adopted Concurrency model and the Mobility Master Plan (MMP). The purpose of the TIP is to identify transportation-related projects that are or may become eligible for Federal, State, and/or local funding. Additionally, the TIP is the transportation component of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which is updated biennially. The TIP was last updated as part of the 2024-2029 CIP (

2024 TAB Work Plan

Action · 45 min · John Larson-Friend, Transportation Program Coordinator · packet pp.73–92

▶ Watch from 53:28 Open packet at p.73 ↗

Staff report:

Present TAB the Administration’s current workplan, discuss the various topics, and finalize for Council approval.

5. REPORTS

Board Work Plan

Staff Report

Chair Report

Youth Report

2221 segments .txt ↗

0:06 ↗ uh my name is Julian I am uh presiding

0:10 ↗ over this meeting chair is uh attending

0:13 ↗ remotely so I'm presiding uh in person

0:16 ↗ here I'm calling the order at

0:18 ↗ 6:m um and first thing of business is

0:23 ↗ approval of the

0:26 ↗ minutes I want to T them until the next

0:31 ↗ date certain uh due to um technical

0:35 ↗ error um that didn't allow them to be

0:45 ↗ compl I

0:47 ↗ have I second

0:51 ↗ that I think we can adopt by's consent

0:56 ↗ uh for that to consider this for another

1:00 ↗ for the next

1:04 ↗ meeting do we have any public comments

1:08 ↗ online we do not have any public

1:11 ↗ comments online or in person I

1:14 ↗ not um well in that case we'll move to

1:18 ↗ regular business and talk about the

1:21 ↗ transportation Improvement program 2025

1:24 ↗ to

1:25 ↗ 2030 it's an informational update um I

1:28 ↗ believe John friendly presenting that

1:32 ↗ Greg and John

1:39 ↗ martinon so Greg you can share your

1:58 ↗ screen

2:08 ↗ yeah all right is yours hi everybody uh

2:11 ↗ my name is Greg Lucas I'm a

2:13 ↗ transportation engineer at the city of

2:15 ↗ isqua my first tab meeting I've been

2:18 ↗ here since last

2:22 ↗ June we'll be sitting me a few more

2:24 ↗ times in the next couple

2:26 ↗ months um today yeah we're talking about

2:29 ↗ the Transportation Improvement program

2:31 ↗ for the year 2025 to

2:43 ↗ 2030 so then the presentation will give

2:46 ↗ an overview of what the transportation

2:48 ↗ Improvement program is um some of the

2:51 ↗ funding sources that go into it uh the

2:55 ↗ previous

2:56 ↗ tip uh what was used in the master

2:59 ↗ Mobility

3:00 ↗ mo mobility master plan uh project

3:04 ↗ prioritization and then also the CIP

3:07 ↗ project selection

3:09 ↗ criteria finished with next steps um the

3:15 ↗ tab the purpose of today's meeting is to

3:17 ↗ create an understanding of the

3:19 ↗ transportation Improvement program so

3:21 ↗ that tab can discuss setting the

3:24 ↗ priorities in the February meeting and

3:26 ↗ then review the draft tip in March Mar

3:30 ↗ we look to adopt it in June with the

3:36 ↗ council so what is the the

3:38 ↗ transportation Improvement program um

3:40 ↗ it's a six-year look at at projects uh

3:44 ↗ that are funded either with local funds

3:47 ↗ or federal funds or grants or really any

3:51 ↗ any funded project it lives in the

3:54 ↗ tip uh last year that the tip was the

3:58 ↗ transportation element of the 2024 to

4:01 ↗ 2029 CIP CIP has more than just the

4:05 ↗ transportation

4:06 ↗ projects um but that doesn't need to be

4:08 ↗ updated every every two

4:12 ↗ years and within there you'll see all

4:15 ↗ the projects that we have funded um what

4:20 ↗ phase we expect to do so you'll see

4:22 ↗ design property acquisition right away

4:26 ↗ construction

4:28 ↗ planning um

4:30 ↗ yeah it yeah gets updated every year

4:33 ↗ whether it's in the CIP or or this year

4:36 ↗ the the odd years where it's just the

4:38 ↗ the tip

4:42 ↗ itself tip's got um a lot of different

4:46 ↗ types of

4:47 ↗ projects uh maintenance projects that

4:49 ↗ are funded via programs

4:52 ↗ annually safety mandated projects

4:55 ↗ projects that are underway uh long-term

4:59 ↗ term projects new

5:01 ↗ projects um basically any project that's

5:05 ↗ got federal funds or local funds uh

5:08 ↗ expected or or

5:10 ↗ currently

5:13 ↗ funded and then in the back of the tip

5:15 ↗ you'll see projects kind of in the

5:17 ↗ bullpen that don't have funds that could

5:20 ↗ find its way into the tip in future

5:22 ↗ years but projects that are consistent

5:25 ↗ with the city's goals and policies that

5:27 ↗ just don't have have the funds for

5:32 ↗ projects underway we got quite a few of

5:34 ↗ those um

5:36 ↗ got projects under design are the

5:38 ↗ Newport Way projects sr900 to 54 Street

5:44 ↗ Maple to

5:46 ↗ Sunset also got a Northwest samamish

5:49 ↗ Road non-motorized Improvement

5:52 ↗ projects recently started a planning

5:54 ↗ study for 990 multimodal Crossing in

5:58 ↗ central isqua

6:01 ↗ um also got we accepting a

6:05 ↗ grant February to start the design of

6:08 ↗ Juniper Street improvements

6:10 ↗ non-motorized

6:12 ↗ Trail and then we've got an RF Cube put

6:14 ↗ together to start a process to select a

6:16 ↗ consultant for a Gilman Bridge rehab

6:20 ↗ project so those projects will stay

6:23 ↗ funded um other projects these are the

6:27 ↗ annual projects um improvements for curb

6:30 ↗ ramps um maintenance for pavement and

6:35 ↗ concrete to go through all these but

6:38 ↗ other kind of small winds for the small

6:40 ↗ capital projects other programs for

6:44 ↗ maintaining things like the RFB signal

6:47 ↗ cabinets couple of the dynamic messaging

6:51 ↗ signs some

6:53 ↗ it

6:55 ↗ and also got a few projects that these

6:59 ↗ are the mandated safety related stuff so

7:01 ↗ we got a SL repair

7:03 ↗ and selected a consultant to look at the

7:05 ↗ black nugget wall behind breed me

7:09 ↗ Depot updating that other Bridge related

7:13 ↗ safety stuff also got some projects

7:16 ↗ that'll make its way to the tip that are

7:18 ↗ identified in the ongoing Transit

7:22 ↗ study yeah quite a bit of

7:28 ↗ those

7:30 ↗ also got in process to start

7:32 ↗ implementing the um the its plan that

7:35 ↗ was approved last

7:38 ↗ year again quite a bit of different

7:40 ↗ things that you'll see in

7:42 ↗ there

7:45 ↗ um but yeah I think we'll kind of

7:47 ↗ develop a work plan for what gets

7:49 ↗ implemented for the ITF plan and how

7:51 ↗ it'll be field projects studies that

7:54 ↗ kind of stuff how best to manage those

7:58 ↗ funds

8:01 ↗ here you kind of see the different types

8:02 ↗ of funding the city of vqu gets for

8:04 ↗ transportation

8:07 ↗ projects for example the transportation

8:10 ↗ Improvement boards part of the gas tax

8:12 ↗ for the state that's grants that we we

8:15 ↗ appli for and hope to get um other

8:18 ↗ federal grants um those are a lot of

8:23 ↗ those are federal grants um the ARA was

8:27 ↗ a CO stimulus

8:30 ↗ City B has got quite a bit of projects

8:32 ↗ funded with same with the the

8:34 ↗ transportational terms programs the

8:35 ↗ Federal grant also get money with um

8:39 ↗ some larger development agreements to

8:41 ↗ help fund some of the impacted

8:44 ↗ infrastructure

8:46 ↗ that and then local funding um it funds

8:51 ↗ through real estate ex ex real estate

8:54 ↗ excise

8:55 ↗ tax property sales um recently approved

9:00 ↗ was the transportation benefit

9:03 ↗ District

9:04 ↗ fund the Northwest samamish Parkway

9:07 ↗ project I believe and some of the IT

9:11 ↗ projects we also get money when

9:14 ↗ development comes

9:16 ↗ in are the impact fees mitigation

9:21 ↗ fees and then voter

9:23 ↗ fond and then we can also pull money

9:26 ↗ from the general fund to fund some of

9:27 ↗ our projects

9:31 ↗ this slide shows um and how the projects

9:35 ↗ uh were scored couple years back during

9:38 ↗ the implementation of the mobility

9:41 ↗ master

9:44 ↗ plan predates my time here but I think

9:46 ↗ that was that plan kind of Consolidated

9:49 ↗ all the city's policies and

9:52 ↗ goals all the data into one

9:56 ↗ document looked at all the projects they

9:58 ↗ wanted to

9:59 ↗ construct then scored them and that's

10:02 ↗ kind of what went

10:04 ↗ into well the tip a few years back once

10:06 ↗ the mobility master

10:08 ↗ plan was

10:11 ↗ implemented and see the criteria then

10:14 ↗ how it's weighted new project was scored

10:16 ↗ and then rated how

10:20 ↗ funded last year um and there is I think

10:25 ↗ some handouts for for some of this both

10:28 ↗ you'll see the

10:30 ↗ the projects and last year's

10:33 ↗ PP some information on the on the

10:36 ↗ mobility master plan

10:39 ↗ priorities and then you'll also see

10:43 ↗ um what was used in the 2024 to

10:47 ↗ 29

10:48 ↗ CIP for the transportation element was

10:51 ↗ done a little bit

10:52 ↗ differently more in a visual sense as a

10:55 ↗ matrix where kind of color coded like a

10:58 ↗ stop light

10:59 ↗ um green yellow

11:01 ↗ red and helps communicate better why

11:04 ↗ certain projects were bonded over other

11:06 ↗ ones instead of a simple scoring

11:10 ↗ U similar type criteria I

11:14 ↗ think got safety kind of Hit the big

11:17 ↗ ones I think a big part of it was also

11:19 ↗ just availability funds make sure the

11:22 ↗ projects that have federal funds are

11:24 ↗ getting

11:27 ↗ Advanced and then last St next steps

11:31 ↗ um so today kind of want to just set the

11:35 ↗ table for the tip is talk about how

11:39 ↗ projects were prioritized

11:42 ↗ previously next month we'd like to come

11:45 ↗ back talk about how we'd like to

11:48 ↗ prioritize projects um in the next tip

11:52 ↗ that we'd like to adopt this June um one

11:56 ↗ change um in the presentation will we'll

11:58 ↗ take

12:00 ↗ some of this information to the

12:01 ↗ environmental board and have discussion

12:03 ↗ with them in

12:05 ↗ March and then we'll review and comment

12:08 ↗ on the draft TP in the March tab

12:13 ↗ meeting

12:15 ↗ take discussion to the mobility and

12:18 ↗ infrastructure

12:19 ↗ committee a public hearing and then look

12:22 ↗ to adopt it in June

12:26 ↗ 17th I that for you

12:29 ↗ good um do we have any questions from

12:32 ↗ cythia or Dave or any of the other folks

12:39 ↗ online

12:42 ↗ s uh well I want to begin but um I guess

12:46 ↗ I will um I I just wanted to make sure I

12:49 ↗ understood I'm not trying to catch you

12:52 ↗ but I just want to make sure I think you

12:54 ↗ said something at the beginning that's

12:55 ↗ inconsistent with my understanding of

12:58 ↗ the sixe tip and you said only projects

13:00 ↗ that are funded are on the sixe tip but

13:03 ↗ I thought that it was a bit of a chicken

13:05 ↗ and egg thing and it was only projects

13:07 ↗ that there's likely to be funding and

13:09 ↗ there might be targeted funding

13:11 ↗ identified but that it has to be on the

13:12 ↗ tip in order to be eligible for funding

13:16 ↗ that funding doesn't require it to have

13:18 ↗ already been secured before it gets on

13:20 ↗ the tip and I thought it was just the

13:21 ↗ two years the first two years of the six

13:24 ↗ years is the only ones that are actually

13:25 ↗ funded do I am I understanding that

13:28 ↗ correctly

13:30 ↗ so if we got a project if years out that

13:32 ↗ we'd like to uh chase a grant with which

13:35 ↗ a lot of the kind of the 2030 projects

13:38 ↗ may be candidates for are are projects

13:41 ↗ that um I mean it's it's got to be I

13:45 ↗ think the term is fiscally constrained

13:47 ↗ so we got to show how it's going to be

13:50 ↗ um funded within the tip U but those

13:53 ↗ funds don't necessarily have to be

13:55 ↗ secured but it's got to be within the LA

13:58 ↗ kind of States reason ably funded I

14:00 ↗ think so we'll we'll for a Federal grant

14:03 ↗ we'll show you know we'll use some of

14:05 ↗ our anticipated City funds and then

14:08 ↗ we'll expect to get a grant on the rest

14:09 ↗ of

14:11 ↗ it thanks that's

14:16 ↗ helpful any other questions

14:18 ↗ online

14:20 ↗ Okay question yeah to follow up on that

14:23 ↗ question this is Tom um have something

14:26 ↗ has find out five years uh there's a

14:29 ↗ need that's identified 5 years out some

14:31 ↗ City funds are set aside for it but

14:33 ↗ they're going to be applying for Grants

14:34 ↗ so TI or federal grants we don't get

14:37 ↗ those then that project could possibly s

14:39 ↗ a year or two until apply the grants

14:43 ↗ yeah yeah if that slips out another year

14:46 ↗ then another project may come in and

14:47 ↗ take its

14:49 ↗ place is that correct or would that

14:51 ↗ project just slip out like another

14:53 ↗ potentially yeah projects can kind of I

14:55 ↗ mean we just for example moved that

14:57 ↗ Juniper Street project forward because

14:59 ↗ we applied for a grant happen to get it

15:04 ↗ so we're able to use existing match

15:06 ↗ funds it was shown at

15:08 ↗ the a little bit of fluid in there but

15:11 ↗ yeah okay

15:14 ↗ yeah and projects that are slated to

15:18 ↗ start so in 2024 so ones that start in

15:22 ↗ 2025 those are pretty much locked in

15:25 ↗ then with all the funding available most

15:27 ↗ to any pending grants standing for those

15:29 ↗ are or some of those that are planned

15:31 ↗ for 2025 or when year out they're still

15:35 ↗ at risk if we don't get a grant was not

15:38 ↗ fully City funded that that might be

15:40 ↗ poed out

15:41 ↗ here uh but I mean I would say at least

15:47 ↗ maybe yeah it's kind of more of a John

15:50 ↗ question but uh definitely the more

15:52 ↗ flexibility later year in the year more

15:54 ↗ flexibility I think we have with it um

15:56 ↗ if there is maybe something there's an

15:58 ↗ opportunity to shift funds around but we

16:00 ↗ want to make sure that we you know fund

16:01 ↗ all of our

16:03 ↗ obligations so to go into the details on

16:06 ↗ that one looking at

16:10 ↗ 2024 I'm going to say every one of them

16:14 ↗ has funding and then I'm going to put a

16:15 ↗ giant asct on tr22 Newport way sr900 to

16:20 ↗ Southeast 54 because that one we've been

16:24 ↗ awarded a grant but in order to obligate

16:26 ↗ the grant we need to get our

16:29 ↗ environmental approval or NEPA and in

16:33 ↗ order to do that we needed to get a

16:34 ↗ biological assessment reviewed and

16:38 ↗ yesterday after two years seven months

16:41 ↗ and one day we finally got review

16:43 ↗ comments and so we're going to ask for

16:46 ↗ an extension on our grant and so a lot

16:48 ↗ of that work will get delayed a

16:52 ↗ year assuming we our extensions

16:57 ↗ gy

17:05 ↗ how is the um priority of uh certain

17:08 ↗ projects like how are they prioritized

17:10 ↗ is it basically just from the like this

17:13 ↗ this like red yellow green chart and

17:16 ↗ then like whatever funding for like or

17:18 ↗ how do you guys decide like which

17:20 ↗ project is going to be executed

17:24 ↗ first if I take this one all right

17:26 ↗ perfect I'm glad you asked that question

17:29 ↗ because I actually wanted to talk about

17:30 ↗ this to help set the table for next

17:32 ↗ meeting and so there's two

17:37 ↗ things well more than two but I'm going

17:40 ↗ to try and keep it simple um so in the

17:43 ↗ mobility master plan and it's in your

17:45 ↗ packet as one of the attachments there's

17:47 ↗ the setting the priorities and you have

17:51 ↗ that here or if you're online you have

17:53 ↗ the opportunity to look at that so was

17:56 ↗ part of when we wrote wrot the mobility

17:59 ↗ master plan we looked

18:00 ↗ at the guiding principles came up with

18:04 ↗ this project rating criteria and so it

18:07 ↗ looks at

18:09 ↗ accidents Drive alone access for people

18:13 ↗ with

18:14 ↗ disabilities it looks at is it something

18:17 ↗ that we can

18:19 ↗ Implement does it increase multimodal

18:22 ↗ capacity in central

18:25 ↗ isqua increases route option

18:28 ↗ interconnectiveness

18:31 ↗ um reduces negative impacts to existing

18:34 ↗ neighborhoods increases capacity

18:37 ↗ for motorized Andor mod on arterial

18:41 ↗ Network how we looked at How Does It

18:44 ↗ Better connect isquad with the region by

18:48 ↗ leveraging Regional Investments and

18:49 ↗ prepare for light rail so projects that

18:52 ↗ improve access to Transit Gap

18:55 ↗ points projects that build a on

19:00 ↗ funding from other agencies were

19:04 ↗ Partners than City Visa um projects that

19:08 ↗ create new connections to Regional

19:11 ↗ destinations jobs and employment or

19:15 ↗ residential centers um we also looked at

19:18 ↗ the

19:19 ↗ environment projects

19:22 ↗ that reduce single

19:25 ↗ occupant vehicle use projects

19:29 ↗ avoid critically sensitive areas get

19:33 ↗ points for projects in the Strategic

19:36 ↗ plan A lot of the things that the parkks

19:38 ↗ department are trying to do with the

19:39 ↗ green necklace are inside the right of

19:42 ↗ way um and then looked at prioritization

19:47 ↗ of Maintenance along with capital

19:49 ↗ Investments so from a tip point of view

19:51 ↗ we do try and utilize this and what we

19:54 ↗ want to do is have a very in-depth

19:57 ↗ discuss discussion about that next week

20:00 ↗ about how to use this do we want to make

20:02 ↗ any tweaks to it um at the same time

20:05 ↗ also in your packet

20:09 ↗ is what we did for the CIP so the CIP

20:13 ↗ it's beyond just Transportation so they

20:16 ↗ needed a format that would work for

20:19 ↗ facilities Parks

20:22 ↗ utilities

20:24 ↗ transportation and so it was a very

20:27 ↗ simple

20:29 ↗ green yellow and red and so there's a

20:32 ↗ matrix of how the different projects

20:34 ↗ what color they got subjective um next

20:38 ↗ week I don't really want to dive into

20:40 ↗ this other than thinking of how maybe we

20:43 ↗ can use this but without changing the

20:45 ↗ CIP one just because the

20:48 ↗ CIP selection criteria was developed

20:51 ↗ Citywide

20:53 ↗ and with other departments since I don't

20:55 ↗ want

20:56 ↗ to Tinker with things that involve other

21:00 ↗ departments without involving them um

21:03 ↗ but it would be great between now and

21:05 ↗ next meeting if you guys could really

21:07 ↗ spend some time looking at the project

21:09 ↗ evaluation criteria um especially what

21:13 ↗ we have in the mobility master plan so I

21:16 ↗ guess to Circle back to the

21:19 ↗ question as we look we we have projects

21:22 ↗ that are already underway and that was a

21:24 ↗ real high priority in the mobility

21:26 ↗ master plan to keep those going um this

21:29 ↗ so an example oh there's several

21:31 ↗ examples but like the Newport Way

21:33 ↗ projects um but then we also have

21:37 ↗ projects that come up because there is a

21:41 ↗ maintenance

21:44 ↗ or safety need and so for example

21:49 ↗ the r Rehabilitation on Northwest Gil

21:53 ↗ Gilman Boulevard is an example of that

21:56 ↗ it wasn't even scored when the mobility

22:00 ↗ master plan was done but we did a bridge

22:03 ↗ assessment we realized that it needs a

22:06 ↗ seismic Rehabilitation to prepare for an

22:08 ↗ earthquake as well as in order to allow

22:12 ↗ emergency vehicles to drive on the

22:14 ↗ bridge so

22:16 ↗ um then so we got the those different

22:20 ↗ categories but then for new projects we

22:23 ↗ do try and look at how well they do with

22:25 ↗ the mobility master plan prioritization

22:28 ↗ and keeping in mind the Matrix of the

22:30 ↗ different funding sources because we may

22:32 ↗ love a project but if we can't fund it

22:35 ↗ then we might kind of keep that on the

22:37 ↗ list for the future and there be may be

22:40 ↗ a project

22:41 ↗ that's good according to the mobility

22:43 ↗ master plan but not great but um we may

22:47 ↗ have funding sources that we can't use

22:49 ↗ for other projects that they score well

22:51 ↗ for so we might advance that too so it's

22:53 ↗ a a balancing act of need using the

22:57 ↗ mobility master plan prioritization

23:00 ↗ score and figuring out what we can

23:04 ↗ fund yeah Dave you have a

23:09 ↗ question yeah I do can you hear me okay

23:13 ↗ yes so uh John I want to go back to

23:19 ↗ the

23:22 ↗ tr22 um if it is delayed this year I see

23:29 ↗ 3,710 th000 in there for this year what

23:34 ↗ happens to that money for this year if

23:38 ↗ it slipped uh all the way to next year

23:41 ↗ does it just slide

23:46 ↗ over so what the council will or so what

23:50 ↗ the administration will ask Council to

23:52 ↗ do is include it in a budget

23:56 ↗ actually a budget reauthorization so at

24:01 ↗ the end of a budget year money that's

24:03 ↗ unspent that we want to carry forward to

24:06 ↗ the next

24:07 ↗ year the finance department puts

24:10 ↗ together a big agenda Bill and lists all

24:12 ↗ kinds of different work items and

24:15 ↗ Council reauthorizes the

24:17 ↗ money okay I I get that I'm just I guess

24:23 ↗ my thought

24:24 ↗ is this would be transportation uh

24:29 ↗ related money for expense that uh we

24:34 ↗ could pick up some other project this

24:37 ↗ year that would be

24:40 ↗ unfunded um and then slide it over but I

24:44 ↗ I see that sliding scale on the

24:47 ↗ financial summary on the out years not

24:50 ↗ only this year but all the way

24:53 ↗ through

24:55 ↗ 2029 and then the oute years beyond that

24:59 ↗ I guess my confusion is as a former

25:04 ↗ budgeteer uh losing that money that

25:09 ↗ goes out of transportation and goes

25:12 ↗ someplace else that that city council

25:15 ↗ sees

25:17 ↗ so I'm probably not right on but I think

25:20 ↗ you get my drift that that that money

25:24 ↗ could stay in the transportation Arena

25:27 ↗ to do something else if we lose this

25:30 ↗ year do you understand what I'm trying

25:32 ↗ to say I do and the money that we have

25:37 ↗ for that project really would be hard to

25:39 ↗ put on anything else because it includes

25:42 ↗ I want to say a 22.2 million Federal

25:45 ↗ grant that's only for this project and

25:48 ↗ then it also includes the rest of it's 1

25:53 ↗ Point whatever million but a lot of that

25:55 ↗ came from traffic impact fees and and so

25:58 ↗ Newport Way eser 900 to 54th can be for

26:01 ↗ the total cost up to I want to say 30%

26:04 ↗ funded with traffic impact fees so

26:07 ↗ technically that money could be freed up

26:10 ↗ for other traffic impact fee eligible

26:13 ↗ projects but I will say we could not

26:15 ↗ respond fast enough to spend that money

26:18 ↗ on another traffic impact fee project

26:21 ↗ and we have a construction grant for

26:24 ↗ phase one that we need to get ready for

26:27 ↗ in we've got that Grant I think it's

26:29 ↗ about just a little bit more than $5

26:32 ↗ million Grant in

26:34 ↗ 2026 and so I really strongly recommend

26:38 ↗ not moving that traffic impact fee to

26:41 ↗ another project

26:43 ↗ because then we would not be able to

26:45 ↗ utilize a more than $5 million Grant in

26:48 ↗ 2026 so

26:50 ↗ it's I get it I get it I I we so follow

26:55 ↗ on quick question do we lose that Grant

26:58 ↗ as

27:00 ↗ well the under the that $2 million Grant

27:05 ↗ under the tr22 do we lose that Grant if

27:08 ↗ we don't uh claim it this

27:12 ↗ year most likely no so we have to submit

27:15 ↗ an extension request and so the

27:18 ↗ extension request is due on February

27:20 ↗ 15th and we're working on it now we

27:23 ↗ fully expect the extension request to be

27:25 ↗ approved but I guess in theory the huget

27:30 ↗ sound Regional Council could always say

27:32 ↗ no we're not granting it but I fully

27:34 ↗ expect they will give us a one-year

27:36 ↗ extension on it got it thank

27:42 ↗ you any other questions or comments

27:47 ↗ Cynthia um thanks hey um thanks for

27:50 ↗ putting this together and I I didn't say

27:51 ↗ this before but I really do appreciate

27:53 ↗ that we're taking this material in

27:56 ↗ sequence the way we are

27:58 ↗ um getting the introduction and then

28:00 ↗ getting to look at it and then um

28:02 ↗ discuss it and so forth so I would

28:04 ↗ definitely encourage all of us to spend

28:06 ↗ some time on the projects themselves um

28:10 ↗ just to and even though the exercise is

28:13 ↗ not going to be you know really into the

28:15 ↗ Weeds about each and every project I

28:17 ↗ still think that when you understand the

28:19 ↗ projects it um helps you wrap your head

28:21 ↗ around the whole thing so um I'll

28:23 ↗ definitely make some time to do that and

28:25 ↗ a lot of these are very familiar

28:27 ↗ obviously but that leads me to my

28:28 ↗ question which is um aside from the uh

28:33 ↗ its um items that are new are there any

28:38 ↗ other new items and before you answer I

28:40 ↗ just I want to say that I really

28:42 ↗ appreciate the earlier question I think

28:44 ↗ it was Obi um about how does something

28:47 ↗ get on there and um it kind of reminds

28:49 ↗ some of you might be old enough to

28:50 ↗ remember that um Schoolhouse Rock that

28:52 ↗ I'm Just a Bill like how does a bill

28:54 ↗ like how does a law become a law and

28:56 ↗ it's like I think it would it's like I

28:58 ↗ almost want this like graphic you know

29:00 ↗ representation of how a project goes

29:02 ↗ from not existing to completion and

29:05 ↗ through all these cycles and I know they

29:07 ↗ come in from different ways but I am

29:09 ↗ curious um how what if you could just

29:14 ↗ tell us off the top of your head

29:15 ↗ obviously I could dig in the materials

29:16 ↗ and compare side by side but what's new

29:18 ↗ on here besides its um for this new tip

29:22 ↗ versus even last year's CIP or the tip

29:25 ↗ portion of the CIP

29:28 ↗ so I will say

29:31 ↗ that the new when we talk about what's

29:35 ↗ current what we're showing in the packet

29:37 ↗ is the tip from last year's

29:41 ↗ CIP and so we have not proposed any new

29:45 ↗ projects and we're not going to do that

29:47 ↗ until after we talk about the

29:49 ↗ prioritization

29:51 ↗ criteria ah that makes a lot of sense I

29:54 ↗ I was thinking this was like an early

29:56 ↗ draft but yes that of course that makes

29:58 ↗ sense thank

30:04 ↗ you I think we're all done I don't have

30:08 ↗ any questions myself well the questions

30:10 ↗ I was gonna ask have already been

30:11 ↗ answered um so in that case thanks for

30:15 ↗ your

30:17 ↗ information the good information that

30:20 ↗ provided about this looking forward to

30:23 ↗ talking about this more next week um

30:27 ↗ suppose we can move to the tab work plan

30:31 ↗ that

30:43 ↗ case right we're cruising

30:47 ↗ tonight you'll have that animation done

30:49 ↗ by

30:51 ↗ next oh

30:54 ↗ hi oh you're you're on mute

30:59 ↗ there can you hear me now yes uh thank

31:03 ↗ sorry about that uh sorry uh I do have a

31:06 ↗ question about the I didn't know if we

31:07 ↗ were going to go over the like criteria

31:09 ↗ like a little bit more independently or

31:11 ↗ if we're just going over projects but I

31:13 ↗ did have a question about um one of the

31:17 ↗ criteria

31:18 ↗ for uh one of the sorry I should have my

31:22 ↗ question prepared a little bit more I

31:23 ↗ just didn't want to Gove on Fast uh for

31:27 ↗ like the environmental aspect I know

31:30 ↗ that um the red

31:34 ↗ category

31:36 ↗ was

31:37 ↗ uh

31:41 ↗ so maybe it wasn't environmental I'm

31:43 ↗ sorry I don't have this together as well

31:45 ↗ but um basically it weighted uh

31:51 ↗ like reducing single occupancy vehicle

31:55 ↗ trips uh at the same category of like

31:58 ↗ red as

32:03 ↗ um I'm so sorry can I come back or maybe

32:05 ↗ like type my question I just didn't want

32:07 ↗ to move on to like another section

32:09 ↗ before I had got this thought out of my

32:11 ↗ head um Erica what's source is your um

32:15 ↗ criteria from is it from the uh sorry I

32:18 ↗ can't is it from the capital the the

32:20 ↗ department wide um a multip department

32:22 ↗ one we did last year or is it from the

32:24 ↗ MMP but I was trying to follow along way

32:27 ↗ asking your question I was trying to

32:28 ↗ figure out which source of criteria that

32:31 ↗ would help it's from the MMP okay yeah

32:35 ↗ it does say it does say promote

32:37 ↗ environment whereas in the MMP like when

32:39 ↗ you reduce words down it always is a

32:42 ↗ little you have to make decisions when

32:44 ↗ you reduce warrants but it's like says

32:46 ↗ promote environmentally sustainable

32:48 ↗ Mobility but I think it like a better

32:50 ↗ word is protect the environment I think

32:52 ↗ I don't know so

32:54 ↗ weird Okay um I might just s a follow-up

32:57 ↗ question to staff it was basically it

33:00 ↗ had like weighted

33:02 ↗ um like reducing singular occupancy

33:06 ↗ trips with like no reduction I just had

33:09 ↗ a question about that's probably a

33:10 ↗ little bit in the weeds but um sorry if

33:13 ↗ we're ready to move on I can just follow

33:17 ↗ well I I love getting into questions

33:19 ↗ about the understanding the project

33:21 ↗ prioritization before we dive into it so

33:23 ↗ I love the question even if it's not

33:25 ↗ fully formed um

33:28 ↗ let me just look here right so as it was

33:32 ↗ in the mobility master plan we

33:36 ↗ had under

33:39 ↗ environment three different

33:41 ↗ subcategories so the first one was about

33:45 ↗ projects that encourage travel to be

33:48 ↗ less impactful on the environment

33:51 ↗ including shifting to non-auto modes and

33:55 ↗ so a project would Score Four Points

33:58 ↗ if it reduced single single occupant

34:01 ↗ vehicle use and if it did not then it

34:04 ↗ would score zero and I haven't done it

34:08 ↗ but it would be kind of curious to look

34:09 ↗ at the the projects to see how those

34:13 ↗ points are given out and then one that

34:17 ↗ I wonder if we might want to

34:21 ↗ consider tweaking or expanding is we

34:24 ↗ have a category for projects that void

34:27 ↗ sensitive

34:28 ↗ areas and so then we get four points for

34:31 ↗ projects that avoid sensitive areas for

34:34 ↗ water quality but there's other

34:36 ↗ environmentally sensitive

34:38 ↗ areas guess one question that we might

34:42 ↗ have next week is do we want to change

34:44 ↗ that to expand because yeah there's

34:47 ↗ sensitive areas for water quality not

34:50 ↗ sure exactly if that means a creek or a

34:52 ↗ wetland I'm going to assume it does but

34:54 ↗ then we

34:55 ↗ have as a city value tree protection we

35:01 ↗ value

35:04 ↗ um

35:05 ↗ steep

35:07 ↗ Hazard like steep slopes and seis risk

35:12 ↗ areas so there's other critical areas

35:14 ↗ that the city has

35:17 ↗ um but we and maybe it is for a good

35:20 ↗ reason but right now the criteria only

35:21 ↗ looks at water quality areas and then

35:25 ↗ the third one is parks that are included

35:27 ↗ in the OR projects that are included in

35:29 ↗ the park strategic plan also scored Four

35:31 ↗ Points so that that's how the current

35:34 ↗ environmental criteria is

35:37 ↗ written that answered what you're

35:39 ↗ wondering or do you want to dive into

35:42 ↗ okay yeah no thank you for that it did

35:44 ↗ that was exactly yeah the one you

35:45 ↗ mentioned about the S occupany vehicle I

35:47 ↗ was just um kind of

35:50 ↗ wondering like uh it was like a bit all

35:55 ↗ or nothing and I didn't know yeah no

35:57 ↗ this is you explaining that is

36:02 ↗ helpful

36:03 ↗ great so along those lines Too part of

36:06 ↗ what we should be doing as we look at

36:08 ↗ these projects is looking at the guiding

36:10 ↗ principles as well yeah we're going to

36:13 ↗ change them but those are what we have

36:14 ↗ said in the mobility master plan and how

36:16 ↗ these The Guiding principles as well as

36:18 ↗ the other CR yes yeah that's always a

36:20 ↗ great one to especially for this because

36:23 ↗ this project prioritization was based on

36:25 ↗ the guiding principle

36:27 ↗ and so besides just understanding the

36:31 ↗ technical I think that's a great point

36:33 ↗ you made Tom is to go back to the

36:35 ↗ guiding principles and have that in mind

36:40 ↗ too thanks sorry so Tom and I were uh I

36:44 ↗ think the only people besides John in

36:47 ↗ the room that were on the involved in

36:50 ↗ putting together the MMP and um I have

36:53 ↗ it printed out in a binder because I

36:55 ↗ just keep looking looking back at it but

36:58 ↗ I definitely think that it would be

36:59 ↗ useful to go back to page 44 of the MMP

37:03 ↗ and see the original

37:05 ↗ text um because things have to get

37:08 ↗ reduced for practical reasons but when

37:10 ↗ you go back to that so it's page

37:13 ↗ 44 um and I have it flagged in my little

37:15 ↗ print out and I always refer back to it

37:17 ↗ and of course it's never as wise as it

37:20 ↗ seemed when we first uh you know birthed

37:22 ↗ it there's lots of flaws but um it does

37:26 ↗ give the full text and it's I think

37:29 ↗ helpful and I like to look at it

37:33 ↗ um anyway so I just would encourage us

37:35 ↗ and if you just Google MMP or Master

37:38 ↗ Mobility plan isqu you can get right to

37:40 ↗ it and it starts on that criteria starts

37:42 ↗ on page

37:43 ↗ 44 and online there's a link right to

37:46 ↗ the mobility master plan uh that you can

37:49 ↗ go right to it and I think a couple of

37:51 ↗ months ago I put together because we had

37:53 ↗ this similar discussion I put together

37:55 ↗ the guiding principles and the other

37:56 ↗ criteria here in a single page so I

37:58 ↗ could have a single page she sheet if I

38:00 ↗ can find that I'll send that out uh so

38:03 ↗ everybody can

38:04 ↗ have I'm not just take I just took it

38:06 ↗ out of the mobility master plan put it

38:08 ↗ on once you can for me

38:11 ↗ to to refer to Great sh that um cool

38:18 ↗ well I think in that case um anyone

38:21 ↗ doesn't have any more questions we can

38:24 ↗ go and move on to that worked by me

38:27 ↗ which is an action

38:29 ↗ item

38:33 ↗ yes all

38:37 ↗ right okay so um yes I am John lar

38:41 ↗ friend I'm Transportation program

38:42 ↗ coordinator here at the city uh and I'm

38:45 ↗ here to talk to you all about the 2024

38:48 ↗ tab work plan which uh is sort of a new

38:51 ↗ idea we've had work plans over time but

38:54 ↗ nothing so formal as this um it is

38:58 ↗ actually uh written into the kind of the

39:02 ↗ outline of how tab Works uh in code that

39:05 ↗ we're supposed to have a work plan but

39:07 ↗ uh it hasn't happened so far so um we

39:10 ↗ are working with the clerk's office to

39:12 ↗ to kind of get that

39:14 ↗ underway so the purpose this evening is

39:17 ↗ to basically present you all with the

39:19 ↗ current work plan as it's written uh

39:22 ↗ discuss the various topics uh and then

39:25 ↗ uh basically we're going to final for

39:26 ↗ Council approval so the action is not

39:29 ↗ not adopting it but it's approving it so

39:32 ↗ we can go to council so they can look at

39:34 ↗ it and say yes we can adopt it

39:37 ↗ later um so yeah so the direction needed

39:40 ↗ this evening is requesting your approval

39:42 ↗ to present the work plan to city council

39:43 ↗ for

39:47 ↗ review um as I mentioned uh the work

39:51 ↗ plan idea has been sort of a loose idea

39:54 ↗ uh as of you know the last few years

39:56 ↗ since tab started uh but now the city is

39:59 ↗ working to final or formalize that idea

40:03 ↗ for um all different boards and councils

40:08 ↗ well boards not specifically councils um

40:11 ↗ and tab was selected as one of four

40:13 ↗ Boards out of that list that I've shown

40:16 ↗ you all um of boards four of those

40:19 ↗ boards uh to basically pilot this work

40:22 ↗ idea um the work group that I wasn't

40:25 ↗ personally a part of but uh they

40:28 ↗ presented what they found they looked at

40:30 ↗ other cities work plans and basically

40:34 ↗ the uh the the clerks created kind of

40:38 ↗ our own version of what the world which

40:40 ↗ is sitting in front of you um it looks

40:43 ↗ at the whole year um there will be a

40:46 ↗ follow-up

40:47 ↗ meeting uh I don't know if it'll be

40:49 ↗ February might be March I might be wrong

40:52 ↗ um and then one correction I already

40:54 ↗ made in the PowerPoint is uh today's

40:56 ↗ about reviewing and not adopting I don't

40:58 ↗ know why adopting just creating a

41:01 ↗ PowerPoint wrote it

41:05 ↗ in so uh the first thing uh the first SE

41:08 ↗ so there's three different sections two

41:10 ↗ of them have items in them that future

41:13 ↗ section uh that is not included in this

41:15 ↗ PowerPoint but it's included in your

41:16 ↗ packet uh that future section is

41:19 ↗ basically projects that we might look at

41:22 ↗ in years to come so 2025 and Beyond

41:26 ↗ uh we don't have any specific topics on

41:29 ↗ deck at this point uh but when we come

41:32 ↗ back to review uh work plan in uh July

41:37 ↗ then there might be some at that

41:40 ↗ point so first of all we have our annual

41:44 ↗ work plan discussion that's tonight and

41:46 ↗ then we'll have another one in July as I

41:48 ↗ mentioned uh and then separated out from

41:51 ↗ that is the annual work plan adoption as

41:53 ↗ I mentioned uh there's a Council

41:59 ↗ approval portion that basically Council

42:02 ↗ will look at the work plan after you

42:04 ↗ have looked at and approved it and then

42:06 ↗ hopefully approve it themselves to then

42:08 ↗ be adopted in March as we have on

42:12 ↗ here in July we won't have to go through

42:15 ↗ that Council process they're just going

42:18 ↗ to assume that any updates we make are

42:21 ↗ good that's basically what clerk's

42:22 ↗ office has told

42:24 ↗ me um as usual uh May is the uh election

42:29 ↗ of the chair and vice

42:32 ↗ chair uh every year there is uh there's

42:35 ↗ an open public meetings training that

42:39 ↗ that the clerk's office usually comes in

42:40 ↗ and conducts that's either personally or

42:43 ↗ as a group it I think there's rules

42:45 ↗ about like by anually it has to be the

42:47 ↗ group and otherwise it's new members

42:49 ↗ every year or or something like that uh

42:51 ↗ they still wanted us to put it into the

42:53 ↗ work plan uh and that would be that

42:56 ↗ would be

42:57 ↗ June and then uh there's also baked into

43:01 ↗ the the tab rules uh an annual report

43:04 ↗ that goes to city council which don't

43:07 ↗ know if we've ever done before um I

43:10 ↗ could be wrong but I wasn't aware of it

43:12 ↗ for a month ago so uh in October in some

43:17 ↗ form whether that's an email or a formal

43:20 ↗ presentation you still have to work that

43:22 ↗ out I think um uh there would be

43:26 ↗ a a report of some kind that would go to

43:29 ↗ city council to let them know how things

43:30 ↗ are

43:32 ↗ going any questions about the

43:36 ↗ ad I had a question about one of the

43:39 ↗ admin items I remember in previous years

43:41 ↗ we used to have the racial Equity

43:44 ↗ training okay some one of the members I

43:48 ↗ think were put on I think last time that

43:52 ↗ happened was like April or something

43:54 ↗ like that or um so I think that would be

43:57 ↗ something to consider adding if possible

44:00 ↗ yeah um would that be something you

44:02 ↗ would want to formally add to the the

44:04 ↗ items on this work plan or um or have us

44:09 ↗ keep it in mind to move forward on to I

44:14 ↗ think it would be good to just add it on

44:16 ↗ to this administrative list okay great

44:21 ↗ then we'll look at what that looks like

44:24 ↗ great yeah if I remember remembering

44:26 ↗ right last year it was on a Saturday or

44:29 ↗ something it wasn't during like the

44:30 ↗ regularly scheduled tab time and it was

44:33 ↗ very optional or there was like a couple

44:36 ↗ different uh dates to choose from and

44:39 ↗ I'm sure that was just dependent on like

44:40 ↗ the trainers

44:41 ↗ availability um and I don't know if it's

44:44 ↗ um worth just building into our standing

44:47 ↗ meeting time or what um I think it was

44:50 ↗ all the city boards uh the folks on the

44:54 ↗ boards and commissions

44:56 ↗ had to pick a date for them to attend

44:58 ↗ anyways I just I didn't like think the

45:00 ↗ communication around it was like as good

45:02 ↗ as it probably could have been and so I

45:04 ↗ did end up attending but um yeah that

45:08 ↗ does sound familiar okay I'll look into

45:14 ↗ that any other questions about this

45:21 ↗ list uh as you can see I have a schedule

45:24 ↗ in potential dates all these are

45:25 ↗ scheduled uh unlike the next section

45:29 ↗ ohia sorry good um Julian could you just

45:32 ↗ repeat what you were requesting be added

45:34 ↗ to

45:35 ↗ this I was I was thinking uh the equity

45:39 ↗ training that that that's usually done

45:42 ↗ uh particularly you know since well

45:44 ↗ since I got on to the board in 2021 um I

45:48 ↗ think we did it in 21 and

45:50 ↗ 22 23 as well um so that's what question

45:57 ↗ I'm glad I asked the question again

45:58 ↗ because I missed the word equity and I

45:59 ↗ didn't know what kind of training you

46:01 ↗ were talking about so I think that's a

46:03 ↗ fantastic idea and I think if we're

46:07 ↗ serious about Equity then it should be

46:09 ↗ on this

46:11 ↗ page I I I'm in favor of uh seeing what

46:15 ↗ we can do to get that on to that I don't

46:18 ↗ again I don't know if it's

46:19 ↗ administrative I don't know but um I

46:22 ↗ think that that's an ongoing discussion

46:24 ↗ an ongoing education

46:26 ↗ and if we're serious about Equity it

46:28 ↗ can't just be something we do every once

46:30 ↗ in a while so I like that idea juliean

46:32 ↗ and I'm glad I asked because I didn't

46:35 ↗ catch that the first

46:38 ↗ time and it's not just up to me I mean I

46:40 ↗ don't know what other people think but

46:42 ↗ I'm just gonna put that out

46:47 ↗ there do we have consensus about the

46:50 ↗ importance of putting this or at least

46:53 ↗ considering putting out this

46:54 ↗ administrative

46:56 ↗ list I would say yes it's quite an

46:59 ↗ important issue and if it's in one

47:00 ↗ included in one of our

47:02 ↗ meetings that would be a good

47:06 ↗ thing yeah I think we should

47:10 ↗ add it's necessary to do it every year

47:13 ↗ we have enough change in our board and

47:16 ↗ last what they were we were told last

47:18 ↗ year is that the city has to pay it's

47:20 ↗ not something inous it was a contracted

47:23 ↗ service and I don't know that it's a

47:26 ↗ good use of our money to go pay every

47:31 ↗ year one suggestion is could we combine

47:34 ↗ C boards other boards into meeting so we

47:37 ↗ can get more people into the meeting and

47:39 ↗ then we also get to meet some of the

47:41 ↗ other people the same time that may be

47:43 ↗ one way

47:45 ↗ to

47:48 ↗ together I like that Tom I mean even if

47:51 ↗ there's you know few even if there's you

47:55 ↗ know the same number of people you know

47:57 ↗ we don't have a lot of change over you

47:59 ↗ know particular since last year we have

48:00 ↗ had a couple of new folks join our board

48:03 ↗ and

48:04 ↗ even um I've been here for you know

48:07 ↗ two well three years almost um I think

48:11 ↗ it's still important to refresh our

48:12 ↗ conversations about this every

48:15 ↗ year

48:20 ↗ so

48:23 ↗ great can I ask a question sorry not

48:27 ↗ very good at being

48:30 ↗ remote um I think it was Micah that

48:33 ↗ mentioned a concern about cost would it

48:35 ↗ make you more comfortable if we put

48:37 ↗ language in there about you know some

48:39 ↗ kind of cost-effective way to be um you

48:42 ↗ know perhaps consider joining with other

48:45 ↗ other departments or something just

48:46 ↗ because I think frequency is more

48:47 ↗ important than a small intimate

48:50 ↗ group I like Tom's suggestion of working

48:53 ↗ with other boards great

48:56 ↗ I think that the crossboard

48:57 ↗ communication is something that we're

48:59 ↗ missing I know there's reasons why so

49:03 ↗ yeah that would certainly address a lot

49:05 ↗ of it I I don't really like the idea of

49:08 ↗ paying a you know contractor for com in

49:10 ↗ to doed maybe will be five people that

49:13 ↗ just seems uh inefficient use of City

49:22 ↗ resources

49:24 ↗ thanks so if I were

49:26 ↗ to uh work with the clerk's office and

49:30 ↗ other boards I assume um and could get a

49:34 ↗ date nailed in that would work for

49:37 ↗ everybody within the next in the next

49:40 ↗ month I guess when we have to get this

49:42 ↗ stop councel um I could put that in and

49:46 ↗ but if there's not enough time to do

49:48 ↗ that I could put put it in like a

49:51 ↗ tentative category as well that's also

49:54 ↗ an option um

49:56 ↗ there's also yeah there's also timing

49:58 ↗ for getting this to council as

50:02 ↗ well raising your hand yeah quick one um

50:07 ↗ when I was on the cemetery board we not

50:10 ↗ only had the uh open public meetings act

50:13 ↗ but we had the public records act and I

50:17 ↗ guess I missed uh in the discussion when

50:21 ↗ you would insert the equity training can

50:24 ↗ it be all

50:26 ↗ that same time frame in

50:29 ↗ June that's a great question and the

50:31 ↗ reason why you didn't hear an answer is

50:33 ↗ because we didn't know yet

50:36 ↗ um that's a possibility so I've got a

50:39 ↗ question to the tab so and I don't know

50:43 ↗ one way or another whether a

50:44 ↗ consultant's on the o table whether it's

50:47 ↗ being planned um but going with the

50:51 ↗ scenario let's say that's not being

50:53 ↗ planned the way it was last time would

50:56 ↗ the tab want a discussion on Equity

50:59 ↗ where we would as a staff group come

51:02 ↗ with what we're seeing in the region

51:06 ↗ because like when we talk about our

51:08 ↗ funding Partners in our some of our

51:10 ↗ grant competitions there's Equity a lot

51:13 ↗ of effort that's been put into

51:15 ↗ incorporating Equity into funding

51:18 ↗ projects and the states also looking at

51:21 ↗ that as they have

51:23 ↗ that I don't know how much of a disc

51:25 ↗ question it would be but um how to turn

51:29 ↗ it into a discussion but it could be a

51:32 ↗ share to try and incorporate Equity to

51:36 ↗ talk

51:37 ↗ about and I'm not even sure because I'd

51:39 ↗ have to look at how the different Grand

51:42 ↗ competitions are doing it but we're

51:44 ↗ seeing it on our end the equities

51:47 ↗ getting incorporated into how projects

51:49 ↗ are being prioritized and maybe we could

51:52 ↗ come up with a discussion on

51:56 ↗ that as a way to incorporate equity and

51:58 ↗ I wanted to see what people

52:01 ↗ thought good point um anyone had any

52:08 ↗ feedback

52:10 ↗ Erica uh yeah and the I have I think

52:13 ↗ I've made similar comments in the past

52:15 ↗ whether it was in the actual uh Equity

52:17 ↗ training itself or when we were talking

52:20 ↗ about doing a training about um uh like

52:23 ↗ the more kind of narrowly tailored to

52:26 ↗ transportation and Transit issues I

52:28 ↗ think the more valuable it's I mean it's

52:30 ↗ always valuable but the more valuable it

52:32 ↗ will be for our boards specifically um

52:36 ↗ I've never attended an equity training

52:38 ↗ that was narrowly tailored to um

52:42 ↗ transportation and I would just love

52:44 ↗ that I'm sure it exists out there or

52:46 ↗ even if it's not you know a um a trainer

52:51 ↗ with us if it's uh we get some good

52:53 ↗ materials on it in addition to a broader

52:55 ↗ Equity training um I'm sure this exists

52:58 ↗ somewhere I don't know if Metro has you

53:01 ↗ know plenty of documents on this too but

53:04 ↗ um or if they maybe use it like someone

53:06 ↗ specific for their training but um I'm

53:09 ↗ just SP balling here but yeah I I've

53:12 ↗ definitely like raised this in the past

53:14 ↗ and I would love to dive into

53:18 ↗ that I I definitely concur with er's

53:22 ↗ thoughts about um you know TR to you

53:25 ↗ know make sure that because there's you

53:27 ↗ know especially in the past decades we

53:30 ↗ have had problems of equity and

53:32 ↗ transportation

53:34 ↗ and that whole issue of Highways going

53:38 ↗ through communties color and all of that

53:41 ↗ so I I've always thought that having

53:43 ↗ transportation you know equ Equity

53:46 ↗ focused

53:48 ↗ Transportation session would be kind of

53:54 ↗ nice yeah we could we'll make something

53:57 ↗ for

53:58 ↗ sure yeah okay great I'll look into that

54:02 ↗ see what I'll see what the clerk's

54:03 ↗ office is doing on their end I'll see

54:05 ↗ what other boards are doing

54:11 ↗ and good anything else before I move on

54:14 ↗ to the next

54:18 ↗ section good

54:21 ↗ bu uh all right so let's move on to

54:25 ↗ actual work plan items so as I mentioned

54:29 ↗ before uh we have our gray which are

54:31 ↗ they are the Hope scheduled items

54:35 ↗ theoretically they will move um and then

54:37 ↗ we I have some potential dates too

54:40 ↗ which I was trying to avoid potential

54:42 ↗ dates but some of these projects they

54:44 ↗ you know folks won't staff members

54:47 ↗ weren't quite ready to to commit to a

54:49 ↗ specific month or they don't even know

54:51 ↗ what the question that they would ask

54:53 ↗ know they need to come and ask questions

54:56 ↗ of about their project get information

54:58 ↗ from you all um so uh I'll run through

55:03 ↗ these one by one and then at the end of

55:05 ↗ each item I'll ask if anyone has

55:08 ↗ questions if they're

55:11 ↗ description couple folks here whose

55:13 ↗ projects or well all three of us have

55:16 ↗ projects on this list so uh we we're

55:18 ↗ more than to to

55:22 ↗ expand um so this one look familiar uh

55:26 ↗ so this was uh tonight's topic the

55:28 ↗ transportation Improvement program

55:31 ↗ um basically providing an overview of

55:33 ↗ the six year tip then you know moving

55:36 ↗ into the to the other sections um this

55:39 ↗ of course is this month February and

55:42 ↗ March so it's going to be a three-month

55:43 ↗ block of discussions um introduction

55:46 ↗ tonight and then the next two meetings

55:48 ↗ will go more in

55:49 ↗ depth that was already pretty much you

55:52 ↗ already described everything does anyone

55:53 ↗ have any questions about where this is

55:54 ↗ going I think you probably all already

55:56 ↗ got your questions out for but just want

55:58 ↗ to ask

56:01 ↗ any

56:04 ↗ great traffic calming so uh I know that

56:08 ↗ I said last month that this would be

56:10 ↗ coming back this month but um I think

56:13 ↗ Cynthia mentioned in the meeting are you

56:15 ↗ sure you want to come back in January

56:17 ↗ and she was right I did not want to come

56:19 ↗ back uh so because of the well

56:22 ↗ thankfully because tip needed time to

56:24 ↗ three months to to to to present um I

56:28 ↗ get to come back in April so I have some

56:30 ↗ time to to get things together uh we did

56:35 ↗ have our uh staff collaborator meeting

56:39 ↗ uh is that yesterday that was yesterday

56:41 ↗ um is that crazy um so I had that we had

56:44 ↗ that yesterday went very well um and so

56:47 ↗ uh I I actually I want to make sure that

56:50 ↗ you all know that um in the basically

56:54 ↗ the the plan outline I ended up

56:56 ↗ switching two items around that would be

57:00 ↗ um had Tab and then I think policy dive

57:04 ↗ or I can't remember what what I called

57:06 ↗ it I switched those two around so I'm

57:08 ↗ going to go in and do some

57:11 ↗ intensive research and start kind of

57:14 ↗ crafting some things and then I will

57:16 ↗ come back to you all in April for that

57:19 ↗ post collaborator feedback and whatever

57:22 ↗ work has been done at that point um

57:25 ↗ we also have a plan to do some public

57:29 ↗ engagement hopefully in June so there

57:32 ↗ might be some questions in April about

57:34 ↗ public engagement process as well um and

57:36 ↗ then hopefully everything goes well I'll

57:39 ↗ come back in July for the policy

57:42 ↗ approval for new all really exciting so

57:46 ↗ any questions about where that's

57:53 ↗ going great

57:58 ↗ uh this came to us from uh

58:01 ↗ sustainability Department um so David

58:03 ↗ REI will be coming in April uh and

58:06 ↗ presenting on the 2022 greenhouse gas

58:10 ↗ inventory that they just completed um

58:13 ↗ they completed it for both community and

58:15 ↗ government operations so they're gonna

58:17 ↗ they wanted to come and basically show

58:19 ↗ you all what they

58:21 ↗ found I don't have any other information

58:23 ↗ other than that so and so I won't take

58:27 ↗ any questions no I'm just kidding I'm

58:28 ↗ just kidding go ahead just one yeah go

58:31 ↗ ahead uh so greenhouse gas inventory are

58:33 ↗ they looking at both traffic

58:35 ↗ manufacturing everything

58:37 ↗ that to it as far as I no I think it's

58:41 ↗ all the above yeah I think it was

58:43 ↗ comprehensive

58:49 ↗ yeah yeah that'll be

58:52 ↗ exciting uh this is my project so this

58:55 ↗ is the squawk Mountain non-motorized

58:56 ↗ Improvement project um I have been

58:58 ↗ working with the consultant

59:00 ↗ since mid last year at least um and

59:04 ↗ we've been working on basic it's

59:07 ↗ basically the uh 12th in Mount Olympus

59:10 ↗ Corridor up in squawk um it doesn't have

59:13 ↗ any sidewalk speeds are relatively High

59:17 ↗ um and they based on our public feedback

59:21 ↗ went through a big survey process there

59:22 ↗ is a huge demand for

59:25 ↗ sidewalk especially coming down to

59:27 ↗ tibits park um so we've been working

59:30 ↗ with them on basically design

59:34 ↗ Alternatives um so we've developed at

59:36 ↗ least a few now um so we should and I

59:40 ↗ have this as yellow tentative uh the we

59:44 ↗ were scheduled to come to you all I

59:46 ↗ think in April due to some um some

59:50 ↗ background policy work that we're

59:51 ↗ working on we've had to push this

59:53 ↗ project Back Time back at least a month

59:55 ↗ or two so hopefully we'll come back with

59:59 ↗ this or come to you with this uh project

1:00:01 ↗ in May or June and then there's a second

1:00:05 ↗ uh

1:00:06 ↗ post secondary public engagement process

1:00:10 ↗ and going into hopefully what will be

1:00:12 ↗ the final design uh recommendation by

1:00:16 ↗ the community um hopefully that public

1:00:19 ↗ feedback will kind of determine which

1:00:21 ↗ which of the designs is most popular and

1:00:24 ↗ what which one we move forward with um

1:00:27 ↗ so we'll hopefully come back with that

1:00:29 ↗ design in September October to% to you

1:00:32 ↗ all before moving towards so yeah

1:00:35 ↗ question uh are they still looking at

1:00:36 ↗ sidewalk on one side those sides to try

1:00:39 ↗ and save some of the trees that they

1:00:40 ↗ talked about back that is on the table

1:00:42 ↗ yes in fact I think think we're moving

1:00:44 ↗ forward with any double-sided ones

1:00:48 ↗ so that's a it's it's a whole thing yeah

1:00:53 ↗ without going into it too much there's

1:00:54 ↗ parts of the city code that require a

1:00:56 ↗ planner strip and there's no

1:00:59 ↗ deviation um for anything so we've been

1:01:02 ↗ talking to the people the land use

1:01:05 ↗ planners because that's where the

1:01:07 ↗ planner strip code resides um

1:01:11 ↗ to we want to present options to the

1:01:14 ↗ community and we don't think that the

1:01:16 ↗ community wants to see an option that

1:01:19 ↗ would kill 179 trees yes 179 so

1:01:25 ↗ on one side in our neighborhood networ

1:01:26 ↗ fine yeah so that's we want to make sure

1:01:30 ↗ that we fully understand the code

1:01:33 ↗ implications and how to go about that

1:01:36 ↗ because we don't want to ask the

1:01:37 ↗ community for something and then the

1:01:40 ↗ people who for met a project like well

1:01:41 ↗ sorry can't do that and so we're working

1:01:45 ↗ out some code

1:01:48 ↗ conflicts ahead of time we we're still

1:01:52 ↗ waiting

1:01:53 ↗ on um but hopefully by May or June we'll

1:01:57 ↗ have that answer yeah seems like you

1:01:59 ↗ could app their

1:02:01 ↗ practicality does make sense on some of

1:02:03 ↗ those yeah yes

1:02:08 ↗ yeah any other questions about

1:02:14 ↗ that excited to bring it back in the

1:02:17 ↗ spring to you

1:02:20 ↗ all uh next stop uh is concurrency

1:02:24 ↗ this is uh this would be June and

1:02:28 ↗ November um so this year the city is re

1:02:31 ↗ evaluating the transportation currency

1:02:32 ↗ system for alignment with the mmp's

1:02:34 ↗ guiding principles if the system is not

1:02:37 ↗ found to be in alignment the tab will

1:02:39 ↗ provide feedback from the development

1:02:42 ↗ prototypes John do you w to expand on

1:02:45 ↗ that

1:02:46 ↗ any yes I can do that um so one of the

1:02:50 ↗ things in the mobility master plan that

1:02:52 ↗ was listed as an action was exactly this

1:02:57 ↗ so the city has a concurrency system and

1:03:01 ↗ I'll try and explain it can get kind of

1:03:04 ↗ complicated but the way Transportation

1:03:06 ↗ concurrency works is the idea is as

1:03:11 ↗ growth occurs in the city of isqua we

1:03:13 ↗ want Transportation improvements to

1:03:15 ↗ happen concurrently with growth

1:03:19 ↗ and when we say concurrently within the

1:03:22 ↗ six-year tip

1:03:24 ↗ and so a developer let's say a developer

1:03:28 ↗ wants to build a 400 unit apartment

1:03:31 ↗ complex and then we have a formula that

1:03:34 ↗ says okay they're going to

1:03:38 ↗ generate X number of trips that are

1:03:40 ↗ taken from the trip bank so we

1:03:43 ↗ have we know how much capacity we have

1:03:45 ↗ based on how many projects that we're

1:03:47 ↗ going to build and our existing system

1:03:51 ↗ works and then they start subtracting

1:03:53 ↗ from that trip Bank and we currently

1:03:55 ↗ have a concurrency system that is based

1:03:58 ↗ on delay at a signalized intersection

1:04:01 ↗ and so our current standard is D which I

1:04:05 ↗ forget how many seconds of delay that is

1:04:07 ↗ but basically a like what you wanted in

1:04:09 ↗ school is the best um there is an E and

1:04:14 ↗ F but as a city we've said we want D or

1:04:17 ↗ better and so what we're going to do as

1:04:20 ↗ part of this is to look at our current

1:04:22 ↗ system and the guiding princip and first

1:04:25 ↗ ask the

1:04:27 ↗ question are they in alignment or yes or

1:04:30 ↗ no and then if they're not then what

1:04:33 ↗ what are the options now obviously if

1:04:35 ↗ they are then the project would be over

1:04:38 ↗ but going with

1:04:40 ↗ the that we have tentatively scheduled

1:04:44 ↗ June and November but I do need to

1:04:47 ↗ verify that with the consultant to make

1:04:49 ↗ sure that that is the right time

1:04:52 ↗ frame I have a question about about um

1:04:55 ↗ like what we what that would be

1:04:57 ↗ considering like I sometimes it's says

1:05:01 ↗ that well you know move it to like E

1:05:04 ↗ standard or or something like that is

1:05:06 ↗ that the case or or are we or is there

1:05:08 ↗ consideration possible moving it's like

1:05:11 ↗ the

1:05:12 ↗ multimodal concurrency standard

1:05:15 ↗ something like that well that's what

1:05:17 ↗ we'll talk about yeah so um without

1:05:21 ↗ going I'll probably go into it too much

1:05:23 ↗ but I think it's kind of exciting um

1:05:25 ↗ there's several agencies redm has a

1:05:29 ↗ multimodal system they use a Mobility

1:05:32 ↗ unit unit I don't quite understand it

1:05:35 ↗ and um how it works but they they have

1:05:39 ↗ that Bellingham has another system that

1:05:42 ↗ incorporates

1:05:44 ↗ multimodal um there could be ways to

1:05:46 ↗ tweak ours or maybe we could say well

1:05:50 ↗ the standard is D but in these areas we

1:05:53 ↗ want want more multimodal so we're

1:05:55 ↗ willing to live with e or F because we

1:05:59 ↗ would rather give Transit priority or bu

1:06:02 ↗ a head priority I I'm kind of getting

1:06:05 ↗ ahead but those are some of the options

1:06:07 ↗ of I I actually I basically see the

1:06:10 ↗ options are stay the same modify the

1:06:13 ↗ current

1:06:14 ↗ one follow Bellingham follow Redmond I

1:06:17 ↗ guess there could be a fifth option I'm

1:06:20 ↗ not creative enough to know what that

1:06:21 ↗ would

1:06:23 ↗ be

1:06:34 ↗ yeah uh black Nugget Road um so this is

1:06:38 ↗ a project uh Jim jacobe one of our

1:06:41 ↗ Engineers will be bringing this one uh

1:06:43 ↗ in June uh

1:06:45 ↗ so uh looking at uh feedback on roadway

1:06:50 ↗ options for the black R Nugget Road

1:06:52 ↗ Project so getting more in depth on that

1:06:54 ↗ uh the city is beginning preliminary

1:06:56 ↗ evaluation of alternatives to

1:06:58 ↗ rehabilitate or replace the thousand

1:07:00 ↗ foot long and up 35 foot tall well 35

1:07:03 ↗ foot tall retaining wall on uh Southeast

1:07:07 ↗ blackmet Road as well as potential

1:07:09 ↗ roadway improvements adjacent to the

1:07:11 ↗ wall uh the city will be seeking uh tab

1:07:15 ↗ input on potential roadway and wall

1:07:17 ↗ improvements including turn lane

1:07:20 ↗ Alternatives sidewalks bike Lanes

1:07:22 ↗ anesthetics so

1:07:29 ↗ of clarify to build off of our previous

1:07:32 ↗ discussions on this this is to basically

1:07:35 ↗ not really look at a crosssection

1:07:37 ↗ necessarily

1:07:40 ↗ right potentially yeah so yeah yeah I I

1:07:43 ↗ can speak a little bit to that one so

1:07:46 ↗ they're going to be looking the primary

1:07:49 ↗ purpose of that project is to replace

1:07:51 ↗ the wall and um for from a geotechnical

1:07:54 ↗ engineering point of view they'll be

1:07:57 ↗ investigating and coming up with options

1:08:01 ↗ and then while we're constructing it as

1:08:04 ↗ we look at okay if the wall was in front

1:08:07 ↗ of the existing wall That's Where the

1:08:08 ↗ Sidewalk is so then sidewalk comes in

1:08:11 ↗ what do we want to do with the road um

1:08:14 ↗ is it one where we would replace the

1:08:16 ↗ wall in its current location um do we

1:08:19 ↗ want to try and make room for bike Lanes

1:08:22 ↗ or not and

1:08:24 ↗ I haven't even seen what the Consultants

1:08:25 ↗ come up but they are just barely getting

1:08:28 ↗ started but that's kind of how I see the

1:08:31 ↗ conversation of primarily the wall but

1:08:34 ↗ while we're doing the wall the road and

1:08:37 ↗ how it all ties together into one

1:08:38 ↗ project Tom okay I think that was

1:08:41 ↗ answering my question just thinking as

1:08:43 ↗ long as we replaced a wall what can we

1:08:45 ↗ do can we move back a little bit to you

1:08:48 ↗ squeeze a little bit more into the

1:08:49 ↗ roadway PR there for a buying sidewalk

1:08:52 ↗ side

1:09:01 ↗ wall that looks like it was built in

1:09:02 ↗ 1840 it

1:09:04 ↗ wasn't like it never had the faceci sh

1:09:06 ↗ put on just yeah toil Nails TI

1:09:12 ↗ back uh I90 Crossing this one's very

1:09:14 ↗ exciting uh so this is uh Greg will be

1:09:18 ↗ introducing the ongoing planning process

1:09:20 ↗ for the centralist sad multimodal I90

1:09:22 ↗ Crossing project sometime in between Q2

1:09:27 ↗ and

1:09:28 ↗ Q4 do you want to say anything else

1:09:30 ↗ about

1:09:31 ↗ it uh yeah I'm kind of workshopping how

1:09:33 ↗ best to discuss it with you guys but the

1:09:36 ↗ goal is to kind of have a third

1:09:38 ↗ alternative from uh what a Crossing

1:09:40 ↗ could look like across 990 this ball

1:09:43 ↗ this winner um currently we're

1:09:46 ↗ downloading all the existing information

1:09:48 ↗ projecting with land use what the future

1:09:51 ↗ conditions will look like and so we're

1:09:52 ↗ kind of in a fact finding stage we know

1:09:54 ↗ where we want to

1:09:55 ↗ get so the question is kind of between

1:10:00 ↗ once we kind of know some more about

1:10:02 ↗ what we're dealing with and and where we

1:10:03 ↗ want to go how do we you know want to

1:10:05 ↗ integrate this tab so I kind of see us

1:10:08 ↗ coming here three times doing now in the

1:10:10 ↗ end of that project um I just don't know

1:10:12 ↗ enough to really have a good plan for

1:10:21 ↗ that any questions on that

1:10:24 ↗ so this first meeting is essentially

1:10:26 ↗ introduction and basic Workshop yeah

1:10:32 ↗ yeah you're all going to collectively

1:10:34 ↗ design the

1:10:38 ↗ over all

1:10:40 ↗ right a few more uh signal timing policy

1:10:44 ↗ uh Nick green who was here last month uh

1:10:47 ↗ is will be coming again sometime between

1:10:50 ↗ Q3 and Q4 um to seek feedback on policy

1:10:54 ↗ for op operating signalized

1:10:56 ↗ intersections uh this is a big topic and

1:11:01 ↗ I know you were in a meeting about it

1:11:02 ↗ earlier do you want to talk about it all

1:11:04 ↗ yeah so we this is one we also want to

1:11:06 ↗ do concurrently with concurrency um

1:11:09 ↗ because as we're looking at our level of

1:11:13 ↗ service especially at signalized

1:11:15 ↗ intersection um policy discussions could

1:11:18 ↗ be um talking about different things

1:11:21 ↗ like leading pedestrian inter

1:11:24 ↗ or Transit priority and who knows what

1:11:27 ↗ else but we do want to do this

1:11:29 ↗ concurrently with concurrency because I

1:11:31 ↗ think those two really tie in very

1:11:33 ↗ closely

1:11:40 ↗ together

1:11:44 ↗ okay uh Mobility master plan uh Thomas

1:11:47 ↗ will drizz will be coming again

1:11:50 ↗ sometimes between August and December um

1:11:53 ↗ St staff will be requesting feedback

1:11:55 ↗ propos updates for the mobility master

1:11:57 ↗ plan to enhance the implementation of

1:11:59 ↗ the transportation element of the comp

1:12:00 ↗ plan which is also being updated in

1:12:02 ↗ parallel since those those two documents

1:12:04 ↗ are

1:12:05 ↗ separate but uh definitely feed into

1:12:09 ↗ each other and affect each

1:12:10 ↗ other so he will be yes yeah it'd be

1:12:14 ↗ good to know if we're g do any updates

1:12:16 ↗ to the MMP if there's any specific areas

1:12:19 ↗ we want to look at to reading thing I'm

1:12:22 ↗ sure yeah I think he'll have something

1:12:24 ↗ along those lines and I think I asked

1:12:27 ↗ about if he was going to return with the

1:12:28 ↗ transportation element it sounds like he

1:12:30 ↗ might do an email update for you all at

1:12:32 ↗ some point um so that might also as

1:12:39 ↗ well any questions about the

1:12:41 ↗ MMP

1:12:44 ↗ Cynthia so I always get confused about

1:12:47 ↗ this timing and the cycles and the minor

1:12:49 ↗ updates and the major updates and the

1:12:51 ↗ annual updates and the seven-year is it

1:12:53 ↗ 10 year five year is this a major or

1:12:56 ↗ minor

1:12:58 ↗ update or something in

1:13:00 ↗ between yeah so the comp plan is a major

1:13:05 ↗ update and then the mobility Master Plan

1:13:10 ↗ update that I couldn't tell you what

1:13:12 ↗ Thomas has and planned I mean I would

1:13:15 ↗ think theoretically if there's a major

1:13:18 ↗ update happening with comp plan there

1:13:20 ↗ might be a major update in a piece to

1:13:23 ↗ match it but I don't know I'm going to

1:13:26 ↗ guess that it would

1:13:29 ↗ incorporate the transit plan and I'm

1:13:33 ↗ guessing maybe an update to the actions

1:13:35 ↗ in the mobility master plan because

1:13:37 ↗ we've actually made quite a bit of

1:13:38 ↗ progress on the actions

1:13:47 ↗ listed we'll find out in August no I'm

1:13:50 ↗ just just

1:13:51 ↗ kidding okay

1:13:53 ↗ the changes in the MMP would

1:13:56 ↗ drive comp plan updat comp driving the

1:14:00 ↗ MMP comp plan would drive MMP yeah comp

1:14:04 ↗ plan is State mandated and we're in the

1:14:06 ↗ cycle right now the comp plan is July

1:14:12 ↗ 31 for us or I I that sounds close yeah

1:14:19 ↗ some cities have it mid4 some cities

1:14:22 ↗ have

1:14:24 ↗ I'll have to

1:14:25 ↗ look it is this year though for

1:14:30 ↗ sure

1:14:33 ↗ great uh yeah so I think this is the

1:14:37 ↗ last one so light rail visioning uh this

1:14:39 ↗ is also a big topic coming down the

1:14:42 ↗ rails sure uh so staff will seek

1:14:45 ↗ feedback on proposed Light Rail vision

1:14:47 ↗ and set guiding principles to guide

1:14:49 ↗ Light Rail station decisions again this

1:14:51 ↗ is sometime basically in the fall or

1:14:54 ↗ early winter um so this is so basically

1:15:00 ↗ when I believe that the plan is once

1:15:02 ↗ Thomas is either complete or almost

1:15:04 ↗ complete with the transit

1:15:07 ↗ study then he would move into the light

1:15:10 ↗ rail

1:15:11 ↗ visioning uh portion of of of the long

1:15:15 ↗ range planning um this is in preparation

1:15:19 ↗ for the so I believe the Sound Transit

1:15:22 ↗ uh planning process for isqua light rail

1:15:25 ↗ which is scheduled for 2041 scheduled

1:15:28 ↗ 2041 um what oh 20 it got delayed to

1:15:34 ↗ 20444 okay I've been holding on to 2041

1:15:36 ↗ so 202

1:15:37 ↗ 2044 um but the planning process

1:15:40 ↗ regardless of um of 2041 or 44 uh the

1:15:45 ↗ planning process starts in

1:15:47 ↗ 20127 so um we have to we have three

1:15:51 ↗ years to to to get going on that um

1:15:56 ↗ basically to to indicate Sound Transit

1:15:59 ↗ that we're serious

1:16:00 ↗ and and we have all we'll have a whole

1:16:03 ↗ bunch of things in a row by the time

1:16:04 ↗ they get to that process start time

1:16:07 ↗ 244 my Walker to to go

1:16:10 ↗ down a Bott whole car with tax they took

1:16:15 ↗ from about like the sequencing like of

1:16:18 ↗ the I90 Crossing and the light rail Vis

1:16:21 ↗ visioning I feel like those kind of go

1:16:24 ↗ hand in hand I mean depending on where

1:16:27 ↗ it ultimately is decided because in case

1:16:32 ↗ we think that the Light Rail station is

1:16:34 ↗ best placed or the I90 Crossing will be

1:16:38 ↗ or close to that those car doesn't be

1:16:41 ↗ very closely connected so I'm just

1:16:42 ↗ wondering what the sequence would be and

1:16:44 ↗ what everyone's thinking about yeah if

1:16:47 ↗ we should try to have that any Crossing

1:16:49 ↗ discussion first light relevation

1:16:52 ↗ first or maybe at the same

1:16:55 ↗ meeting a consensus

1:16:58 ↗ there I think for tab discussion that

1:17:01 ↗ they should be two separate discussions

1:17:03 ↗ because I think we'll have two separate

1:17:05 ↗ questions but as we do

1:17:10 ↗ both both are very closely tied together

1:17:13 ↗ because the I90 Crossing needs to be

1:17:15 ↗ compatible with the Light Rail station

1:17:18 ↗ whether the Light Rail station is in the

1:17:20 ↗ middle of the freeway where the

1:17:21 ↗ Crossing's at or it's somewhere else in

1:17:24 ↗ this squad but they're very closely

1:17:27 ↗ related but I believe we're going to

1:17:29 ↗ have separate set of discussions but

1:17:32 ↗ Light Rail compatibility is a huge part

1:17:35 ↗ of the iing

1:17:43 ↗ study any questions about

1:17:48 ↗ that right well that's the last one uh

1:17:52 ↗ before I get to this I do want to ask

1:17:55 ↗ just in case if there are any topics

1:17:58 ↗ that somehow we as the admin forgot or

1:18:03 ↗ seems like there might be something

1:18:04 ↗ glaringly missing or anything like that

1:18:07 ↗ just wanted to put that out there just

1:18:09 ↗ in case Erica

1:18:13 ↗ Erica um I guess it's not necessarily

1:18:16 ↗ something we would give feedback on I

1:18:19 ↗ guess what what is is the um like

1:18:21 ↗ feedback loop for for Metroplex like

1:18:24 ↗ will we get an update on that or I don't

1:18:26 ↗ know if that's just in the staff report

1:18:28 ↗ down the line or that is a great

1:18:31 ↗ question uh I just got the first mini

1:18:35 ↗ batch of data yesterday um so we have a

1:18:39 ↗ relatively okay idea I think I'm getting

1:18:42 ↗ a full report at the by the end of the

1:18:44 ↗ week um

1:18:47 ↗ I I need to think about that actually um

1:18:51 ↗ I would imagine it would probably be

1:18:54 ↗ like an email update of some kind you

1:18:57 ↗ know hey this is what this is what it

1:18:59 ↗ looks like we're six months in or

1:19:01 ↗ something like that um but that is

1:19:04 ↗ something I'm glad you I'm glad you

1:19:06 ↗ asked about that

1:19:07 ↗ yeah

1:19:11 ↗ thanks I think it's something can talk

1:19:16 ↗ about

1:19:20 ↗ yeah yeah that would because we had some

1:19:23 ↗ discussion on that in option so it'd be

1:19:26 ↗ nice to know how it's working and kind

1:19:28 ↗ of come back around if we had an input

1:19:30 ↗ in something how did it turn out how is

1:19:32 ↗ it

1:19:34 ↗ work I I can confirm that uh it's being

1:19:39 ↗ pretty highly utilized and unfortunately

1:19:42 ↗ it's that's the biggest indicator of

1:19:44 ↗ that is the weight times are going up so

1:19:46 ↗ um we're yeah we're looking at that to

1:19:49 ↗ see to see if that that's coming coming

1:19:52 ↗ out so but yeah it seems to be very

1:19:55 ↗ popular hopefully hopefully not so

1:19:57 ↗ popular that it's not working for people

1:20:00 ↗ that's the issue that

1:20:02 ↗ I'm

1:20:04 ↗ yeahia um so maybe this is a little bit

1:20:07 ↗ picky but I do think that followup on

1:20:11 ↗ things that we've worked on is important

1:20:14 ↗ but I don't think it's the same as the

1:20:16 ↗ work

1:20:17 ↗ plan so I do think that we what we had

1:20:21 ↗ to get away from a couple years ago with

1:20:23 ↗ a lot of updates we kind of got started

1:20:26 ↗ to get a little update heavy and we felt

1:20:29 ↗ like we weren't really um being utilized

1:20:32 ↗ and I feel like this is a really meaty

1:20:35 ↗ work plan um and I think that maybe

1:20:39 ↗ somewhere we need to document put a pin

1:20:41 ↗ in that you know I think followup is

1:20:42 ↗ really satisfying it helps make our work

1:20:45 ↗ feel more yeah satisfying so I think

1:20:48 ↗ it's an important concept but I I just

1:20:51 ↗ don't want our work plan to get like

1:20:54 ↗ bogged down with um updates or

1:20:57 ↗ follow-ups or whatever and they can also

1:20:59 ↗ be I mean an email if we don't have

1:21:01 ↗ enough time or you know that sort of

1:21:03 ↗ thing um so I'm being a little nitpicky

1:21:06 ↗ but I just want to be really I I guess

1:21:09 ↗ I'm really protective of our work plan

1:21:12 ↗ thanks yeah that that makes sense and

1:21:15 ↗ just so you all know I have have a spre

1:21:18 ↗ an active spreadsheet that I keep track

1:21:20 ↗ of all the topics and I have a calendar

1:21:24 ↗ ping the first week of every month to

1:21:27 ↗ follow up I think on the the two months

1:21:30 ↗ ago topic to make see if there's a so

1:21:33 ↗ that's why I sometimes will send out

1:21:35 ↗ emails about different updates and stu

1:21:37 ↗ stuff like that so I am actively

1:21:39 ↗ thinking about that

1:21:41 ↗ so than

1:21:48 ↗ Dave sorry took me a little longer to

1:21:50 ↗ unmute than I thought um

1:21:53 ↗ thanks for that question Cynthia

1:21:56 ↗ um I guess in looking at the work PL I

1:21:59 ↗ don't think it's over encumbered with uh

1:22:03 ↗ updates I I didn't see it that way

1:22:06 ↗ Cynthia but that's just one little bit

1:22:09 ↗ of

1:22:10 ↗ feedback I think it cuts across the

1:22:13 ↗ grain really well and I'm um really glad

1:22:18 ↗ that the comment was made about uh an

1:22:22 ↗ update on

1:22:27 ↗ um God I love it when you get old and

1:22:30 ↗ you know the thing is right there and

1:22:32 ↗ you can't say it it just won't come out

1:22:35 ↗ what what did we just ask for an update

1:22:38 ↗ on metrox yeah Metroflex thanks that's

1:22:42 ↗ the word I was trying to get out and it

1:22:44 ↗ finally got there um and I think that's

1:22:48 ↗ really a great idea that we that we get

1:22:50 ↗ an update on Metroflex but that that

1:22:53 ↗ doesn't have to be soon that can be

1:22:56 ↗ later when you get more details from

1:22:59 ↗ them I really want to see that

1:23:01 ↗ information uh for sure

1:23:04 ↗ so just feedback for you Cynthia I don't

1:23:08 ↗ I don't see a whole bunch of updates in

1:23:11 ↗ this work plan I would say if

1:23:15 ↗ the plan if the administration tonight

1:23:19 ↗ wants that vote I'd be comfortable on

1:23:22 ↗ voting for what I see as the work

1:23:26 ↗ plan cyth do you want to yeah I was just

1:23:29 ↗ going to say I was saying in past years

1:23:31 ↗ couple years ago two three years ago we

1:23:33 ↗ were update heavy I think this is really

1:23:35 ↗ meaty I think this work plan is great I

1:23:38 ↗ think updates are important but um I was

1:23:40 ↗ speaking of years

1:23:43 ↗ past so I too am supportive of this and

1:23:48 ↗ so

1:23:51 ↗ thanks

1:23:53 ↗ great think we have consensus to add an

1:23:57 ↗ update a you know six month update or

1:24:00 ↗ whatever may

1:24:02 ↗ be about

1:24:04 ↗ how it's going metlex you want

1:24:08 ↗ that in the I thought I was hearing not

1:24:11 ↗ in the work plan but definitely one is

1:24:14 ↗ that the version I think it's the update

1:24:17 ↗ unless people are thinking otherwise I

1:24:19 ↗ think the update uh email freef comment

1:24:23 ↗ at meeting

1:24:25 ↗ um that that was consensus that I might

1:24:28 ↗ be mistaken so unless I don't know that

1:24:37 ↗ correctly yeah I mean I think I think

1:24:39 ↗ just be

1:24:42 ↗ comment

1:24:44 ↗ Dave well by by not uh putting in a work

1:24:48 ↗ plan doesn't that give the flexibility

1:24:50 ↗ on when you can add it

1:24:53 ↗ into

1:24:56 ↗ uh an evening I mean it could be any

1:25:00 ↗ that update could come anytime correct

1:25:03 ↗ you you could just say your advanced

1:25:07 ↗ notice out to us I've got an update on

1:25:11 ↗ Metroflex and it's included in tonight's

1:25:15 ↗ it it doesn't have

1:25:16 ↗ to it seems to me not putting in the

1:25:20 ↗ work plan leaves you flexibility to be

1:25:22 ↗ able to get it uh and then get it out to

1:25:25 ↗ us

1:25:29 ↗ I it's top of mine so I won't yeah okay

1:25:33 ↗ so I

1:25:34 ↗ guess perhaps not putting in there but I

1:25:38 ↗ think what previously discuss or what I

1:25:41 ↗ was discussing about

1:25:44 ↗ Equity so that's I'm not sure if we

1:25:48 ↗ want amendment to this thing or just I

1:25:52 ↗ think oh go ahead sorry to to approve

1:25:56 ↗ this to present it um with that in mind

1:25:59 ↗ I was thinking somebody could make a

1:26:01 ↗ motion since since we put an action we

1:26:03 ↗ could somebody could make a motion

1:26:06 ↗ to move the work plan to city council

1:26:10 ↗ for

1:26:12 ↗ approval

1:26:14 ↗ with the amendment of adding the or

1:26:18 ↗ something like that and then second to

1:26:20 ↗ vote what else

1:26:25 ↗ so I'll let you call that cool um well

1:26:29 ↗ does anyone have does anyone want to

1:26:32 ↗ move uh

1:26:35 ↗ to does anyone want to move to approve

1:26:37 ↗ to to present the work plan to city

1:26:39 ↗ council for

1:26:42 ↗ review or I'll move it I'll move it does

1:26:45 ↗ anyone want

1:26:47 ↗ second are

1:26:50 ↗ second I

1:26:54 ↗ second um and then for the Amendments

1:26:58 ↗ I'll move to add the I think we have to

1:27:02 ↗ have a motion in a second yet have to

1:27:05 ↗ V and then don't we

1:27:08 ↗ do add but you've already now had a

1:27:12 ↗ second so you can't add to motion that

1:27:14 ↗ way that's against

1:27:16 ↗ robber you can just do it as a as a

1:27:19 ↗ thing after you do this the easiest way

1:27:21 ↗ to do okay perfect you could also

1:27:23 ↗ withdraw the motion and make a motion

1:27:25 ↗ that includes the amendment couldn't you

1:27:27 ↗ I mean couldn't you just make a new

1:27:29 ↗ could you withdraw the motion Micah

1:27:31 ↗ knows the stuff so to St although I

1:27:33 ↗ don't remember what seconded whether

1:27:35 ↗ you're supposed to V can you withdraw

1:27:38 ↗ second I would say just vote and then

1:27:40 ↗ just make another one right because it's

1:27:42 ↗ gonna affect the same the same outcome

1:27:44 ↗ so okay well in that case we'll take a

1:27:47 ↗ vote about this motion okay all in favor

1:27:50 ↗ say I hi hi

1:27:54 ↗ hi none opposed um cool well that passes

1:27:59 ↗ and then I'll move to add the equity uh

1:28:04 ↗ training component into the

1:28:06 ↗ administrative um to administrative

1:28:09 ↗ items of the work plan do I have a

1:28:12 ↗ second for

1:28:14 ↗ that

1:28:16 ↗ second great um and then we will take a

1:28:19 ↗ vote um all in favor say I I I all those

1:28:29 ↗ opposed I may yes because I I like I

1:28:33 ↗ said before I think it should be if it's

1:28:35 ↗ done it should not be done at a board

1:28:36 ↗ level because I don't think that's a

1:28:38 ↗ efficient use of City resources I like d

1:28:41 ↗ suggestion about doing it at

1:28:44 ↗ a cross multiple

1:28:51 ↗ boards

1:28:55 ↗ I think we have

1:28:56 ↗ that through I guess what I should have

1:28:59 ↗ done we should have had that

1:29:05 ↗ discussion I think this we've talked

1:29:07 ↗ about you know want to do with other

1:29:09 ↗ boards as well this obviously has

1:29:12 ↗ flexibility I hope it's yeah absolutely

1:29:16 ↗ okay well great is Dave's hand still up

1:29:19 ↗ or is it up again no it's up again

1:29:26 ↗ goe so uh just to give you some history

1:29:30 ↗ uh from another board that I was on uh

1:29:33 ↗ we were able to get multi boards to do

1:29:37 ↗ the open public meetings act the public

1:29:40 ↗ records act and there was another thing

1:29:43 ↗ that we talked about and my guess is

1:29:45 ↗ they could also include equity in there

1:29:48 ↗ at the same time and it could be

1:29:50 ↗ multiple boards that's past history of

1:29:53 ↗ the city so I believe it can be done

1:29:58 ↗ okay

1:30:01 ↗ great all

1:30:03 ↗ right uh last thing next steps uh we

1:30:07 ↗ will take the work plan to city council

1:30:08 ↗ for approval and then upon Council

1:30:11 ↗ approval in February we'll return to you

1:30:13 ↗ in March for adoption which

1:30:20 ↗ should

1:30:22 ↗ okay thanks John um and now we'll move

1:30:26 ↗ on to

1:30:28 ↗ reports um I wanted to see if we could

1:30:31 ↗ get audience comments because we had a

1:30:33 ↗ member of the community but the link in

1:30:34 ↗ the agenda wasn't good and so she wasn't

1:30:37 ↗ able to join sure

1:30:40 ↗ sure

1:30:42 ↗ Connie you have five

1:30:50 ↗ minutes

1:30:54 ↗ there W okay there we

1:30:57 ↗ go sorry about that I tried for a long

1:31:00 ↗ time to get on and finally finally I was

1:31:03 ↗ able to so I am going to Connie Marsh I

1:31:06 ↗ live on squawk um and I wasn't able to

1:31:10 ↗ hear what you said but I was rereading

1:31:12 ↗ the project prioritization criteria

1:31:15 ↗ table for the

1:31:17 ↗ tip

1:31:19 ↗ and

1:31:20 ↗ um

1:31:22 ↗ I think it needs a review

1:31:25 ↗ because it seems like there's a

1:31:28 ↗ duplication of many things and then

1:31:30 ↗ there's a lot of words in there that

1:31:32 ↗ make it so that I don't understand when

1:31:35 ↗ it would be counted for example how

1:31:39 ↗ tight does something have to be in the

1:31:41 ↗ park strategic plan to get four

1:31:45 ↗ points um I don't understand why you

1:31:50 ↗ don't get a negative number number if

1:31:52 ↗ you actually negatively impact a

1:31:54 ↗ neighborhood you can only get positive

1:31:56 ↗ points and so I think that just in

1:32:00 ↗ general needs refinement and we went

1:32:02 ↗ through a

1:32:03 ↗ tip uh last time and I remember the

1:32:07 ↗ committee not being entirely happy with

1:32:09 ↗ the results of it and so I don't know if

1:32:12 ↗ you went to that that conclusion or not

1:32:15 ↗ but there's there's my input there and

1:32:20 ↗ so um down to your work plan we have had

1:32:24 ↗ multimodal concurrency in the past it

1:32:26 ↗ was called Planned capacity and um the

1:32:30 ↗ city council worked on that for years

1:32:32 ↗ and they were ahead of their time so you

1:32:34 ↗ might go back before what we already did

1:32:37 ↗ what we have now to what they did for

1:32:40 ↗ Planned capacity and see what their

1:32:42 ↗ successes and failures were for that um

1:32:46 ↗ as you start refining multimodal

1:32:49 ↗ measuring

1:32:50 ↗ multimodal um and also uh if you don't

1:32:54 ↗ get wash dot in with your concurrency we

1:33:00 ↗ are going to end up in the same

1:33:01 ↗ situation that we are now now the idea

1:33:07 ↗ of reports coming back to you all the

1:33:10 ↗ time the city has a place on the website

1:33:14 ↗ for data and so I was wondering because

1:33:17 ↗ I can't remember if you all have figured

1:33:19 ↗ out what you want to have measured

1:33:22 ↗ so what do you

1:33:24 ↗ perceive success and where what items do

1:33:29 ↗ you want to know that about and those

1:33:31 ↗ are the things that you could have your

1:33:33 ↗ own

1:33:34 ↗ transportation data platform we're not

1:33:37 ↗ just you but the public could see things

1:33:40 ↗ like how well is Metroflex

1:33:42 ↗ working um because these dashboards I

1:33:46 ↗ think they're really important to

1:33:47 ↗ understand if you think you're going uh

1:33:49 ↗ where you want and so I would actually

1:33:52 ↗ add add that to a work item because I

1:33:56 ↗ don't remember having that tight of a

1:33:58 ↗ discussion with um the tab what is

1:34:02 ↗ success what do you want to

1:34:04 ↗ measure there to show it if that makes

1:34:08 ↗ sense to you so I appreciate you letting

1:34:10 ↗ me talk for a minute here at the end I

1:34:12 ↗ know the discussion is already sort of

1:34:14 ↗ done but at least you get to hear it

1:34:16 ↗ hear it a little bit thank

1:34:19 ↗ you thanks Scotty

1:34:23 ↗ I'm not sure if anyone can speak to like

1:34:25 ↗ the data

1:34:27 ↗ dashboard stuff and then what

1:34:31 ↗ that where the progress is on that yeah

1:34:35 ↗ so we

1:34:36 ↗ have know enough to speak but not well

1:34:40 ↗ enough I know we have a

1:34:42 ↗ performance dashboard on the city's

1:34:45 ↗ website and we've got a team in the

1:34:48 ↗ exact office who is doing a lot with

1:34:52 ↗ data and we have a staff team working on

1:34:55 ↗ it and working with the Bloomberg

1:34:58 ↗ Institute to I forget what sort of

1:35:00 ↗ certification we ended up getting but

1:35:03 ↗ really trying to make data driven

1:35:05 ↗ decisions so I I don't know quite how to

1:35:08 ↗ answer your question but I know that

1:35:11 ↗ Bale in the executive office is doing a

1:35:13 ↗ lot with

1:35:15 ↗ data looking at how we can utilize it I

1:35:18 ↗ can speak to it a little bit um so uh

1:35:21 ↗ data management has

1:35:24 ↗ become I think it's moving towards a

1:35:26 ↗ very top priority if it is already a top

1:35:29 ↗ priority um in fact the last let's see

1:35:33 ↗ I've taken three trainings in this room

1:35:35 ↗ over the last week about data management

1:35:38 ↗ and and whatnot and there were people in

1:35:41 ↗ that class so at least so and uh and not

1:35:45 ↗ to mention the I think the the dashboard

1:35:48 ↗ on the website has been revamped as of

1:35:51 ↗ take last week so I think that there is

1:35:54 ↗ a lot of progress going in toward making

1:35:56 ↗ all this very all of our data very

1:35:59 ↗ transparent um and I think the biggest

1:36:02 ↗ reason why some data isn't available is

1:36:05 ↗ just because we haven't had the staff

1:36:06 ↗ resources we haven't had the training

1:36:09 ↗ and haven't had the time uh or resources

1:36:12 ↗ to actually get all of that data out

1:36:14 ↗ there so I think um I think the city is

1:36:17 ↗ moving a great Direction when it comes

1:36:19 ↗ to to data it's just going to take to

1:36:21 ↗ take a little time I don't think it's

1:36:22 ↗ going to take as much time as everyone

1:36:24 ↗ thinks it might but I think I think I

1:36:27 ↗ know there little thing says data

1:36:29 ↗ dashboard page yeah it's very cool I

1:36:32 ↗ really like it with more with more data

1:36:34 ↗ points on the way I think especially

1:36:37 ↗ especially following the training took

1:36:39 ↗ uh this last week it was very

1:36:42 ↗ robust I saw including me like there

1:36:45 ↗ were a lot of light bulbs in the room I

1:36:48 ↗ have that dat so yeah great

1:36:54 ↗ question cool um well in that case now

1:36:57 ↗ we can move to reports we already much

1:37:00 ↗ covered board work plan so we can oh

1:37:05 ↗ board work plan yeah

1:37:08 ↗ adopted no not and staff report yes I

1:37:13 ↗ have a few items here um first since

1:37:18 ↗ con's here uh it looks like that that

1:37:20 ↗ link

1:37:21 ↗ on the agenda was broken I I don't know

1:37:24 ↗ how that happened but I I see it now I

1:37:26 ↗ will get that fixed for meetings moving

1:37:28 ↗ forward it's probably because I when we

1:37:30 ↗ redid the new year of meetings it

1:37:33 ↗ probably switched the link I didn't ask

1:37:36 ↗ or cler's office changing because teams

1:37:39 ↗ got updated teams got updated too like

1:37:40 ↗ it could have been a few so I'll add

1:37:42 ↗ that to the list of things to check

1:37:44 ↗ before

1:37:46 ↗ meetings um as mentioned before the

1:37:50 ↗ transportation uh tax the the

1:37:53 ↗ improvement district tax passed um that

1:37:56 ↗ tax will begin in April uh it's

1:37:59 ↗ projected to make 2.2 million annually

1:38:02 ↗ for the city and uh the the staff is

1:38:07 ↗ anticipating you know

1:38:09 ↗ Northwest non non-motorized Improvement

1:38:13 ↗ project and its both adopted in the CIP

1:38:17 ↗ will be funded largely through which is

1:38:19 ↗ very exciting exciting

1:38:22 ↗ um and then Micah you had a question

1:38:24 ↗ last month about Sunset front

1:38:28 ↗ intersection and how the intersection

1:38:30 ↗ works and timing and stuff um so we we

1:38:34 ↗ will include that discussion with the

1:38:36 ↗ signal timing policy later this

1:38:38 ↗ year we'll provide some basic

1:38:40 ↗ information about traffic signal timing

1:38:42 ↗ and then we might be able to use that as

1:38:44 ↗ intersection of example since it's such

1:38:47 ↗ a pertinent very important intersection

1:38:50 ↗ of the city so that concludes staff

1:38:53 ↗ report okay uh shair reports Cynthia be

1:38:58 ↗ sharing something yes so um Julian is

1:39:01 ↗ functioning as a chair this evening and

1:39:03 ↗ he indulged me and let me make the chair

1:39:06 ↗ for tonight so thank you and thank you

1:39:07 ↗ for covering for me um I wanted to just

1:39:11 ↗ remind everybody that um recruitment is

1:39:14 ↗ for um board members will open up soon

1:39:18 ↗ and I think they'll be due before we

1:39:20 ↗ meet again and um I'm happy to say we

1:39:23 ↗ have a full roster right now and I have

1:39:26 ↗ reason to believe that the two people

1:39:28 ↗ who are up for Renewal this year will be

1:39:32 ↗ pursuing um hopefully being uh

1:39:36 ↗ continuing on the board so what that

1:39:38 ↗ leaves us was hopefully with a full

1:39:40 ↗ board but it does um we could still use

1:39:42 ↗ some alternates and um so if you know of

1:39:45 ↗ people that you think uh would be great

1:39:47 ↗ a great addition to this board um please

1:39:50 ↗ encourage them to

1:39:51 ↗ uh to apply and then the other thing is

1:39:54 ↗ I wanted to say that um we were

1:39:58 ↗ asked uh for tab participation on the

1:40:01 ↗ mayor's strategic Plan update task force

1:40:04 ↗ so that's going to be happening this

1:40:05 ↗ year um sometime um probably in the by

1:40:09 ↗ the end of Q2 I think and so Julian will

1:40:13 ↗ be representing tab on that um and

1:40:17 ↗ there's just a couple of boards that

1:40:19 ↗ have representation on that tab Force so

1:40:21 ↗ it's always nice that tab gets asked um

1:40:25 ↗ so uh thanks Julian for for doing that

1:40:28 ↗ and I just want everybody to know about

1:40:29 ↗ that that's all I have

1:40:32 ↗ thanks Cynthia um and then youth report

1:40:36 ↗ you have something else yeah here sorry

1:40:38 ↗ wrot it

1:40:39 ↗ on we have a youth report everybody all

1:40:44 ↗ right yeah so I conducted a survey about

1:40:47 ↗ the general satisfaction of the isqua

1:40:49 ↗ road Network and this is includes like

1:40:51 ↗ maintenance including snow and ice

1:40:53 ↗ mitigation and removal and then traffic

1:40:56 ↗ safety and usability of the roads so for

1:40:59 ↗ the respondents of the survey I just

1:41:01 ↗ made a Google form and sent it to a lot

1:41:03 ↗ of my peers at isqua high school so it's

1:41:05 ↗ isqua high school students with a permit

1:41:07 ↗ or license and I got 40

1:41:10 ↗ responses so my first question was the

1:41:13 ↗ General satisfaction of the roads rated

1:41:15 ↗ on a scale between one and five so one

1:41:17 ↗ is extremely dissatisfied with the roads

1:41:19 ↗ being a complete night here and five is

1:41:22 ↗ extremely satisfied and the roads are

1:41:24 ↗ perfect so 10% of respondents rated the

1:41:27 ↗ roads of one 45% of respondents rated

1:41:31 ↗ the roads of two 27 and a half% of

1:41:34 ↗ respondents rated the roads at three 17

1:41:37 ↗ and a half percent of the respondents

1:41:39 ↗ rated the roads of four and then nobody

1:41:41 ↗ rated the roads of five

1:41:43 ↗ unfortunately so then I asked people

1:41:46 ↗ what they like about the roads and what

1:41:49 ↗ their concerns are about the road roads

1:41:51 ↗ so what people appreciated was that um

1:41:55 ↗ maintenance crews are generally fast at

1:41:56 ↗ fixing issues and there's easy to act

1:41:59 ↗ easy access to I90 and then also there's

1:42:03 ↗ um like the roads there's a lot of nice

1:42:05 ↗ aesthetic features like trees and the

1:42:07 ↗ medians and stuff like that and there's

1:42:09 ↗ still enough space for large SUVs that a

1:42:11 ↗ lot of people drive to like navigate

1:42:14 ↗ through the

1:42:15 ↗ streets and there's also nice twisty

1:42:18 ↗ back roads that are fun to drive on

1:42:21 ↗ sidewalks and then plowing is generally

1:42:24 ↗ sufficient and traffic isn't bad midday

1:42:28 ↗ and then also like the small quality of

1:42:31 ↗ life features I'd like to say like if

1:42:33 ↗ there's two turn Lanes right next to

1:42:34 ↗ each other like the little dotted white

1:42:36 ↗ line through intersections and stuff and

1:42:39 ↗ then dislikes the main comment was the

1:42:42 ↗ horrid traffic at the start and the end

1:42:43 ↗ of the school day IHS and IMS and

1:42:47 ↗ basically it's because there's a

1:42:48 ↗ thousand cars at each school and it's

1:42:50 ↗ going going along a two-lane road and

1:42:52 ↗ then the unprotected lefts into the

1:42:55 ↗ church parking lot and the gravel lot

1:42:56 ↗ that a lot of us have to take otherwise

1:42:58 ↗ we're going to be late to school and

1:43:01 ↗ that kind of ends up C causing traffic

1:43:03 ↗ to stop momentarily which just builds

1:43:04 ↗ and builds traffic down um Second Avenue

1:43:08 ↗ heading to

1:43:09 ↗ Sunset and then a lot of parents drop

1:43:11 ↗ off their kids when they could just send

1:43:14 ↗ them on the bus so um an idea that

1:43:17 ↗ someone proposed was making a paid pass

1:43:19 ↗ that you have to purchase to be able to

1:43:21 ↗ drop off your kids at school using a car

1:43:24 ↗ and then um also stricter enforcement in

1:43:28 ↗ the main parking lot of iso High School

1:43:31 ↗ uh at the start of first period and

1:43:33 ↗ after lunch because I've heard from a

1:43:35 ↗ lot of people like right at lunch

1:43:38 ↗ everybody drives to like go get food or

1:43:40 ↗ whatever outside of the school and then

1:43:42 ↗ people move their cars into the main lot

1:43:46 ↗ of the school that should that are not

1:43:48 ↗ allowed to park in that main lot of the

1:43:49 ↗ school and then people who pay to park

1:43:51 ↗ in the main lot of the school can't use

1:43:53 ↗ their

1:43:54 ↗ parking yeah and then also just

1:43:56 ↗ generally more comments about the

1:43:58 ↗ dislikes and traffic of like Front

1:44:00 ↗ Street and Gilman and downtown of squa

1:44:03 ↗ and then like some potholes and then

1:44:06 ↗ some badly timed traffic lights and then

1:44:08 ↗ also like a lot of my Highlands friends

1:44:10 ↗ were complaining that the snow and ice

1:44:11 ↗ mitigation with the recent storm was not

1:44:14 ↗ enough in some neighborhoods and it was

1:44:17 ↗ unsafe to

1:44:18 ↗ drive and that's it thank you a very

1:44:21 ↗ good detail report thank

1:44:24 ↗ you any

1:44:29 ↗ questions I didn't mean to raise my hand

1:44:31 ↗ I meant to clap that was amazing thank

1:44:33 ↗ you yeah thank you any

1:44:35 ↗ questions should ask them what they

1:44:37 ↗ think about uh Road dieting explain to

1:44:40 ↗ them it's narrowing roads oh yeah we got

1:44:43 ↗ a pretty clear response there yeah I

1:44:45 ↗ don't think people like that I like the

1:44:47 ↗ idea on the comment that some of them

1:44:49 ↗ had about having a perit drop off kids

1:44:51 ↗ to have people think twice about driv

1:44:53 ↗ just SCH drop the P off on the bus good

1:44:57 ↗ idea especially like Middle School like

1:44:58 ↗ for me a big reason I don't take the bus

1:45:00 ↗ is because it's so cramped like I can't

1:45:02 ↗ sit normally in the bus and I'm not even

1:45:04 ↗ that tall enough to like sit sideways

1:45:06 ↗ and stuff so it's just like I'd rather

1:45:08 ↗ just

1:45:09 ↗ drive where it's like I can like just

1:45:12 ↗ relax more being like cramped a bunch of

1:45:14 ↗ like middle schoolers and stuff with the

1:45:16 ↗ bus but like for the Middle School Aids

1:45:17 ↗ kids they have like they're small they

1:45:19 ↗ can fit on the bus they should just take

1:45:21 ↗ the bus I know how that feels because I

1:45:23 ↗ went on a couple field trips

1:45:34 ↗ and good well in that case do we have

1:45:37 ↗ any other business or

1:45:42 ↗ announcements that this we are turn at

1:45:49 ↗ 745 good I guess I was going to ask in

1:45:52 ↗ the picture

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