Transportation Advisory Board · Wednesday, January 28, 2026 · City Council Digest

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes of October 22, 2025

packet pp.3–4

Open packet at p.3 ↗

Staff report:

APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) 10-22-25 Transportation Advisory Board Minutes Page [1] CITY OF ISSAQUAH Transportation Advisory Board 6:00 PM Gibson Hall, 105 Newport Way October 22, 2025 MINUTES SW, Issaquah

4. REGULAR BUSINESS

2027-2032 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Introduction(I)

Thomas Valdriz, Senior Transportation Planner · packet pp.5–63

Topics: Transportation

Open packet at p.5 ↗

Staff report:

• Introduce the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) • Provide context for how the TIP fits into City planning and budgeting • Prepare Board to review the draft 2027-32 TIP in March

Adaptive Signal Control Technology Feasibility Study Introduction (D)

Marina Bandla, Senior Transportation Engineer · packet pp.65–80

Topics: Transportation

Open packet at p.65 ↗

Staff report:

JANUARY 28| TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD

2026 Board Work Plan

Discussion · Thomas Valdriz, Senior Transportation Planner · packet pp.81–98

Open packet at p.81 ↗

Staff report:

2026 TAB Workplan JA N UA RY 2 8 , 2 0 2 6| T R A NSP O RTATI ON A DV I SO RY B OA R D

5. REPORTS

Staff Report

Chair Report

2314 segments .txt ↗

21:30 ↗ Traffic signals help vehicles move

21:32 ↗ safely and efficiently, but traditional

21:34 ↗ signals follow fixed timing even when

21:37 ↗ traffic changes.

21:39 ↗ This can lead to delay and driver

21:41 ↗ frustration.

21:43 ↗ What is adaptive signal control and how

21:45 ↗ does it work?

21:47 ↗ Today's traffic signals use detectors

21:49 ↗ such as sensors in the pavement,

21:51 ↗ cameras, or radar to know when vehicles

21:53 ↗ are waiting. Most signals use this

21:56 ↗ information to follow a fixed schedule

21:58 ↗ that changes by time of day, but does

22:00 ↗ not continuously adapt to on the ground

22:02 ↗ traffic conditions. Adaptive traffic

22:05 ↗ signal control builds on this by using

22:07 ↗ real-time data from multiple

22:08 ↗ intersections. Detectors track where

22:11 ↗ traffic is moving smoothly and where

22:13 ↗ backups are forming and share this

22:15 ↗ information between signals. Instead of

22:18 ↗ relying on a preset schedule, the system

22:20 ↗ automatically changes signal timing

22:22 ↗ based on current traffic conditions to

22:24 ↗ better understand how traffic moves

22:26 ↗ through the network. How can adaptive

22:28 ↗ signals benefit the city?

22:31 ↗ When deployed in appropriate corridors,

22:33 ↗ adaptive signals can reduce delays,

22:35 ↗ smooth traffic flow, make travel times

22:38 ↗ more reliable, and reduce the number of

22:40 ↗ stops and time idling. This improves

22:42 ↗ safety and a driver's experience,

22:45 ↗ reduces greenhouse gases, and makes

22:47 ↗ better use of existing transportation

22:48 ↗ infrastructure.

22:50 ↗ Great, but what's the catch? Adaptive

22:53 ↗ signals are not a cure all. They can't

22:55 ↗ prevent congestion caused by crashes,

22:58 ↗ construction, or too many vehicles for

23:00 ↗ the road's capacity. Adaptive signals

23:03 ↗ adjust timing and optimize existing

23:05 ↗ infrastructure, but they can't create

23:07 ↗ new roadway capacity for an overloaded

23:10 ↗ system. For adaptive control to deliver

23:12 ↗ value, the city also needs up-to-date

23:15 ↗ detectors, supporting infrastructure,

23:18 ↗ a strong communications network, and

23:20 ↗ trained staff to monitor and maintain

23:22 ↗ the system. This investment is part of

23:25 ↗ making the technology work for the

23:27 ↗ community. What's the bottom line?

23:30 ↗ Adaptive signal control is a smart tool

23:32 ↗ that can help manage traffic more

23:33 ↗ efficiently by responding to real-time

23:36 ↗ conditions. However, it works best only

23:39 ↗ under the right circumstances. Adaptive

23:41 ↗ signals cannot fix congestion caused by

23:43 ↗ an overloaded roadway system. They

23:46 ↗ require upfront investment in detectors,

23:48 ↗ communications, and supporting

23:49 ↗ infrastructure, as well as ongoing

23:52 ↗ operating and maintenance resources to

23:54 ↗ continue delivering benefits.

23:56 ↗ What's next?

23:58 ↗ The next step is a study to identify

24:00 ↗ which system improvements make the most

24:02 ↗ sense, what investments would be

24:04 ↗ required to implement and maintain them,

24:06 ↗ and which options offer the greatest

24:08 ↗ value.

24:10 ↗ Adaptive signal control can be the

24:11 ↗ cherry on top of a modern signal system,

24:14 ↗ but it is not a one-sizefits-all

24:16 ↗ solution and may not always align with

24:18 ↗ the city's priorities. For that reason,

24:20 ↗ implementation costs and benefits should

24:23 ↗ be evaluated on a corridor bycridor

24:25 ↗ basis. This balanced approach help

24:27 ↗ ensures that future decisions are

24:29 ↗ informed, strategic, and align with the

24:32 ↗ city's broader transportation goals.

31:44 ↗ arterial.

32:05 ↗ I see that a lot

32:09 ↗ that

32:11 ↗ some between

32:14 ↗ 90 in front is really a disaster. Um,

32:17 ↗ and I would be interested in seeing if

32:19 ↗ that can help, but I also

32:22 ↗ I guess I really thought about the um

32:26 ↗ doesn't help if there's too much traffic

32:28 ↗ for the roads, which I think might in my

32:32 ↗ lived experience that doesn't feel like

32:34 ↗ only a traffic signal problem.

32:39 ↗ >> It's Julie. Um I think you know my main

32:42 ↗ experience at least over the past year

32:44 ↗ or so has been

32:47 ↗ bus um we either go trans center ride

32:52 ↗ and two bus from there

32:55 ↗ either two but u when it comes to the

32:58 ↗ bus on 900 u I do think it'll be

33:02 ↗ important to have some have transit

33:04 ↗ priority there um where you know the bus

33:07 ↗ will start particularly when it's

33:09 ↗ approaching the the uh the trans center.

33:13 ↗ So that's pretty important uh from my

33:16 ↗ experience I think. Well, I think I mean

33:20 ↗ probably experience traveling you know

33:23 ↗ throughout that region

33:25 ↗ because I I've been thinking about more

33:31 ↗ extremely

33:34 ↗ I also ride through this quarter. I

33:36 ↗ don't remember what this road that goes

33:38 ↗ right past this old

33:40 ↗ >> SR900

33:41 ↗ >> SR900

33:42 ↗ uh I never remember but SR900 is not a

33:47 ↗ very memorable name I don't know

33:50 ↗ >> anyway this roadway I think is the one

33:53 ↗ that I personally think just from

33:56 ↗ thinking about it like the traffic

33:58 ↗ lights on this quarter are kind of the

33:59 ↗ biggest problem it like people were

34:01 ↗ saying on Front Street and Sunset yes

34:03 ↗ there's a lot of traffic there but

34:04 ↗ that's typically because there's 10,000

34:05 ↗ cars. Like it's not because the traffic

34:07 ↗ lights are slowing things down, but here

34:09 ↗ there's like 10 traffic lights in the

34:10 ↗ road and have been down for during the

34:12 ↗ 90s

34:13 ↗ >> or like when you're going to Lake Smash

34:14 ↗ State Park, there's like literally a set

34:17 ↗ of like four or five traffic light,

34:20 ↗ traffic light, traffic light, traffic

34:21 ↗ light. It is very possible to just get

34:23 ↗ stuck at every single light and make

34:25 ↗ taking like what should be a 10-minute

34:27 ↗ trip take 20 minutes or something,

34:28 ↗ right? Um so that's where I see there

34:32 ↗ being like the biggest need for that

34:34 ↗ sort of thing.

34:35 ↗ Um because that's the place where I get

34:37 ↗ most annoyed by the traffic lights, I

34:40 ↗ guess.

34:42 ↗ >> It's good to know.

34:46 ↗ >> Are you taking detailed questions as

34:48 ↗ well? Because I I I'm having trouble

34:50 ↗ with the kind of the higher level point

34:52 ↗ because because I don't know whether

34:55 ↗ it's a capacity problem or a weather

34:58 ↗ signal. I just never studied it in that

35:01 ↗ way. So I can't say. But I I can tell

35:02 ↗ you that there's a couple of places

35:04 ↗ where the signals are not working well.

35:07 ↗ Um, and one of them uh is the

35:11 ↗ intersection of Front Street and Dogwood

35:14 ↗ at Right here. And if you're on Dogwood

35:16 ↗ and you're trying to go uh left on a

35:19 ↗ front street,

35:21 ↗ you either have to jump out of the car

35:23 ↗ and hit the pedestrian light or and I

35:26 ↗ just and I know that

35:28 ↗ >> in the tip, this is like a future

35:30 ↗ project to redo that. I don't understand

35:33 ↗ why we can't have um a sensor for the

35:37 ↗ cars coming from street because it's

35:39 ↗ really really really problematic. uh

35:43 ↗ >> a pedestrian signal today only.

35:46 ↗ >> It's only a pedestrian signal now.

35:48 ↗ >> And so yeah, all kinds of creative

35:50 ↗ things to get out of there. And it I

35:53 ↗ don't know if that's adaptive or what

35:55 ↗ because I don't know enough about what

35:58 ↗ the boundaries are. Another thing that

36:01 ↗ is um I don't know if this could work,

36:04 ↗ but um I mean I I love a Scramble and I

36:07 ↗ love our Scramble and the three trails

36:10 ↗ crossing, but uh I find myself at that

36:12 ↗ intersection on foot on bike and in a

36:15 ↗ car pretty regularly. When I'm in a car,

36:18 ↗ it seems really really long. And then if

36:21 ↗ I'm running, it seems like it's way

36:23 ↗ longer than it needs to be. And if I'm

36:26 ↗ biking, it's way longer than it needs to

36:27 ↗ be. But if I'm on crutches, like I was

36:29 ↗ last spring, but it's just the right

36:31 ↗ amount of time. Is there any way for

36:32 ↗ these sensors to There's not that much.

36:36 ↗ It's not like, you know, a huge

36:38 ↗ scramble. There's not that much use each

36:40 ↗ signal. Is there any way to adapt it

36:43 ↗ based on the users? Because you can have

36:47 ↗ I mean, it's like 25 or 30 seconds. Some

36:49 ↗ of them be cross 5 seconds and sitting

36:51 ↗ there for seconds. So,

36:53 ↗ >> so the

36:56 ↗ I I can take all my time on this, but um

37:00 ↗ the way that we time signals for

37:02 ↗ pedestrians is that we have a set speed

37:05 ↗ that we assume a pedestrian can walk,

37:07 ↗ which is based basically on somebody.

37:10 ↗ And that is the minimum that our

37:13 ↗ manuals, our guidelines, our best

37:14 ↗ practices allow us to time for a

37:18 ↗ pedestrian. So, if there's a pedestrian

37:20 ↗ call, which at an intersection with a

37:22 ↗ pet scramble, we're going to serve that

37:24 ↗ every single time we go through a cycle.

37:27 ↗ Um,

37:29 ↗ we are always going to serve that

37:31 ↗ manner. There's technology that can

37:33 ↗ detect a pedestrian who's having trouble

37:35 ↗ in the crosswalk and extend that walk

37:37 ↗ longer and to give them time to clear,

37:40 ↗ but it's not necessarily going to be

37:42 ↗ able to go lower than that. And

37:44 ↗ specifically at the scramble, you have

37:46 ↗ to time it based on the longest distance

37:49 ↗ somebody has to cross, which is going to

37:50 ↗ be the diagonal,

37:52 ↗ >> right? So it does ped scramles do have a

37:55 ↗ longer phase. Sometimes they're actually

37:58 ↗ better for the operations though because

38:00 ↗ you're getting all the maintenance at

38:02 ↗ once rather than having to have usually

38:04 ↗ the longest crossing across the major

38:07 ↗ street going with the smallest volumes

38:09 ↗ which is the side street volumes that go

38:12 ↗ through cuz nobody usually goes through.

38:14 ↗ They're only wanting to turn on. So

38:16 ↗ there pedestrians anyway. So you end up

38:18 ↗ with this weird time bang that's

38:23 ↗ really based on like

38:24 ↗ >> So the answer is it's not really on the

38:27 ↗ table because you have to I can't

38:30 ↗ >> one note is that we love a pet scramble.

38:33 ↗ I think that's that's great. And then

38:36 ↗ wanting to be able to have more

38:39 ↗ input on maybe not always going to mass

38:42 ↗ like recall or something. Yeah. And then

38:45 ↗ um final final one is just that it seems

38:47 ↗ like

38:49 ↗ uh it seems like front and sunset is so

38:51 ↗ right for the scramble and I don't know

38:53 ↗ if that's also in its own adaptive uh

38:56 ↗ considering if that's the piece of this

38:58 ↗ conversation

39:00 ↗ very adaptive to me and it seems like

39:03 ↗ >> it would really help there but

39:08 ↗ Julie

39:09 ↗ >> yeah I mean I guess I had just

39:12 ↗ a question about you know the balance

39:14 ↗ you brought up the point about the

39:15 ↗ balance of this discussion of you when

39:17 ↗ we're looking at some of the uh material

39:20 ↗ corridors

39:22 ↗ at you know peak hours of you know

39:24 ↗ between 4 and 5:30 p.m. or 8:30 to 9:30

39:28 ↗ a.m. A lot of these corridors are

39:32 ↗ difficult to get through because of the

39:34 ↗ congestion because of the number of

39:36 ↗ video input and so it's to what extent

39:40 ↗ can adaptive signaling change that and

39:44 ↗ how much problem we have when it comes

39:46 ↗ to induced demands

39:49 ↗ to accept because I assume that people

39:52 ↗ alter

39:54 ↗ not be on the road like myself I

39:57 ↗ uh it's the road That's um one block

40:01 ↗ down from from 900 and I go all the way

40:05 ↗ to the TFC area and I go on go and I

40:08 ↗ take the right or there and you get that

40:11 ↗ signal then I might end up starting with

40:13 ↗ go that's 900 again and again and so my

40:17 ↗ question is just like how to what extent

40:20 ↗ can we sure that

40:24 ↗ also the fact like are we sure that

40:29 ↗ similar

40:38 ↗ as well.

40:39 ↗ >> Yeah.

40:40 ↗ >> Jordan was concerned about second.

40:43 ↗ There's just a lot of people waiting

40:44 ↗ there. That's not the arterial,

40:47 ↗ >> but it's

40:48 ↗ going to defract

40:58 ↗ I almost want to reframe this because

41:00 ↗ there's there's a lot in the question

41:03 ↗ which yeah if we fix capacity or we add

41:09 ↗ if we if we make it so that we can have

41:11 ↗ more through vehicles on the major

41:13 ↗ streets then it may pull things off the

41:17 ↗ side streets but it could also

41:19 ↗ negatively impact people from side

41:22 ↗ streets trying to get onto that at the

41:24 ↗ same time. So that that that is kind of

41:25 ↗ the push and pull, but I I want to try

41:28 ↗ to figure out what is the goal overall

41:31 ↗ is that like

41:33 ↗ we want to have Dory's point less diver

41:37 ↗ traffic onto the side streets, the local

41:39 ↗ streets, and we want to keep things on

41:42 ↗ the arterials if that's the the goal and

41:44 ↗ we want to move that, but we also don't

41:46 ↗ want to induce demand on major

41:48 ↗ arterials. I feel like those are the

41:51 ↗ things that I really need to like hear

41:53 ↗ as far as a priority goes at that's

41:56 ↗ really threading the needle.

41:58 ↗ Let's go over here next.

42:01 ↗ >> So, this might be slightly off topic,

42:03 ↗ but I don't know what a pedestrian

42:04 ↗ scramble is. I don't know if I'm the

42:06 ↗ only one here who doesn't know what that

42:07 ↗ is.

42:08 ↗ >> It's a great question.

42:11 ↗ >> Do you want to handle it, John, or you

42:12 ↗ want? Well, I will take an attempt and

42:16 ↗ then if I what I pick up the pieces.

42:19 ↗ >> So, it is a signal signalized

42:22 ↗ intersection where when the walk sign

42:25 ↗ comes on for the pedestrians, then go

42:27 ↗ any direction. And so, if you're wanting

42:30 ↗ to go north, you go north. If you're

42:31 ↗ wanting to go

42:33 ↗ west, you go west. And if you're wanting

42:36 ↗ to go northeast, you go northeast. And

42:38 ↗ so, all the pedestrian movements happen

42:41 ↗ all at once. So, it's you usually see it

42:43 ↗ where you have a lot of pedestrians. So,

42:45 ↗ if you're at the

42:50 ↗ Yes. A location with lots and lots of

42:52 ↗ pedestrians.

42:53 ↗ >> Yeah. Japan.

42:55 ↗ >> Yeah.

42:56 ↗ >> Yeah.

42:57 ↗ Like the Santa Monica Pier has a

42:59 ↗ pedestrian scramble

43:02 ↗ >> place

43:06 ↗ of the Reineer Trail. Gilman. They call

43:09 ↗ the three trails crossing. Yeah. Or if I

43:12 ↗ ride by schools, I uh see the

43:15 ↗ >> Oh, caboose. They got a little nice,

43:18 ↗ too. I've been there, but I didn't know

43:20 ↗ there was a pedestrian there.

43:22 ↗ >> You have be there.

43:24 ↗ >> Yes.

43:24 ↗ >> Yeah. And if you ever go to the

43:25 ↗ Belleview Transit Center, there's one

43:27 ↗ there, too. Yeah.

43:28 ↗ >> Okay. Yeah. And we were possibly

43:31 ↗ discussing putting one of those in front

43:34 ↗ of Sunset. And I think that being

43:36 ↗ pedestrian crossing there said that's

43:39 ↗ probably a good idea.

43:41 ↗ >> Yeah, you always end up going

43:52 ↗ in your

43:56 ↗ >> um we're looking for like specific

43:58 ↗ priorities. I think based on the

44:01 ↗ different road sections you showed, I

44:04 ↗ guess my mind there's different

44:05 ↗ priorities for different ones of those.

44:07 ↗ Like old town is full of pedestrian. 900

44:11 ↗ does not support as many pedestrians.

44:13 ↗ That's not a pedestrian thoroughfare as

44:15 ↗ much. So my priority probably wouldn't

44:18 ↗ be prioritizing pedestrian 900 even

44:21 ↗ though it is

44:24 ↗ things like that. So I think it's like

44:26 ↗ roadway independent.

44:29 ↗ >> Yeah, I

44:31 ↗ you you queued me up perfectly because

44:33 ↗ the next part of the conversation is to

44:35 ↗ break down the corridor and I would kind

44:38 ↗ of group them up so that they're

44:40 ↗ somewhat similar in nature, but we can

44:42 ↗ get into those very specifics. Um what

44:45 ↗ we're going to do is go through those

44:46 ↗ groups and I like to think of things in

44:49 ↗ three buckets of what about that quarter

44:52 ↗ do you want to protect? What would you

44:54 ↗ like to create? So, what is something

44:56 ↗ new that you would like to see there?

44:58 ↗ And then what do you want to avoid? What

45:00 ↗ would be a bad outcome that you'd be

45:02 ↗ like, "Boy, I wish we didn't do that in

45:04 ↗ the future." Um, so why don't we just go

45:08 ↗ through because the very

45:09 ↗ >> more general comment,

45:11 ↗ >> okay,

45:12 ↗ >> on the pedestrian scramble and

45:14 ↗ discussion of corregation of pedestrian

45:16 ↗ traffic, I think we talked about there's

45:19 ↗ kind of a minimum worthy amount of time

45:20 ↗ that the crosswalk must meet on. We

45:23 ↗ didn't talk about like the full cycle

45:24 ↗ length. So how do you forage and I think

45:27 ↗ this is probably something that is like

45:29 ↗ a general positive of adaptive signaling

45:32 ↗ is you can at times when you don't have

45:34 ↗ congestion reduce the cycle width

45:36 ↗ perhaps for cars

45:38 ↗ >> and that would be awesome.

45:40 ↗ >> Okay. and in a number of uh

45:43 ↗ intersections plus

45:54 ↗ perfect.

45:57 ↗ All right. So the first group that we

46:00 ↗ were looking at um

46:04 ↗ it's like so we have it's okay it's

46:06 ↗ quite a big quite a big group. So, we

46:08 ↗ have the Seamish Northwest Seamish Road

46:12 ↗ at Southeast 56th, which is the loop

46:14 ↗ that goes up and around

46:17 ↗ uh sort of the Costco area there. Um and

46:20 ↗ then East Lake Samish as well. So, lots

46:24 ↗ of big box retail off of those, lots of

46:27 ↗ um shopping through traffic on those as

46:30 ↗ well. We also included um Front Street

46:34 ↗ in here. uh I think just the north side

46:36 ↗ of Front Street and then 17th or the

46:40 ↗ SR900

46:41 ↗ um corridor which is a much longer one.

46:44 ↗ Now the ones that I've kind of

46:45 ↗ highlighted in yellow on the basically

46:48 ↗ what's north of I90 that is included in

46:52 ↗ one of the plans that we were talking

46:54 ↗ about earlier. Um and there's a little

46:57 ↗ cross-section in there. They're called

47:00 ↗ like parkways. Um I showed the option

47:03 ↗ here where there's a transit on them. So

47:05 ↗ on some of these parkways there are

47:07 ↗ transit you know routes. So there's

47:10 ↗ transit priority. Um and on those the

47:14 ↗ modal plan has already sort of

47:16 ↗ identified that vehicles and transit are

47:19 ↗ going to be the like the mode priorities

47:21 ↗ for those major corridors.

47:28 ↗ So with that, I just kind of want to

47:30 ↗ looking at the map of these corridors on

47:32 ↗ on the board. What do we want to protect

47:35 ↗ create? Why don't we just start with one

47:37 ↗ question at a time? Hold on. What do we

47:39 ↗ want to protect about those corridors?

47:49 ↗ regardless.

47:51 ↗ >> I think this has this I know we talk

47:53 ↗ about priorizing and less of rather

47:55 ↗ regardless these are arterial but um on

47:59 ↗ piece you like to have a shrill where

48:02 ↗ all the bikes and the runners are. I

48:04 ↗ think that these I can imagine all all

48:06 ↗ three creative work protecting their

48:09 ↗ signal priority because there I do

48:11 ↗ notice as someone who's ran for or just

48:15 ↗ just ran um that's a very popular respon

48:26 ↗ I think I think that cross also has a

48:29 ↗ history of uh accidents

48:32 ↗ so there's

48:35 ↗ something that we would be looking for

48:37 ↗ the uh group pedestrians still be

48:39 ↗ improved especially with all left turns

48:43 ↗ >> yeah some improvements to it like this

48:46 ↗ allow terms that science they're not

48:48 ↗ always following

48:53 ↗ the solutions that have children

48:56 ↗ bouncing off that point. Uh I think

48:59 ↗ I think you know having enabling people

49:02 ↗ to

49:03 ↗ people who are biking or who are walking

49:07 ↗ or rolling

49:09 ↗ on these trails. So East Lake Smamash

49:12 ↗ among the Smamish trail on the north

49:14 ↗ side of north of the Smamish road and

49:16 ↗ then kind of the the other trails on the

49:20 ↗ west side of uh SR 900 those kind those

49:25 ↗ trails and then of course the crossing

49:26 ↗ from East Lake Samish to the rest trail.

49:30 ↗ So trying to make sure that people are

49:32 ↗ able to flow pretty freely between, you

49:35 ↗ know, when they like cross the road and

49:37 ↗ stuff and so enable that happen. I know

49:41 ↗ there's been times where I've had to be

49:44 ↗ stuck at the crossing for squad rest and

49:48 ↗ trail quite a long time. that we're

49:51 ↗ trying to uh tax the ability for um best

49:58 ↗ friends and my nurse and rollers to go

50:00 ↗ through that area

50:02 ↗ to me.

50:06 ↗ >> Uh I was just going to try and put a

50:07 ↗ positive spin on say that there is a

50:09 ↗ history of some uh there was a fatality

50:12 ↗ out many years ago. Um but there have

50:14 ↗ been improvements

50:16 ↗ um and I think we want to project those

50:19 ↗ improvements. Um I do feel like my

50:22 ↗ office is particularly efficient to get

50:23 ↗ further non-motorized but it is there is

50:27 ↗ a facility which is nice and so making

50:31 ↗ sure that we protect the um

50:34 ↗ the predictable there and the

50:37 ↗ separating

50:40 ↗ at some of those major intersections

50:43 ↗ where nonmotorized and yeah

50:49 ↗ I think they're probably at least three

50:51 ↗ and then major non-car intersections in

50:55 ↗ this corner of the wood. Uh and so what

50:57 ↗ we talked about earlier with like uh

50:59 ↗ prioritizing non non-vehicle traffic at

51:02 ↗ times when we don't have a lot of

51:04 ↗ throughput and vehicle traffic. I heard

51:06 ↗ you say signal lights there.

51:09 ↗ >> I was actually just talking about the

51:10 ↗ safety.

51:11 ↗ >> Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm I guess I want to

51:14 ↗ make sure that safety efforts that have

51:16 ↗ been made are protected. Um,

51:18 ↗ >> yeah,

51:19 ↗ >> I think that even if it's not

51:21 ↗ prioritized for nonmotorized efficiency,

51:23 ↗ that's a trade-off we make and I think

51:25 ↗ we can't make any trade-offs in safety.

51:28 ↗ And so just the like there's that um the

51:32 ↗ signal that says that you can't make the

51:34 ↗ right turn, you know,

51:37 ↗ first.

51:39 ↗ Yes. Thank you.

51:48 ↗ Um,

51:50 ↗ let's go into create. What do you What

51:53 ↗ would you like these corridors to be

51:55 ↗ that they're not doing well today?

52:06 ↗ to like uh for 17 and like getting onto

52:10 ↗ I90. Um just that backup if you're not

52:13 ↗ HOV

52:15 ↗ um usually because people are going

52:17 ↗ straight or right does everybody know

52:19 ↗ where I'm talking about? Okay. Um so

52:23 ↗ like helping them create less friction

52:26 ↗ um on that entrance and then getting off

52:29 ↗ I90 onto Front Street just the folks

52:31 ↗ that are trying to get over to continue

52:33 ↗ onto Front that big um that's really

52:37 ↗ difficult

52:38 ↗ >> and then everybody else who just wants

52:40 ↗ to go right on building

52:46 ↗ uh areas that create

52:50 ↗ a room

52:52 ↗ Victoria,

52:53 ↗ >> in addition um getting off 90 onto 900,

52:58 ↗ I sit at that light, you know, right

53:00 ↗ there by the PCC

53:02 ↗ multiple light cycle every time. And if

53:04 ↗ I go at a really, really, really dead

53:06 ↗ time, like that ramp is backed up all

53:08 ↗ the way to the highway a lot of times

53:11 ↗ and I'm just sitting there fine. But I

53:15 ↗ imagine that that is a bottleneck for

53:18 ↗ people who need to go places other than

53:21 ↗ Costco, you know, like it's uh I don't

53:25 ↗ know that like just never seems right to

53:27 ↗ me. Um get off there sitting on that

53:30 ↗ ramp.

53:31 ↗ >> Can you say again?

53:33 ↗ >> It's when you're going eastbound on

53:37 ↗ westbound on 90. when you go to get

53:39 ↗ officially online

53:42 ↗ and um whether you're going right or

53:44 ↗ left from that exit that whole exit back

53:46 ↗ up especially because there comes a

53:49 ↗ point where you can't separate into

53:50 ↗ whether you're going right or left and

53:51 ↗ it's just one long line ours um I don't

53:55 ↗ know that I've ever sat at that cycle

53:56 ↗ for less than like two

53:59 ↗ >> gothroughs or whatever you go to Costco

54:01 ↗ at 9 in

54:04 ↗ I send my husband for exact now

54:10 ↗ I've gotten hit on that like by a car

54:12 ↗ behind me on that one. Uh I just I

54:14 ↗ really particularly hate that off ramp

54:16 ↗ but I the light seems a problem there.

54:19 ↗ Anyone

54:23 ↗ else with things I want to relate

54:26 ↗ for?

54:28 ↗ I think Julian mentioned this earlier,

54:31 ↗ but this is the corridor that includes

54:33 ↗ the Squatch Transit Center, I believe,

54:35 ↗ and creating more

54:38 ↗ um more mobility for the buses to get in

54:42 ↗ and out, especially during high traffic

54:44 ↗ hours because I know the bus has not

54:45 ↗ been sitting traffic there for freaking

54:49 ↗ ever. um when you're coming in and

54:52 ↗ coming going in or going out at a high

54:54 ↗ like a high per time and I know that

54:57 ↗ there's some things so smart uh with the

55:01 ↗ signaling improvement like there's

55:04 ↗ uh like prioritization for buses

55:07 ↗ a lot with getting people in and out of

55:08 ↗ the center

55:15 ↗ you mentioned that up by the trans

55:16 ↗ center and all the new developments are

55:19 ↗ the potential like gears in the future

55:21 ↗ if that happens and um but that will be

55:24 ↗ like the new symbol maybe I know this

55:25 ↗ only shows these highlight areas but

55:27 ↗ maybe that would be or that's included

55:29 ↗ as well or analysis signals because that

55:32 ↗ might be to consider in the future that

55:34 ↗ might be a busy area mainly track walls

55:37 ↗ might increase

55:39 ↗ or especially when pedestrians

55:43 ↗ walk around

55:48 ↗ at very least just preparing for making

55:51 ↗ sure this this infrastructure is

55:53 ↗ compatible with that future is

55:54 ↗ important.

55:55 ↗ >> Mhm.

55:59 ↗ >> Yeah. And also there's a lot of

56:01 ↗ development that is getting open to that

56:02 ↗ trail that is already broken ground or

56:05 ↗ they break ground soon on that one. It's

56:07 ↗ going to be a lot more at least local

56:10 ↗ traffic that will be continuing with

56:12 ↗ pass through traffic that we

56:13 ↗ >> Yeah. And also I think uh you know

56:16 ↗ thinking about future developments I

56:18 ↗ feel like those you know big boxers are

56:20 ↗ eventually going to be red developed uh

56:24 ↗ sometime in the future and so you know

56:27 ↗ thinking about

56:29 ↗ to you know make sure that

56:34 ↗ that

56:35 ↗ scenario many

56:42 ↗ Great.

56:43 ↗ And then anything on these to avoid

56:46 ↗ things we don't want

56:54 ↗ >> any siblings comments on

56:57 ↗ the safety protected and avoid. Yeah.

57:02 ↗ Yeah.

57:12 ↗ I guess this is

57:14 ↗ guess I guess another situation to talk

57:17 ↗ about like when it comes to the side

57:19 ↗ streets of when it comes to area and

57:24 ↗ those uh arch but those roads flowing

57:28 ↗ into

57:30 ↗ road and thinking you know we want to

57:33 ↗ avoid

57:35 ↗ making it smoother on a side road at the

57:39 ↗ expense of making her turn her left or

57:42 ↗ whatever

57:43 ↗ etc etc. So I don't know where I stand

57:46 ↗ on that. Uh but I think that question

57:57 ↗ but um I mean you mentioned like the

57:59 ↗ entrance to the N that00

58:04 ↗ as well.

58:09 ↗ I'm sorry I was restate that for me. I

58:11 ↗ was still I was trying to make any

58:13 ↗ saying and I distracted um avoiding the

58:16 ↗ juice especially with what you mentioned

58:17 ↗ earlier with the the 90 and that's true.

58:25 ↗ I think in general we talked about kind

58:27 ↗ of the backups that conformed uh due to

58:32 ↗ polit

58:34 ↗ and we do uh backups that prevent you

58:38 ↗ know traffic flowing around

58:41 ↗ which pretty well

58:44 ↗ you know just because we

58:51 ↗ all right

58:54 ↗ moving On to the next slide.

58:59 ↗ It's a fun one. Uh, so this is the south

59:03 ↗ end of Front Street and then east and

59:06 ↗ west of Sunset. We've already heard the

59:08 ↗ intersection

59:10 ↗ of Front and Sunset is a concern. Um,

59:16 ↗ this one's perfect. There's no problem.

59:17 ↗ Yeah.

59:19 ↗ >> Protect the operation at

59:28 ↗ Besides uh traffic, what I'm talking

59:30 ↗ about thinking about protecting this is

59:32 ↗ a really huge area uh where kids walk to

59:36 ↗ school um multiple schools uh at

59:40 ↗ multiple ages. Um and then I would

59:44 ↗ really like to like

59:46 ↗ facility for them at crosswalk uh things

59:49 ↗ like that. Um I know

59:54 ↗ on second one because of the traffic

59:56 ↗ pages that flash you make on the school

59:59 ↗ road. But uh like yeah um but

1:00:04 ↗ yeah just in general taking protect

1:00:07 ↗ large sidewalks for kids groups of kids.

1:00:10 ↗ It's a really big area for a lot of

1:00:13 ↗ pedestrians but particularly a lot of

1:00:15 ↗ kids and some kids on uh e scooters that

1:00:18 ↗ maybe don't know road safety and things

1:00:20 ↗ like that. And while they should talk

1:00:22 ↗ about safety, like I just would hate to

1:00:25 ↗ see any accidents. We had an accident at

1:00:27 ↗ six and sunset a couple years ago where

1:00:31 ↗ elderly man would hit. Um so things like

1:00:35 ↗ that,

1:00:38 ↗ >> I would say, you know, front street,

1:00:41 ↗ this this part of street and sunset way

1:00:44 ↗ is kind of like the most pedestrian

1:00:48 ↗ section of Isaba by far. And so I think

1:00:50 ↗ the most important thing to protect for

1:00:52 ↗ me is just the pedestrianization of that

1:00:54 ↗ region. Like we we don't want anything

1:00:56 ↗ that will make the area more hostile to

1:00:59 ↗ pedestrians. Uh be that with like harder

1:01:02 ↗ to track across the street or anything

1:01:04 ↗ like that and including safety, but I

1:01:06 ↗ also just think the general like

1:01:08 ↗ convenience of pedestrians

1:01:10 ↗ I want to protect here. But and also

1:01:12 ↗ with I think protecting it's pretty

1:01:16 ↗ fluid like is

1:01:19 ↗ yeah

1:01:23 ↗ >> I don't know if this is within the scope

1:01:25 ↗ but uh when they connect to like

1:01:27 ↗ intelligence um

1:01:30 ↗ because really between I said 15 17 and

1:01:33 ↗ 18 a lot of people can get off of any

1:01:35 ↗ one of those

1:01:36 ↗ >> and it would be really I mean for real

1:01:39 ↗ time data that's feeding into the back

1:01:41 ↗ your real time data so that the drivers

1:01:43 ↗ can adapt

1:01:45 ↗ local maps.

1:01:46 ↗ >> No, I'm just thinking I don't know if we

1:01:48 ↗ would ever have signage, but like

1:01:50 ↗ wouldn't it be nice if I knew instead of

1:01:53 ↗ arguing every time about whether it's

1:01:55 ↗ better 15, 17, right?

1:01:59 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:02:00 ↗ So it's nice if there was some

1:02:01 ↗ indication of of which of those is to

1:02:06 ↗ then you can go the other way cuz

1:02:08 ↗ there's a lot of options for a lot of us

1:02:11 ↗ in that whole grid

1:02:13 ↗ >> and I don't know if that's

1:02:16 ↗ >> I mean there's it system that can do

1:02:18 ↗ that

1:02:18 ↗ >> but can that can they work together?

1:02:20 ↗ Yeah, I think yeah that is a it can

1:02:24 ↗ making a system that can and

1:02:26 ↗ coordinating with wash to do that it's

1:02:28 ↗ definitely a challenge but it's not kind

1:02:30 ↗ of a pie in the sky

1:02:32 ↗ >> I don't know that it's a pie in the sky

1:02:33 ↗ that I have done

1:02:36 ↗ >> I did a project in Tacoma and that was

1:02:38 ↗ our recommendation

1:02:42 ↗ >> yeah between the three interchange the

1:02:45 ↗ three exits a lot of people have you

1:02:48 ↗ know options going to the plateau or

1:02:50 ↗ whether going south

1:02:53 ↗ or you could go any of those if you knew

1:02:56 ↗ that Newport was moving but um street

1:03:00 ↗ wasn't you can get

1:03:03 ↗ off at 15.

1:03:05 ↗ So let's talk about supermarket

1:03:07 ↗ checkouts for a second.

1:03:09 ↗ All right. So, okay, say I have three

1:03:12 ↗ lanes, three uh supermarket checkouts,

1:03:14 ↗ and I have a queue behind each of them.

1:03:16 ↗ Each of those cues is going to move, you

1:03:18 ↗ know, at the speed of the checkout. If I

1:03:20 ↗ have one queue that needs all three of

1:03:22 ↗ those, that Q moves three times as fast,

1:03:24 ↗ even though the throughput through the

1:03:25 ↗ check.

1:03:27 ↗ There's a lot of that going on in these

1:03:29 ↗ streets where you have everything

1:03:32 ↗ leading to the oneway and going south

1:03:34 ↗ for the people that are going toward

1:03:37 ↗ South. Uh and so a lot of trouble in

1:03:42 ↗ this particular corridor is people can't

1:03:44 ↗ get around town when they're not going

1:03:46 ↗ through the cross streets south because

1:03:50 ↗ there's so much traffic going on front

1:03:52 ↗ streets out. So I mentioned this earlier

1:03:54 ↗ like if there were a way to you know

1:03:57 ↗ turn it into kind of a one Q system

1:03:59 ↗ where everybody's flowing then you get

1:04:00 ↗ flow of traffic around town even though

1:04:02 ↗ there's a lot of congestion capacity

1:04:05 ↗ cover

1:04:07 ↗ no idea how to do it

1:04:10 ↗ that's okay

1:04:11 ↗ >> there's a lot of potential traffic

1:04:13 ↗ shaping that

1:04:15 ↗ >> has the impact of it's the same amount

1:04:18 ↗ of capacity it's the same amount of

1:04:19 ↗ throughput but on any particular

1:04:22 ↗ traffic's moving a little bit faster and

1:04:24 ↗ so traffic that is not going through the

1:04:27 ↗ bottle that uh has a better experience.

1:04:33 ↗ So I want to dig in just a little bit on

1:04:35 ↗ the front street backs up and it stops

1:04:38 ↗ you from getting around other ways. So

1:04:41 ↗ would the desire be to get people to use

1:04:44 ↗ an alternative route to Fun Street so

1:04:46 ↗ that it doesn't back up as much onto

1:04:48 ↗ other

1:04:50 ↗ >> um I would say to be specific we've got

1:04:53 ↗ the intersection at Front and Second

1:04:55 ↗ which is set up the high school.

1:04:57 ↗ >> Yes. The bottom of the map there we've

1:04:59 ↗ got the intersection of Front and Sunset

1:05:03 ↗ intersection of Newport and Sunset

1:05:07 ↗ >> uh and then second at Sunset.

1:05:09 ↗ >> Mhm. If you think of this as like three

1:05:11 ↗ highway exits funneling through that

1:05:14 ↗ going down through the that one lane um

1:05:18 ↗ at the worst times you get traffic back

1:05:20 ↗ up and essentially stop.

1:05:24 ↗ >> So three lanes of it less traffic going

1:05:29 ↗ >> each of them moves a third of the one

1:05:32 ↗ lane south of the second and front uh

1:05:37 ↗ intersection.

1:05:38 ↗ >> Yeah. So if if there were an alternative

1:05:42 ↗ that didn't have that following

1:05:43 ↗ property,

1:05:45 ↗ >> you might have a better experience for

1:05:47 ↗ people that are not trying to going east

1:05:50 ↗ west instead of trying to go south

1:05:53 ↗ east west around town.

1:05:55 ↗ >> Yeah. Well, because one of the problems

1:05:56 ↗ I think that what he's trying to say is

1:05:58 ↗ that like if I try to go down like Broad

1:06:01 ↗ Street while you're in that traffic, but

1:06:03 ↗ I'm just trying to get to like Thai down

1:06:06 ↗ front street, but like I'm not trying to

1:06:07 ↗ go restaurant. I I love that restaurant.

1:06:10 ↗ Like if if I'm just trying to go go to a

1:06:12 ↗ a restaurant in along Front Street, it's

1:06:14 ↗ completely impossible that time of day.

1:06:16 ↗ But if you could just make it that the

1:06:17 ↗ same route of traffic moves a little bit

1:06:18 ↗ faster, it would make it much easier for

1:06:20 ↗ me to get as a misappable resident to

1:06:22 ↗ get from my house to the Thai restaurant

1:06:24 ↗ within town.

1:06:26 ↗ So if there's any solutions that like

1:06:28 ↗ can just make it so that the flow the

1:06:30 ↗ traffic flows through town even if it's

1:06:32 ↗ the same amount of traffic that would

1:06:33 ↗ make it easier to get to our

1:06:35 ↗ destinations. And that's the main

1:06:36 ↗ concern people live in the time

1:06:38 ↗ >> where it's fully stopped and we can't

1:06:39 ↗ >> Yeah. Because the problem is traffic

1:06:40 ↗ being stopped, not their V8 traffic.

1:06:43 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:06:49 ↗ just thinking of things I want to

1:06:50 ↗ protect. Um that trail head's right

1:06:53 ↗ there on Sunset and like any they've

1:06:56 ↗ done well parking lots,

1:06:59 ↗ but um the fact that it's there, the

1:07:02 ↗ electric charging they're putting there,

1:07:04 ↗ things like that. Um I think that's part

1:07:07 ↗ of what make really special is how many

1:07:09 ↗ entrances you have in the mountain. Um

1:07:11 ↗ this is the protect slashcreate. a tiny

1:07:15 ↗ little fourc car parking lot by the high

1:07:17 ↗ school trail, you know, that

1:07:18 ↗ >> Oh, yeah.

1:07:19 ↗ >> Yeah. Incred.

1:07:20 ↗ >> Yeah. And like

1:07:22 ↗ >> occasionally you'll get a car that's

1:07:23 ↗ parks, so you're kind of parked in um

1:07:28 ↗ >> that I would like uh protecting access,

1:07:32 ↗ I guess, to to the trail on this because

1:07:34 ↗ there are a couple like very wellused

1:07:36 ↗ ones uh on these corridors.

1:07:46 ↗ picking up a vulnerable.

1:07:48 ↗ >> Yeah,

1:07:50 ↗ true.

1:07:51 ↗ >> Yeah. I mean, I think like the previous

1:07:54 ↗ discussion was a lot about

1:07:57 ↗ matters of throughput and I don't think

1:07:59 ↗ that can do that stuff.

1:08:03 ↗ So you know I think priority for this

1:08:06 ↗ for this area is really to ensure that

1:08:09 ↗ those will get around bikers able to get

1:08:11 ↗ around pretty quickly. uh uh protecting

1:08:15 ↗ the premier trail protecting uh you know

1:08:19 ↗ will eventually be an east sunset

1:08:22 ↗ bikeway or or maybe that's sort of on I

1:08:24 ↗ use and so those kinds of uh the best

1:08:29 ↗ possible really

1:08:33 ↗ yeah

1:08:34 ↗ >> yeah no signaling won't fix the issue of

1:08:39 ↗ >> three different passages going

1:08:41 ↗ >> you're not going to like not found

1:08:44 ↗ developments to make different like that

1:08:46 ↗ jump through the funnel gets us but it

1:08:48 ↗ is

1:08:49 ↗ >> um

1:08:50 ↗ >> yeah so I protecting uh the ability

1:08:54 ↗ rather than loser but the safety of the

1:08:56 ↗ interaction between pedestrians the

1:08:58 ↗ people on wheels

1:09:01 ↗ the people in cars

1:09:04 ↗ >> so a couple things related to the roof

1:09:06 ↗ so if we talk about another quarter uh

1:09:08 ↗ transit uh so going on sunset that's

1:09:11 ↗ kind of a connection point between the

1:09:14 ↗ Isqua transit center uh you know via

1:09:17 ↗ Newport comes to sunset is up for the

1:09:19 ↗ highlands uh so priorization to transit

1:09:23 ↗ uh this is one place we got that and

1:09:25 ↗ historically we've had transit go on

1:09:28 ↗ street as well I don't know if there's

1:09:29 ↗ current

1:09:33 ↗ >> yeah so that's going to change over time

1:09:35 ↗ but I think there's a lot of transit

1:09:37 ↗ route bus routes we do

1:09:40 ↗ priorities

1:09:42 ↗ uh And then the other thing when you

1:09:43 ↗ talk about folks kind of people moving

1:09:46 ↗ on to nonmaterials because they have to

1:09:50 ↗ do that to protect their place in life.

1:09:53 ↗ So even even if they wanted to stay off

1:09:56 ↗ of them, they're highly motivated to

1:09:59 ↗ take a pass through. For example, when

1:10:02 ↗ you say people, you mean specifically

1:10:04 ↗ car just

1:10:11 ↗ >> Yeah, speeding is another thing.

1:10:14 ↗ >> Uh

1:10:15 ↗ yeah. So So Sunset, just south of Sunset

1:10:18 ↗ is uh Andrews.

1:10:21 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. Uh, a lot of traffic on

1:10:23 ↗ Andrews is just kind of cutting the

1:10:25 ↗ corner there. That kind of thing. If

1:10:27 ↗ there's stuff we can do to,

1:10:30 ↗ uh, disincentivize,

1:10:32 ↗ uh, pass through traffic, cut through

1:10:34 ↗ traffic, that kind of thing.

1:10:35 ↗ >> It used to be on sunset and no left turn

1:10:38 ↗ at certain times onto

1:10:41 ↗ >> Never.

1:10:42 ↗ >> I never did that either, and it didn't

1:10:44 ↗ really stop anyone. Um, and then they

1:10:47 ↗ put those speed bumps in which seems

1:10:49 ↗ like a fun challenge to the high

1:10:50 ↗ schoolers. Um,

1:10:55 ↗ kind of put the buses and I know the B4

1:10:57 ↗ go away and stuff, but so you're coming

1:10:59 ↗ off 90 and you're going down sunset.

1:11:04 ↗ The number of people to want to make

1:11:06 ↗ that left on second backs up so much

1:11:09 ↗ into a single lane that if you want to

1:11:10 ↗ go straight, you have to wait for like

1:11:12 ↗ 50 cars to make the left first. Um,

1:11:17 ↗ there's, you know, a bunch of stuff

1:11:18 ↗ there. So, I don't know how much that

1:11:19 ↗ could work out, but that seems to really

1:11:22 ↗ impede people who aren't even trying to

1:11:24 ↗ go that way like that. And I saw it on

1:11:27 ↗ the tip or whatever. Um, I think it's

1:11:30 ↗ one part's a little like one year and

1:11:34 ↗ one part's like three years or

1:11:35 ↗ something. But uh that left turn going

1:11:38 ↗ straight problem seems to be like a big

1:11:42 ↗ bottleneck that doesn't they're not all

1:11:45 ↗ triangle at the same place so it's yeah

1:11:48 ↗ >> they get stuck there

1:11:51 ↗ >> something that I have to work on

1:11:53 ↗ >> something to create figure that out

1:11:56 ↗ >> um but that that's an area where I'm

1:11:58 ↗ like oh not even they're not even

1:11:59 ↗ waiting you make a lap they just want to

1:12:01 ↗ go to D you can't so

1:12:03 ↗ >> similar to Uh when we talk about people

1:12:06 ↗ trying to go east west and to north

1:12:08 ↗ south like if you were just trying to

1:12:10 ↗ get over to like mountain or whatever

1:12:13 ↗ >> you can't because you're well you got to

1:12:16 ↗ wait for everyone who wants to make a

1:12:18 ↗ left on second and then you got to wait

1:12:19 ↗ for people want to make a left on front

1:12:21 ↗ that's just a very one lane road.

1:12:26 ↗ I don't know.

1:12:28 ↗ >> But

1:12:29 ↗ >> I think we're ready to go to the next

1:12:30 ↗ group thing.

1:12:31 ↗ >> What one more thing that's wrong here? I

1:12:34 ↗ I asked a question about email which was

1:12:36 ↗ basically uh

1:12:39 ↗ as part of building this we had a new

1:12:41 ↗ opportunity to collect data. So even if

1:12:43 ↗ we're not doing you know specifically

1:12:46 ↗ adjustment schedules we might find data

1:12:49 ↗ with us too many uh events.

1:12:53 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:12:54 ↗ >> And so one of the examples of that would

1:12:55 ↗ be school times there's a lot of traffic

1:12:58 ↗ which we left out. Uh perhaps there's

1:13:01 ↗ something we can do with the adaptive

1:13:02 ↗ signaling there. like we know there's

1:13:04 ↗ going to just a huge amount of traffic

1:13:06 ↗ coming from uh the high school and the

1:13:09 ↗ middle school by the same time Jeff sles

1:13:12 ↗ for that but even if you don't adjust

1:13:14 ↗ the timing of lights uh having that in a

1:13:18 ↗ data source that we can rely on for

1:13:21 ↗ opportunities and change schedules or

1:13:22 ↗ whatever and I'll I'll reiterate just

1:13:25 ↗ for the rest of the time here that as

1:13:27 ↗ part of this project we are helping

1:13:30 ↗ staff look at new data sources big data

1:13:32 ↗ sources that are going to answer exactly

1:13:34 ↗ some of those questions because those

1:13:35 ↗ are also some of the things that we need

1:13:36 ↗ to know to understand if the active

1:13:39 ↗ signal is even feasible. Um, and then

1:13:42 ↗ we're working with staff to make sure

1:13:43 ↗ that that data can be used to better

1:13:45 ↗ manage traffic flow overall. Um, but it

1:13:48 ↗ and I've heard this I think from

1:13:50 ↗ multiple members that that is just the

1:13:52 ↗ concern is making sure you have data

1:13:55 ↗ that backs up travel management like

1:13:57 ↗ efforts overall.

1:14:00 ↗ >> Yeah. Taking that one step further,

1:14:03 ↗ a lot of the sources kind of are, you

1:14:05 ↗ know, made any changes, you haven't

1:14:07 ↗ perturbed the system. You're just

1:14:09 ↗ measuring kind of how it is naturally,

1:14:11 ↗ >> right? If you allow foration in the

1:14:14 ↗ system, that can allow for much more

1:14:17 ↗ precise data science and so coupling

1:14:20 ↗ that with the

1:14:23 ↗ the traffic uh signal changes,

1:14:27 ↗ it opens up other possibilities.

1:14:29 ↗ >> Yeah, absolutely.

1:14:33 ↗ All right.

1:14:35 ↗ Next is the Highlands 9th Avenue. Sort

1:14:39 ↗ of a couplet up through the Highlands

1:14:42 ↗ area. Um,

1:14:45 ↗ we have two more groups. We're good on

1:14:46 ↗ time to keep going. Space. All right.

1:14:49 ↗ Um,

1:14:51 ↗ start with protect.

1:15:00 ↗ Sorry, just where's

1:15:02 ↗ >> I think this

1:15:05 ↗ purple corridor that's a southbound part

1:15:07 ↗ of a couple is the blue that goes to

1:15:10 ↗ Nora.

1:15:11 ↗ >> There's the Safeway gas station at the

1:15:13 ↗ bottom.

1:15:14 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah.

1:15:15 ↗ >> Splits around. Yes.

1:15:17 ↗ >> Across street.

1:15:35 ↗ pedestrian priority that is still a lot

1:15:37 ↗ of commercial area.

1:15:45 ↗ I think the big thing here is yeah I

1:15:49 ↗ guess the uh public defeat began between

1:15:55 ↗ go straight through uh to go to Kohani

1:15:58 ↗ or something to see damage um

1:16:02 ↗ versus you know obviously the pedestrian

1:16:05 ↗ have been trying to preserve the ability

1:16:08 ↗ to to do that across um but I'm not

1:16:13 ↗ familiar the highlands areas make a

1:16:16 ↗ strong optimization

1:16:18 ↗ but you know obviously I'm inclined to

1:16:20 ↗ protect cross streets and J pedestrians

1:16:23 ↗ and so that's just my general bias but

1:16:26 ↗ uh

1:16:28 ↗ I don't go to the highlands enough to

1:16:30 ↗ say

1:16:34 ↗ let's see Thomas I noticed Erica has a

1:16:37 ↗ hand up there if you could help me watch

1:16:39 ↗ for that

1:16:39 ↗ >> yes great

1:16:42 ↗ >> let's gohead Erica,

1:16:45 ↗ >> thank you. Um, can you hear me? Okay.

1:16:49 ↗ Okay. I'm seeing some nods, I think.

1:16:51 ↗ Sorry. Um, my audio is a little funky. I

1:16:53 ↗ can mostly hear you all. Uh, my

1:16:55 ↗ curiosity is around the as the um

1:17:00 ↗ guess that's the west end of that if I'm

1:17:03 ↗ looking at the map right. It gets

1:17:04 ↗ further developed. I'm curious what sort

1:17:07 ↗ of pedestrian I guess both forms traffic

1:17:10 ↗ but just folks walking from their houses

1:17:12 ↗ to the Safeway or the other services in

1:17:15 ↗ the area uh coffee shops etc. um what

1:17:18 ↗ that means for the pedestrian usage and

1:17:22 ↗ signaling there. And then uh the other

1:17:25 ↗ thing of note is the um 5 well the

1:17:29 ↗ transit center and then there's the 554

1:17:31 ↗ stop that's kind of around the hospital

1:17:34 ↗ which I know potentially like that's

1:17:37 ↗ shifting or changing in the future. Um

1:17:42 ↗ but um I personally have not experienced

1:17:47 ↗ rough traffic flow in this area and I

1:17:50 ↗ might just not be driving during the

1:17:53 ↗ right times of the day to experience

1:17:54 ↗ that compared to some of the other areas

1:17:56 ↗ covered.

1:18:00 ↗ >> Have a similar experience but it's not

1:18:03 ↗ particularly condensed.

1:18:06 ↗ I would the few times I drive through

1:18:08 ↗ there it's not the lights particularly

1:18:10 ↗ coming back down to look at that and I

1:18:13 ↗ seem actually one of the more welltimed

1:18:15 ↗ areas in spot as a citizen uh protecting

1:18:20 ↗ access to the I'm usually very

1:18:23 ↗ pedestrian above all else but you as

1:18:27 ↗ that west side that gets built up more

1:18:30 ↗ protecting the ability because that road

1:18:33 ↗ that you make a left on coming up

1:18:36 ↗ Highlands and making a left to the

1:18:38 ↗ hospital. Um that's kind of a narrow

1:18:41 ↗ road right now and so but they're

1:18:43 ↗ building a whole bunch more along there

1:18:47 ↗ just in general protecting access to the

1:18:49 ↗ hospital for ambulance people going for

1:18:52 ↗ the emergency room thing but the time I

1:18:55 ↗ think like cars do have to have early

1:18:57 ↗ access there.

1:18:59 ↗ >> Yeah, it's discovered drive.

1:19:01 ↗ >> Thank you. Bye.

1:19:04 ↗ Uh yeah, I was going to echo similar

1:19:06 ↗ comments and protect uh because I do

1:19:08 ↗ feel like it's going to be more

1:19:10 ↗ less trafficked areas um and like the

1:19:13 ↗ lights are more in sync usually. Um but

1:19:15 ↗ it could be a place where the technology

1:19:18 ↗ could just further um the improvements

1:19:21 ↗ there. Um especially if like you never

1:19:23 ↗ be coming down to work or coming up to,

1:19:26 ↗ you know, come back home. And so there's

1:19:27 ↗ certainly some possibilities to make it

1:19:29 ↗ even better, but in general, I guess the

1:19:31 ↗ more

1:19:33 ↗ better flow through area this

1:19:35 ↗ >> you want to protect that existence.

1:19:37 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:19:39 ↗ >> Uh one of the things that comes up in

1:19:42 ↗ some I guess squash strategy in the

1:19:44 ↗ community is uh fire evacuation and this

1:19:47 ↗ is one of the areas that's kind of

1:19:49 ↗ challenging. So it's a protect and a

1:19:51 ↗ create. Don't make the fire evacuation

1:19:54 ↗ worse, but also try to create a better

1:19:56 ↗ way to get people out of there if

1:19:59 ↗ there's a fire or an emergency.

1:20:05 ↗ >> Put down protect evacuation routes and

1:20:08 ↗ create better evacuation.

1:20:09 ↗ >> You got it.

1:20:11 ↗ I'll I'll note that I have seen traffic

1:20:14 ↗ which I think is related to the quarter

1:20:16 ↗ we looked at previously uh coming down

1:20:18 ↗ Highlands Drive and going on onto

1:20:21 ↗ Sunset.

1:20:23 ↗ Uh that is something that we would want

1:20:25 ↗ to

1:20:27 ↗ potentially optimize here at some of

1:20:29 ↗ that traffic identity leads to the

1:20:31 ↗ highway where there doesn't appear to be

1:20:32 ↗ at the throughput in time but provide a

1:20:35 ↗ bottleneck and was like it could flow

1:20:39 ↗ pretty freely there but sometimes backs

1:20:41 ↗ up behind traffic go

1:20:46 ↗ >> one area I will say you do come down um

1:20:49 ↗ I have seen some dangerous maneuvers if

1:20:51 ↗ you're waiting because you're I got to

1:20:53 ↗ go straight down to West. Um that uh on

1:20:57 ↗ rampant to go east on 90 will

1:20:59 ↗ occasionally get a little backed up and

1:21:00 ↗ then you have people just being like,

1:21:02 ↗ "Oh, I'm going to go on the shoulder

1:21:03 ↗ around them." Um I don't really know if

1:21:06 ↗ there's any way to do that. But that's

1:21:08 ↗ an issue. I will say um most cars are

1:21:11 ↗ going to go down some stuff, but if you

1:21:13 ↗ get uh at rush tower that turn on at 90,

1:21:18 ↗ but it backs up that single lane going

1:21:20 ↗ down to sunset even more. There's just a

1:21:22 ↗ lot of model like a lot involved with

1:21:24 ↗ sunset with a single lane road.

1:21:27 ↗ >> So potential prioritization left turning

1:21:30 ↗ on.

1:21:31 ↗ >> Yeah, something to make that easier so

1:21:32 ↗ that you're not waiting behind them as

1:21:34 ↗ well.

1:21:37 ↗ So

1:21:39 ↗ this isn't actually strictly related to

1:21:42 ↗ this region but it is related to

1:21:44 ↗ somebody fire evacuation. That made me

1:21:46 ↗ start thinking so this system is a lot

1:21:49 ↗ like the system that we're that or I was

1:21:52 ↗ thinking here is a lot more complicated

1:21:54 ↗ than the typical light system. I was

1:21:57 ↗ just wondering how that affects like

1:21:58 ↗ disaster preparedness and resiliency of

1:22:01 ↗ the transit system cuz for example

1:22:03 ↗ uh like like a couple years ago when we

1:22:06 ↗ had that huge windstorm it knocked out

1:22:08 ↗ power for like a full week and that

1:22:11 ↗ meant that a lot of the traffic signals

1:22:12 ↗ weren't working

1:22:13 ↗ >> and that made it really hard to get

1:22:16 ↗ around town. It's like

1:22:19 ↗ >> yeah um when everything was already the

1:22:22 ↗ road with the freeze on the road and

1:22:23 ↗ stuff and then also the traffic just so

1:22:25 ↗ much more. So, what I'm wondering is,

1:22:27 ↗ does this system make it harder to

1:22:30 ↗ revamp the system after there's a big

1:22:32 ↗ power outage? Does it not affect it at

1:22:33 ↗ all? Because that is a concern in this

1:22:35 ↗ region because we have gigantic power

1:22:37 ↗ outages once every couple years like

1:22:39 ↗ >> they're just going to get worse.

1:22:41 ↗ >> I mean, that's a really it's a really

1:22:44 ↗ good point and I know my colleague team

1:22:46 ↗ member Jim, you know, he talks about

1:22:48 ↗ making sure staff are able to

1:22:51 ↗ work with the system. So, our resets on

1:22:54 ↗ the system, getting it back up and

1:22:56 ↗ running can be a challenge.

1:22:59 ↗ It can also help a lot because if

1:23:01 ↗ there's if it can sense that there's

1:23:03 ↗ congestion somewhere that there normally

1:23:05 ↗ wouldn't be and direct people a

1:23:07 ↗ different way, maybe it could it could

1:23:09 ↗ help. But I think that really comes down

1:23:12 ↗ to making sure that you have staff to be

1:23:16 ↗ able to get it going again. And that's

1:23:19 ↗ not doesn't really happen on its own.

1:23:22 ↗ Yeah. Operation stuff

1:23:24 ↗ >> putting in the priorities just like

1:23:26 ↗ resiliency to natural disasters and

1:23:28 ↗ stuff like that as a priority for the

1:23:31 ↗ project in general I think is important

1:23:32 ↗ because you just be experiencing a lot

1:23:36 ↗ of that.

1:23:36 ↗ >> Yes.

1:23:42 ↗ >> Putting that under my notes on this one

1:23:45 ↗ under create resiliency to natural

1:23:47 ↗ disasters and then putting all four

1:23:51 ↗ I used to live in Montgomery town

1:23:53 ↗ beneath Maryland and they had a doubt of

1:23:56 ↗ signing technology there that I didn't

1:23:59 ↗ know existed until one day it wasn't

1:24:00 ↗ working with backups.

1:24:03 ↗ >> Yes.

1:24:06 ↗ >> Yeah. To your point like sometimes when

1:24:09 ↗ things aren't functioning it can get

1:24:10 ↗ worse because everybody got understood

1:24:12 ↗ things will get so much better.

1:24:14 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:24:15 ↗ >> And I don't know how to deal with that.

1:24:16 ↗ uh the database world uh people

1:24:19 ↗ deliberately slow down databases to the

1:24:21 ↗ worst performance just so it's evened

1:24:23 ↗ out and predictable. I don't think you

1:24:26 ↗ necessarily want to do that in this

1:24:27 ↗ case.

1:24:30 ↗ So, front and sunset everywhere.

1:24:33 ↗ >> Lower the expectations.

1:24:35 ↗ >> That's really now I

1:24:38 ↗ and Jim, if you want to come off mute

1:24:40 ↗ and say anything here, but I'll speak

1:24:42 ↗ I'll speak your the truth that you've

1:24:44 ↗ taught me. Anyway, having a switch and a

1:24:47 ↗ backup plan is one of like Jen's go-to

1:24:50 ↗ recommendation for any further adaptive

1:24:52 ↗ system because it does in a limited way

1:24:56 ↗ think for itself and sometimes does

1:24:59 ↗ things you don't want it to and people

1:25:01 ↗ can suddenly freak out when it's like,

1:25:03 ↗ "Oh my god, this is not what I'm used

1:25:05 ↗ to. and that my rout been messed up and

1:25:07 ↗ it can you want to be able to undo it

1:25:11 ↗ and go back to the normal operations and

1:25:13 ↗ then try to fix it in the background

1:25:14 ↗ without everyone sitting there screaming

1:25:16 ↗ at you for a week.

1:25:18 ↗ >> Yeah, we probably want to test the

1:25:20 ↗ backups as well because they

1:25:22 ↗ >> Yeah, I mean backup is what we have

1:25:23 ↗ today basically what it would go back

1:25:25 ↗ to, right?

1:25:26 ↗ >> Well, presumably maybe not.

1:25:28 ↗ >> Presumably. Yeah, exactly. If you don't

1:25:29 ↗ plan for that, then you don't.

1:25:35 ↗ I don't Oh, Jim's on camera. I don't

1:25:37 ↗ know if he's Give me a thumbs up, Jim,

1:25:40 ↗ if I did. Well,

1:25:42 ↗ >> yeah, that's good. I don't I don't have

1:25:43 ↗ a lot to add. I mean, the whole the

1:25:45 ↗ power outage question. There's not a

1:25:48 ↗ significant difference between having

1:25:50 ↗ the adaptive capability and a regular

1:25:53 ↗ signal system or more typical signal

1:25:56 ↗ system to when we're coming out of p a

1:25:59 ↗ power loss. Uh that's going to be pretty

1:26:02 ↗ similar. Chris pointed out the adaptive

1:26:05 ↗ systems are more complex and they are

1:26:08 ↗ dependent on good detection and

1:26:10 ↗ communications and so there there can be

1:26:13 ↗ an increased level of responsibility for

1:26:16 ↗ the folks maintaining and operating

1:26:18 ↗ these systems to keep and running. um

1:26:21 ↗ like Belleview staff somebody full-time

1:26:24 ↗ who's monitoring and that their adaptive

1:26:26 ↗ signal system and so that uh that's

1:26:30 ↗ probably the bigger issue to me than a a

1:26:33 ↗ power loss and coming out of it just the

1:26:34 ↗ ongoing operations and maintenance need.

1:26:43 ↗ Anything else to add on Highland's ninth

1:26:46 ↗ couplet? We have one more

1:26:49 ↗ order to talk about. We've already

1:26:51 ↗ talked about this one a little bit.

1:26:54 ↗ I pause to see if there was a Okay. Um

1:26:57 ↗ for Gilman talked about it a little bit

1:27:00 ↗ when we were talking about 900 I think

1:27:02 ↗ and some of the redevelopment that's

1:27:04 ↗ planned around the future transit

1:27:06 ↗ station and future future light rail

1:27:10 ↗ station. Um, but so maybe maybe we'll

1:27:14 ↗ hear a lot about what we want to create

1:27:16 ↗ because this feels like it's a part of

1:27:18 ↗ the city that's sort of about to

1:27:20 ↗ transition if not in transition. Um, but

1:27:24 ↗ let's start with protect what's out

1:27:25 ↗ there today.

1:27:28 ↗ Yeah, I think this goes into both

1:27:30 ↗ develop

1:27:34 ↗ um connecting the building for the cross

1:27:37 ↗ for the cross street

1:27:39 ↗ cross street crossings and cross street

1:27:41 ↗ going off to the arterial particularly

1:27:44 ↗ like the maple to

1:27:47 ↗ 900 section because I know in the city

1:27:50 ↗ plans there are plans to make more of a

1:27:53 ↗ grid pattern uh in the center center

1:27:56 ↗ central plan and so there's going to be

1:27:59 ↗ more roads coming onto more streets

1:28:03 ↗ coming onto Gilman and when you have the

1:28:06 ↗ light rail station coming in online you

1:28:08 ↗ know 40 point 45 line you're going to

1:28:11 ↗ have more background street which is

1:28:14 ↗ going west and some bikes and so

1:28:17 ↗ ensuring that um

1:28:20 ↗ it might be annoying to stop that lights

1:28:23 ↗ coming down Gilman after back after back

1:28:25 ↗ after back after back after back after

1:28:25 ↗ back after back after back after back

1:28:25 ↗ after back after for the Safeway area

1:28:26 ↗ but

1:28:29 ↗ to 900 but I think it is important to

1:28:32 ↗ preserve that ability for people to

1:28:37 ↗ go etc. So, uh, I think that's my bias

1:28:41 ↗ for for that

1:28:45 ↗ helpful.

1:28:48 ↗ We already talked about pedestrian

1:28:51 ↗ rollers, that kind of thing. Uh, but the

1:28:53 ↗ multimodal access that the trails

1:28:56 ↗ crossing that leg would protect

1:29:00 ↗ that

1:29:02 ↗ multimodal focus.

1:29:07 ↗ Uh N also talked earlier a little bit

1:29:09 ↗ about uh Domen and 17. There are a

1:29:13 ↗ couple of trails that go through there

1:29:14 ↗ that uh they I don't see them use

1:29:18 ↗ Cavalry, but it's like it's so

1:29:22 ↗ to me it's very intimidating not being a

1:29:24 ↗ car in that area just so way through

1:29:27 ↗ >> that one with the wooden bridge.

1:29:30 ↗ >> I walk my dog in a long loop around

1:29:32 ↗ there. You're physically protected from

1:29:35 ↗ 900, but it's not an enjoyable

1:29:37 ↗ experience to walk along there. Feel

1:29:39 ↗ like that bridge is best for biking.

1:29:42 ↗ >> Get out of there.

1:29:47 ↗ >> I think the bridge got destroyed by a

1:29:50 ↗ storm.

1:29:52 ↗ >> Yeah, it's been a while. And

1:29:53 ↗ >> yeah,

1:29:54 ↗ >> we've been communicating with washout

1:29:56 ↗ the importance of getting it fixed.

1:30:10 ↗ There's like a road and in the fall

1:30:12 ↗ they're all red. I just really like the

1:30:14 ↗ trees along Gilman. Uh I would be very

1:30:17 ↗ sad if anything happened to that. Like I

1:30:19 ↗ really enjoy the tree canopy that is

1:30:21 ↗ there considering it's an art trail.

1:30:24 ↗ >> Yeah. The edible trail.

1:30:26 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. I used to walk my kids up to

1:30:28 ↗ juniper go

1:30:32 ↗ on Gilman tree there really nice

1:30:41 ↗ talked about the uh Eric just talked

1:30:45 ↗ about the um drive moving pretty well. I

1:30:48 ↗ think this is another area general

1:30:49 ↗ pretty well. Um,

1:30:52 ↗ so I don't I don't have a lot of trouble

1:30:55 ↗ like getting stuck in kind of anywhere

1:30:58 ↗ on Gilman getting on to Gilman from some

1:31:01 ↗ the edges of it that you got here on

1:31:03 ↗ front or 17 back in the shoe. Does it

1:31:07 ↗ move too well?

1:31:10 ↗ Like what does that mean? Well,

1:31:13 ↗ when I when I ask that specifically, I

1:31:15 ↗ mean we're hearing side street access.

1:31:19 ↗ So I like to think of things as sort of

1:31:21 ↗ a spectrum of access to mobility.

1:31:23 ↗ Mobility meaning I'm going through I'm

1:31:25 ↗ not stopping. Access being meaning I'm

1:31:26 ↗ going across or from that corridor to

1:31:29 ↗ things. So if the one is accessing the

1:31:34 ↗ land use along the priority mobility is

1:31:37 ↗ I'm passing through that's the priority.

1:31:40 ↗ Where do you think Gilman falls on that

1:31:42 ↗ on like a one to five?

1:31:43 ↗ >> I think it's a good balance.

1:31:44 ↗ >> You think it's good for that?

1:31:45 ↗ >> I think it's balanced well. Uh Cynthia

1:31:47 ↗ was talking about how from various

1:31:49 ↗ perspectives at the British crossing at

1:31:51 ↗ Jer and J and uh potentially there's

1:31:55 ↗ some issues that could be included. Uh

1:31:58 ↗ but as far as traffic is blood, I don't

1:32:01 ↗ think this is where the problems are

1:32:05 ↗ from from any of those perspectives.

1:32:07 ↗ That's just my opinion.

1:32:10 ↗ I think we're going to Erica next.

1:32:13 ↗ >> Thank you. I was going to pipe in and

1:32:15 ↗ say I'll largely echo Adam that this to

1:32:19 ↗ me seems similar as the last uh uh

1:32:23 ↗ corridor that we talked about where I

1:32:26 ↗ generally don't see too many traffic

1:32:28 ↗ issues when I've driven along this which

1:32:30 ↗ tends to be more towards the evening.

1:32:32 ↗ Um, and one thing I would like to

1:32:35 ↗ protect or preserve is the general flow

1:32:38 ↗ in the intersection past the uh, post

1:32:42 ↗ office where it connects to the

1:32:44 ↗ roundabout and under I90, which I know

1:32:46 ↗ is a, you know, maybe future plans there

1:32:50 ↗ or um, where light rail is cited can

1:32:52 ↗ affect that, but um, right now I've had

1:32:55 ↗ just really good uh, you know, auto

1:32:58 ↗ traffic flow experiences there. But

1:33:02 ↗ maybe I'm maybe I'm a one-off.

1:33:07 ↗ >> Homes.

1:33:08 ↗ >> Um, I would generally agree, but back to

1:33:10 ↗ like your spectrum, I would say probably

1:33:12 ↗ close to well in like the side streeter.

1:33:16 ↗ Um, or getting off of Gilman, whether

1:33:18 ↗ you're getting on 900 or Street. Um,

1:33:21 ↗ those are two bottleneck areas to either

1:33:24 ↗ right or left 900 and those trying to

1:33:26 ↗ get on to get from 900. Um, so yeah, I

1:33:30 ↗ think straight you're you're doing

1:33:32 ↗ probably too well and there could be a

1:33:34 ↗ better spectrum and you need a little

1:33:36 ↗ bit more choice with side streams.

1:33:41 ↗ >> I think

1:33:42 ↗ >> I was going to echo what you guys have

1:33:44 ↗ been saying but also uh add just one

1:33:47 ↗ other consideration when you just said

1:33:51 ↗ that uh three trails notwithstanding.

1:33:53 ↗ It's actually not the Gilman part of

1:33:54 ↗ that that's difficult. It's not when

1:33:56 ↗ you're flowing through on Gilman. It's

1:33:58 ↗ when you're on would that be

1:34:02 ↗ >> and there's just so much constraint

1:34:03 ↗ because you can't block the box there

1:34:06 ↗ and so so only two cars can be

1:34:08 ↗ >> it's a mess you're in that position

1:34:10 ↗ trying to get on. So it kind of echoes

1:34:12 ↗ this theme that seems to be developing a

1:34:15 ↗ big job teasing out which is that on and

1:34:18 ↗ off Gilden does move pretty well at the

1:34:20 ↗ beginning I think. Yeah. And so I just

1:34:22 ↗ wanted to add that getting on and off of

1:34:24 ↗ it at the three trails across from the

1:34:27 ↗ jam side is problematic

1:34:30 ↗ but further even at the three cross

1:34:36 ↗ I don't perceive that as such.

1:34:40 ↗ Yeah. And ultimately thing that means

1:34:43 ↗ making perhaps celestial but

1:34:48 ↗ material and making it more fluid uh in

1:34:51 ↗ the sense of like or more in terms of

1:34:54 ↗ you know getting one side to the other

1:34:58 ↗ getting

1:35:01 ↗ uh maple and then

1:35:04 ↗ again

1:35:05 ↗ >> into right. So like I think in the

1:35:08 ↗ future especially when it comes to San

1:35:10 ↗ Francisco all those movements will be

1:35:13 ↗ much more uh serious but much more uh

1:35:16 ↗ much more uh much more volume and so um

1:35:20 ↗ particular noniz so uh thanking that

1:35:24 ↗ ability and also creating uh that

1:35:27 ↗ ability is going to be our

1:35:32 ↗ >> um I was say this go back to your very

1:35:33 ↗ first question when we started which was

1:35:35 ↗ like what's your biggest pain point with

1:35:36 ↗ signal

1:35:37 ↗ is a paw. Um, and mine would be like

1:35:40 ↗ trying to turn onto a main thorough

1:35:42 ↗ player. Um, like Gilman, for example,

1:35:45 ↗ from the side streets. Um, and more so

1:35:48 ↗ from like I'm usually like the lights

1:35:50 ↗ just about to turn yellow or red and I'm

1:35:52 ↗ like, "No, there's still like two more

1:35:53 ↗ cars coming. Like, can you just let

1:35:56 ↗ I don't know if that's where this

1:35:58 ↗ technology might benefit." Um, you know,

1:36:00 ↗ being able to pick up there just like

1:36:02 ↗ let a couple more cars through and then

1:36:04 ↗ there's, you know, there's no one there.

1:36:06 ↗ But I'm I'm I go down with that maple a

1:36:09 ↗ lot where it's like a lot of censuring

1:36:11 ↗ which is just really great and timely

1:36:13 ↗ but it's also really quick where it's

1:36:15 ↗ like there's still occurs.

1:36:21 ↗ >> Um my experience on Gilman is one of the

1:36:24 ↗ few times and like not really but

1:36:26 ↗ sometimes I'm like I wish there were

1:36:27 ↗ more lights on this road. I really

1:36:29 ↗ struggle to make an un I'm very

1:36:32 ↗ riskaverse in general, but I I really

1:36:33 ↗ struggle to make any unprotected left

1:36:35 ↗ out of like there's a lot of shopping

1:36:37 ↗ and a lot of like medical center I come

1:36:40 ↗ out of a lot and traffic never seems to

1:36:43 ↗ stop both way ever though I just started

1:36:46 ↗ making a right going down the 900 on the

1:36:48 ↗ highway and coming back down again. Um

1:36:51 ↗ so I use a good word but like it it it's

1:36:54 ↗ hard to

1:36:56 ↗ the lanes never stop at the same time. I

1:36:58 ↗ can't make a lot of um I just created my

1:37:02 ↗ own that way, but that probably

1:37:05 ↗ >> I'm sure Wash loves to hear that you're

1:37:07 ↗ going to

1:37:14 ↗ have time.

1:37:15 ↗ >> Um so, uh that is a good point. Like the

1:37:20 ↗ side streets, the intersections kind of

1:37:22 ↗ flow well, but like anything without a

1:37:25 ↗ light

1:37:32 ↗ And we had a void on here. I feel like

1:37:34 ↗ we've got some things to avoid, but if

1:37:35 ↗ there's anything left that you wanted to

1:37:37 ↗ add

1:37:41 ↗ and if there were any other general

1:37:43 ↗ things that now that we've kind of gone

1:37:44 ↗ through the quarter side by side and you

1:37:46 ↗ wanted to talk about something, boy, we

1:37:49 ↗ this came up with 900 and didn't

1:37:54 ↗ >> just have a question about it in

1:37:55 ↗ general. Is this I'm going to assume no,

1:37:58 ↗ but it's like all or nothing. Like you

1:38:00 ↗ have to do this for like all the lights

1:38:03 ↗ on a corridor because they are talking

1:38:05 ↗ to each other in the video and stuff or

1:38:07 ↗ like would it like if you only had one

1:38:10 ↗ corridor but like not some others, is

1:38:12 ↗ that not taking full advantage of it cuz

1:38:16 ↗ they're not all talking to each other? I

1:38:18 ↗ don't I don't I'm not a technology

1:38:19 ↗ person, but how much in like how little

1:38:23 ↗ or how much would you have to do?

1:38:27 ↗ >> You would need to do enough signals that

1:38:30 ↗ are connected to each other to get a

1:38:32 ↗ benefit of adaptive. That could be the

1:38:36 ↗ entire for example Gilman corridor or

1:38:39 ↗ maybe half of the Gilman corridor. But I

1:38:42 ↗ I think right now there's not enough

1:38:44 ↗ city

1:38:45 ↗ not just

1:38:46 ↗ >> but like yeah if we were like you you do

1:38:48 ↗ need to get like to a point where there

1:38:51 ↗ is enough return on it but once you do

1:38:53 ↗ that you can expand. So there's not like

1:38:56 ↗ you need to do that first map do

1:38:58 ↗ adaptive on all of the arterial

1:39:01 ↗ corridors. And I think one of the things

1:39:03 ↗ that um Jim is actually helping me with

1:39:06 ↗ too is doing what we're calling a

1:39:07 ↗ corridor atlas to understand what's

1:39:09 ↗ going on on each of these corridors and

1:39:11 ↗ then prioritize the improvements

1:39:13 ↗ depending on where it could have the

1:39:16 ↗ most benefit.

1:39:17 ↗ >> Right.

1:39:18 ↗ >> Yep.

1:39:23 ↗ >> Cool. Do you want to talk about the next

1:39:26 ↗ steps back to you? Okay.

1:39:28 ↗ >> All right. Well, thank you guys. That

1:39:30 ↗ was a really good discussion. Um so just

1:39:32 ↗ want to go through next steps for us. Um

1:39:34 ↗ we plan to come back in April to discuss

1:39:37 ↗ with you once we've done you've absorbed

1:39:39 ↗ all this information. We're going to get

1:39:41 ↗ some existing conditions information

1:39:44 ↗ data collection. Um and then our goal in

1:39:47 ↗ the next um touch point with you really

1:39:49 ↗ is to kind of finalize our performance

1:39:51 ↗ metrics and our goals for the study that

1:39:53 ↗ we move forward with. So we'd have a

1:39:56 ↗ little more data, a little more

1:39:57 ↗ information to go over with you in that

1:39:59 ↗ meeting and then we would take that um

1:40:02 ↗ in June to the mobility and

1:40:04 ↗ infrastructure

1:40:05 ↗ that finalize our performance objectives

1:40:08 ↗ and goals so that we can actually start

1:40:11 ↗ the full study after that.

1:40:18 ↗ >> Awesome.

1:40:19 ↗ >> All right. Well, I still have to go. I

1:40:21 ↗ think this was great uh discussion.

1:40:23 ↗ Hopefully you got a lot out of this.

1:40:24 ↗ >> I did. Thank you.

1:40:26 ↗ >> Yeah.

1:40:26 ↗ >> And I'll stick around until after the

1:40:28 ↗ meeting.

1:40:30 ↗ >> Wasn't too comfortable.

1:40:38 ↗ >> See all the creativity.

1:40:41 ↗ Uh uh so we'll move on to our next item

1:40:44 ↗ on business

1:40:46 ↗ uh which is the board work plan. Uh so

1:40:49 ↗ the next item is to introduce and

1:40:50 ↗ discuss the 2026 board work plan. uh

1:40:54 ↗ Thomas Belterz, senior transportation

1:40:56 ↗ planner and board leaison which will be

1:41:00 ↗ uh take us through the first item. We'll

1:41:03 ↗ come back and take us through the

1:41:04 ↗ boardwork plan.

1:41:06 ↗ >> Great. Well, yeah, thanks again.

1:41:07 ↗ Appreciate it. Uh this should be a

1:41:09 ↗ fairly quick conversation, but do just

1:41:12 ↗ want to know if you support this

1:41:15 ↗ proposed work plan as presented or if

1:41:17 ↗ you have any questions or follow-ups I

1:41:19 ↗ could answer. Would love to answer that

1:41:21 ↗ now.

1:41:22 ↗ um do this every year. Uh come view in

1:41:26 ↗ January and then in March we adopt it um

1:41:30 ↗ here. Uh between that uh we also take

1:41:33 ↗ this to council. So I'll be working with

1:41:35 ↗ Erica and Adam um just to go to a

1:41:40 ↗ council meeting, talk about the proposed

1:41:41 ↗ work plan and um just kind of get their

1:41:44 ↗ their feedback on it. Um so just very

1:41:48 ↗ generally uh there's some administrative

1:41:50 ↗ things. So again, work plan like I just

1:41:52 ↗ talked about. Um many of you will

1:41:55 ↗ remember we did a parliamentary

1:41:57 ↗ procedure training. Um we had Tisha uh

1:42:00 ↗ come here and we did like an interactive

1:42:02 ↗ activity that I thought was uh pretty

1:42:05 ↗ fun. Um and then we do election of

1:42:08 ↗ officers and you'll recall uh we changed

1:42:11 ↗ the uh the board uh rules and

1:42:15 ↗ procedures. So we're now doing a

1:42:16 ↗ September uh election. So that's kind of

1:42:20 ↗ shown here.

1:42:23 ↗ And the more substantive things, we have

1:42:26 ↗ a general work plan. Uh so I can just

1:42:29 ↗ kind of walk through all of these one by

1:42:31 ↗ one. So the tip, we touched on that

1:42:34 ↗ today. Um then in March, we'll come back

1:42:37 ↗ with the draft. We'll really get into

1:42:38 ↗ the weeds on that.

1:42:41 ↗ There's the adaptive uh signal control,

1:42:44 ↗ which uh was just mentioned. And then uh

1:42:46 ↗ coming back in April

1:42:49 ↗ um there's going to be a discussion next

1:42:51 ↗ month on microransit services. Um so

1:42:54 ↗ talking about the overview of metrlex

1:42:57 ↗ service that we currently have and

1:42:59 ↗ discussing uh any potential performance

1:43:01 ↗ targets and looking at some service

1:43:04 ↗ provider alternatives.

1:43:08 ↗ Um Stacy is going to come back to talk

1:43:11 ↗ about the IAP. Um you'll recall we uh

1:43:14 ↗ discussed this um I think it was October

1:43:17 ↗ uh of last year. So coming back with a

1:43:20 ↗ followup. I'm just kind of talking about

1:43:22 ↗ those proposed updates.

1:43:26 ↗ This year there's going to be a lot of

1:43:27 ↗ discussion on light rail. Um so uh

1:43:31 ↗ tonight we'll have a little uh quick uh

1:43:34 ↗ update on where we're at with that. Um

1:43:38 ↗ but yeah, we're just going to come back.

1:43:40 ↗ Uh I I guess the most uh you know the

1:43:42 ↗ biggest deliverable uh in our light rail

1:43:45 ↗ study uh will be the evaluation criteria

1:43:47 ↗ feedback. Uh that's kind of like the the

1:43:49 ↗ nearest one. Um and then we'll sort of

1:43:51 ↗ dig into some alternatives that we're

1:43:53 ↗ thinking about. Um and we're uh kind of

1:43:57 ↗ looking at Q2 Q3 for those discussions.

1:44:03 ↗ the community trip production program.

1:44:05 ↗ Uh we're going to be uh taking a look at

1:44:07 ↗ that in September to November. Um

1:44:10 ↗ community trip production is essentially

1:44:13 ↗ for our larger employers in town uh with

1:44:16 ↗ more than 100 employees. Uh they're

1:44:18 ↗ supposed to provide incentives to not

1:44:21 ↗ drive themselves uh for the employees.

1:44:23 ↗ So, uh, some some people, uh, maybe in

1:44:27 ↗ this room have employer paid transit

1:44:30 ↗ cards as part of that program. Uh,

1:44:33 ↗ sometimes there's free parking provided

1:44:36 ↗ through your employer. Those are kind of

1:44:38 ↗ like two ends of the spectrum of like

1:44:39 ↗ things that are provided through a large

1:44:42 ↗ employer. So, uh, we have a CTR program.

1:44:44 ↗ It's, uh, per state law that we have

1:44:47 ↗ one. Um, city of Visqua has over a

1:44:50 ↗ hundred employees. there's like five or

1:44:53 ↗ 600 I'll say. Uh it's it's something

1:44:55 ↗ very large. Uh but we are also under a

1:44:58 ↗ commute trip uh reduction program within

1:45:00 ↗ the city. So kind of meta on that. Um

1:45:03 ↗ but September, November is when that

1:45:04 ↗ will be discussed.

1:45:06 ↗ >> Great question.

1:45:07 ↗ >> Yes.

1:45:08 ↗ >> Uh do high school students tax

1:45:10 ↗ employees?

1:45:11 ↗ >> No. Okay.

1:45:12 ↗ >> I I think that's a little

1:45:15 ↗ >> Yeah. Yeah. So we do have some like

1:45:17 ↗ part-time folks. I'm not sure that

1:45:19 ↗ they're uh I don't think part- timerrs

1:45:23 ↗ get CTR benefits. Yeah,

1:45:25 ↗ >> full time employees.

1:45:31 ↗ >> See what you're saying. Okay.

1:45:33 ↗ >> The school district has its own program

1:45:35 ↗ for students and trying to encourage car

1:45:37 ↗ pooling and everything there. So, we do

1:45:40 ↗ work with him on that, but the CTR law

1:45:42 ↗ through the state just focuses on

1:45:43 ↗ employees,

1:45:44 ↗ >> right?

1:45:44 ↗ >> And so far, the students aren't paid,

1:45:46 ↗ but we'll see what the future holds.

1:45:51 ↗ Um something I'm pretty excited about is

1:45:54 ↗ talking about trail standards. So we'll

1:45:56 ↗ give a brief introduction and then we'll

1:45:58 ↗ discuss um some proposed updates to city

1:46:01 ↗ trail standards. Um right now we have so

1:46:04 ↗ many different trail standards and we're

1:46:05 ↗ hoping to consolidate into a short list

1:46:09 ↗ um maybe a handful. So um more to come

1:46:11 ↗ on that but that's going to be a

1:46:13 ↗ interesting topic.

1:46:15 ↗ um the mobility action plan that we uh

1:46:18 ↗ many of us have worked on. Uh we're

1:46:21 ↗ going to start uh having a report card.

1:46:24 ↗ I'm hoping to uh bring that in October.

1:46:27 ↗ Um it's just going to be like kind of a

1:46:28 ↗ a short list to kind of see how we're

1:46:31 ↗ doing in achieving the mobility action

1:46:33 ↗ plan and um that can lead to some other

1:46:36 ↗ discussions on how we want to kind of

1:46:38 ↗ move forward from that.

1:46:41 ↗ Um, we also have a traffic calming

1:46:43 ↗ program. Uh, in the mobility action

1:46:45 ↗ plan, it calls for a bianual traffic

1:46:48 ↗ calming program report. So, that will

1:46:50 ↗ come in November. We'll just kind of

1:46:52 ↗ report out on over the last two years

1:46:54 ↗ how the traffic calming program has

1:46:57 ↗ done.

1:47:00 ↗ So, um, I can maybe go back to this

1:47:03 ↗ larger list here. Just wanted to know if

1:47:05 ↗ you had any questions. It looks like

1:47:08 ↗ Erica has a question from there.

1:47:12 ↗ >> Thanks. Um for the traffic calming

1:47:14 ↗ program is that like we're discussing

1:47:16 ↗ our like over the last year about we've

1:47:19 ↗ um made the suggestions for really

1:47:22 ↗ overhauling um you know the original I

1:47:25 ↗ think like 2003 system is kind of what

1:47:28 ↗ uh things were set to like. Is that the

1:47:31 ↗ flavor of that discussion?

1:47:34 ↗ be an update on implementing the new

1:47:36 ↗ policy that council adopted in November

1:47:39 ↗ of 2024.

1:47:42 ↗ >> Okay, perfect.

1:47:45 ↗ >> Based on CAP's feedback, I should add

1:47:49 ↗ this policy.

1:47:52 ↗ >> Great. We have any other questions on

1:47:54 ↗ work plan?

1:47:56 ↗ >> Okay, let's move on then.

1:47:58 ↗ >> I'll just I'll just say next steps. Uh

1:48:00 ↗ yeah, I will be working with Erica and

1:48:02 ↗ Adam. We'll take this to council uh in

1:48:04 ↗ March. So, I'll just kind of coordinate

1:48:06 ↗ with you offline. Um see which which

1:48:09 ↗ meeting works. Um but yeah, we'll

1:48:12 ↗ >> Yeah, it'll bring this back to you guys.

1:48:16 ↗ >> We're going back to you guys. Our next

1:48:18 ↗ item was this is reports uh saying we

1:48:21 ↗ have a staff.

1:48:23 ↗ >> I do. Yeah. So, there's uh I would say

1:48:26 ↗ maybe four topics we want to cover. Um

1:48:29 ↗ first off, wanted to give a shout out to

1:48:31 ↗ Jillian

1:48:32 ↗ Uh don't mean to put you on the spot,

1:48:34 ↗ but uh

1:48:36 ↗ >> do order.

1:48:38 ↗ >> Okay. Yeah. Well, um we we'll circle

1:48:40 ↗ back to that then. Uh I'll just say that

1:48:43 ↗ uh TAB is actively recruiting for new

1:48:45 ↗ members. Uh so in this next round, we

1:48:48 ↗ will need uh two regular positions

1:48:51 ↗ filled and two alternates. Um,

1:48:54 ↗ applications are due February 15th at

1:48:58 ↗ 11:59

1:48:59 ↗ p.m. Um, so please uh please do uh apply

1:49:05 ↗ and like if you're I guess uh Ally, your

1:49:08 ↗ your term is uh coming to an end. So you

1:49:11 ↗ have a one-year term. So we would uh

1:49:14 ↗ encourage you to apply again if you're

1:49:15 ↗ interested. Um and then any other folks

1:49:18 ↗ that are interested um would love for uh

1:49:21 ↗ you to like spread the knowledge that

1:49:24 ↗ this exists. Uh we are actively uh

1:49:26 ↗ recruiting but would love to like kind

1:49:28 ↗ of make this as grassroots as possible.

1:49:31 ↗ Um yeah, I'll save uh discussion with

1:49:34 ↗ Jillian after that. Um last week uh it

1:49:39 ↗ was announced that the line two will be

1:49:42 ↗ opening uh March 28th. Uh that was very

1:49:46 ↗ exciting. I was actually at the press

1:49:47 ↗ conference uh in Seattle. It was very

1:49:49 ↗ fun. Uh good energy. Um so just wanted

1:49:52 ↗ to and in case you haven't heard, it's

1:49:55 ↗ all over the news, but in case you

1:49:56 ↗ haven't heard, um that will be on March

1:49:58 ↗ 28th. Um and then yeah, I will uh kick

1:50:03 ↗ it over to Andrea uh to provide an

1:50:05 ↗ update on light rail planning in a

1:50:08 ↗ squad.

1:50:09 ↗ >> Great. Thank you, Thomas. Hi everybody.

1:50:11 ↗ If we haven't met, I'm Andrea Leonard.

1:50:13 ↗ I'm the deputy city administrator and in

1:50:16 ↗ charge of infrastructure and

1:50:18 ↗ transportation for the city and I wanted

1:50:21 ↗ to run over uh some upcoming things just

1:50:24 ↗ to make sure that you are aware and can

1:50:27 ↗ um weigh in. So on February 29th we are

1:50:30 ↗ having a special meeting with city

1:50:32 ↗ council covering transportation topics

1:50:35 ↗ only. Among them is the pavement

1:50:37 ↗ condition index. So, our streets

1:50:40 ↗ operations manager will be talking about

1:50:43 ↗ what is the condition of our streets. We

1:50:46 ↗ regularly do an inventory and see, you

1:50:49 ↗ know, for example, are there lots of

1:50:51 ↗ cracks, potholes, what's the condition?

1:50:53 ↗ Use that data to help us figure out our

1:50:55 ↗ maintenance plans moving forward. Um, as

1:50:58 ↗ part of that presentation, there's going

1:51:00 ↗ to be a discussion on uh pavement

1:51:03 ↗ maintenance

1:51:05 ↗ um techniques.

1:51:07 ↗ And so, um, we have for the past couple

1:51:10 ↗ of years been piloting some new tech

1:51:12 ↗ techniques that we haven't done before

1:51:14 ↗ to extend the life of the roadway.

1:51:16 ↗ Things like crack seal. You're probably

1:51:18 ↗ seeing more of that around town than you

1:51:19 ↗ used to. Um, other types of seals. And

1:51:24 ↗ so, we've gotten some feedback from the

1:51:26 ↗ public. Uh, not a ton, but some feedback

1:51:29 ↗ on these different techniques. So, we

1:51:31 ↗ want to talk with council about uh those

1:51:33 ↗ techniques moving forward. Can we um

1:51:36 ↗ continue to use those because uh some of

1:51:38 ↗ these techniques are more cost effective

1:51:41 ↗ than what we had traditionally done to

1:51:43 ↗ extend the life of the roadway. So

1:51:46 ↗ that's what the discussion with council

1:51:47 ↗ will be um on pavements on February 9th.

1:51:51 ↗ We'll also have a discussion on

1:51:52 ↗ Metroflex. So this group, this advisory

1:51:55 ↗ board many years ago really considered

1:51:57 ↗ all of our options for Metroflex, our

1:52:00 ↗ microransit program in the city. We um

1:52:04 ↗ had a two-year pilot program for that.

1:52:07 ↗ That two-year pilot came to an end at

1:52:09 ↗ the end of last year. Council decided to

1:52:11 ↗ renew it for another two years and um

1:52:14 ↗ continue to help subsidize that service,

1:52:17 ↗ but they wanted to have another

1:52:18 ↗ conversation about what are those

1:52:20 ↗ success markers. We have established

1:52:23 ↗ goals for the program. We have metrics

1:52:26 ↗ that we're using. Um but there are they

1:52:29 ↗ raised a concern last fall about the

1:52:32 ↗ cost per ride. And so while we're

1:52:34 ↗ hitting some of our uh uh shared ride

1:52:38 ↗ and uh so SOV trip reduction goals,

1:52:41 ↗ we're hitting uh some of our equity

1:52:43 ↗ goals and making progress on lots of

1:52:45 ↗ things. The cost per ride between King

1:52:47 ↗ County Metro and the city together is

1:52:50 ↗ about 40 bucks per ride.

1:52:53 ↗ And so and so um even though we're

1:52:57 ↗ hitting all these other goals uh the

1:52:59 ↗ question is is that a cost we want to

1:53:02 ↗ bear is there are there ways to reduce

1:53:05 ↗ that cost per ride. As part of that

1:53:07 ↗ conversation we have changed the service

1:53:09 ↗ area. We worked with King County Metro

1:53:11 ↗ to change the service area to try to

1:53:13 ↗ pick up a few more riders. So Metroflex

1:53:16 ↗ uh starting next month will no longer

1:53:18 ↗ serve a port the large majority of

1:53:21 ↗ Squawk Mountain as it was and instead um

1:53:24 ↗ we're adding on uh Isiqua Highlands up

1:53:27 ↗ to Blakeley Hall. And so we think that

1:53:30 ↗ um that will pick up more riders and

1:53:31 ↗ change that cost per ride metric.

1:53:35 ↗ In the meanwhile, we want to have a

1:53:36 ↗ conversation and our council wants to

1:53:37 ↗ have a conversation about um Metrolex.

1:53:40 ↗ What is what is that success marker? how

1:53:42 ↗ do we prioritize among those goals that

1:53:45 ↗ this group helped establish and also

1:53:48 ↗ look at um by way of facilitating that

1:53:51 ↗ conversation look at some options. So

1:53:54 ↗ this advisory board looked at other

1:53:56 ↗ options including the possibility of um

1:53:59 ↗ going private and maybe doing a

1:54:01 ↗ partnership with Uber or a similar

1:54:03 ↗ service as Uber. Maybe there's other

1:54:05 ↗ providers. For example, Circuit provides

1:54:08 ↗ uh the Bellhop in Belleview. are there

1:54:11 ↗ um other providers we can look at? So,

1:54:13 ↗ we're packaging all that information for

1:54:15 ↗ council consideration among the next

1:54:17 ↗ steps that I'm proposing to council is

1:54:20 ↗ just to get initial feedback on where

1:54:22 ↗ they'd like us to head and then come

1:54:24 ↗ back to this advisory board to be able

1:54:26 ↗ so that you guys can roll up your

1:54:28 ↗ sleeves and really dig into this

1:54:29 ↗ information and help provide the advice

1:54:32 ↗ uh that you provide to council. So,

1:54:34 ↗ we're making a stop at council first

1:54:36 ↗ just to see what kind of discussion they

1:54:38 ↗ want to have for the rest of the year.

1:54:39 ↗ Um and then I I'm going to propose

1:54:41 ↗ coming back to this board for a more

1:54:42 ↗ detailed discussion with you all.

1:54:45 ↗ Um then uh we have a discussion uh that

1:54:50 ↗ council would like to have on the

1:54:51 ↗ transportation benefit district. So as

1:54:54 ↗ you may know the transportation benefit

1:54:56 ↗ district is a special sales tax

1:54:58 ↗ district. Uh we passed a a tenth of a

1:55:01 ↗ percent sales tax just for

1:55:03 ↗ transportation spending only. Um so

1:55:06 ↗ can't use that money to spend on

1:55:08 ↗ anything else. just transportation

1:55:11 ↗ and we passed that a couple of years

1:55:13 ↗ ago. So there were some things we talked

1:55:15 ↗ about uh at the time on how we wanted to

1:55:17 ↗ spend those funds. One was um uh IT

1:55:21 ↗ projects, intelligent transportation

1:55:23 ↗ systems, some of the smart signal stuff

1:55:24 ↗ that Marina talked about earlier today,

1:55:26 ↗ plus many more things. Um, we also

1:55:29 ↗ talked about using some of that funding

1:55:31 ↗ to help fund uh, Pinch Point or

1:55:33 ↗ Northwest Semeish non-motorized

1:55:35 ↗ improvements. And, um, also in the fall,

1:55:39 ↗ council decided to use some of those

1:55:41 ↗ extra funds left over to help fund

1:55:43 ↗ Metroflex. And they also said, you know,

1:55:45 ↗ let's talk about this a little bit more

1:55:48 ↗ strategically and figure out, is this

1:55:50 ↗ really where we want to be spending

1:55:51 ↗ those transportation benefit district

1:55:53 ↗ funds now and in the future? Are there

1:55:55 ↗ other ideas that we have? So, that's

1:55:57 ↗ really what that conversation is like

1:55:59 ↗ and that's going to help shape up some

1:56:00 ↗ of our approach to the tip um that we

1:56:04 ↗ are updating this year as we update that

1:56:06 ↗ every year. So, we're going to use some

1:56:08 ↗ of that guidance from council to look at

1:56:10 ↗ how do we want to spend that that

1:56:11 ↗ funding moving forward. Mayor Mullet

1:56:13 ↗ also has a few proposals that we're

1:56:15 ↗ going to go over with council. So, those

1:56:16 ↗ are some of the things coming up on

1:56:18 ↗ February 9th. I also wanted to talk

1:56:20 ↗ about Isiqua light rail and what we're

1:56:22 ↗ doing right now with Sound Transit. So,

1:56:25 ↗ um, Isiqua is slated to have our own

1:56:28 ↗ light rail station in 2044.

1:56:30 ↗ Uh, Thomas, as I think you know, is

1:56:32 ↗ working on a station alignment, uh,

1:56:35 ↗ study right now to figure out where

1:56:36 ↗ those future where a best spot is for

1:56:39 ↗ that future light rail station. So,

1:56:41 ↗ we've been doing a lot of the planning

1:56:42 ↗ work to march towards uh, that light

1:56:45 ↗ rail station and prepare for it. There's

1:56:46 ↗ one problem as you know Sound Transit is

1:56:49 ↗ having significant budget woes and is

1:56:51 ↗ trying to figure out how they can um

1:56:55 ↗ still implement ST3 but in a

1:56:58 ↗ cost-effective way. One of the things

1:57:00 ↗ that we're very concerned about is uh

1:57:03 ↗ they may decide to not build an isiqua

1:57:05 ↗ light rail station. They may decide

1:57:08 ↗ instead to cut all of it and put in BRT

1:57:10 ↗ for Isiqua instead or perhaps even do

1:57:13 ↗ nothing. And so our stance is pretty

1:57:16 ↗ bullish on this. We um believe that

1:57:18 ↗ light rail is continues to be a high

1:57:21 ↗ priority for Isiqua. We've been planning

1:57:23 ↗ around it for a long time. Um Isiqua

1:57:27 ↗ voted in favor for Sound Transit 3. Back

1:57:30 ↗ in 2016, Isiquans have been paying these

1:57:34 ↗ taxes and car tab fees for 10 years.

1:57:36 ↗ We're going to be paying them for

1:57:38 ↗ another 20 uh plus years for ST3. So,

1:57:42 ↗ um, we want to make good on that

1:57:44 ↗ investment and, um, and putting in BRT,

1:57:48 ↗ you know, that service looks very

1:57:50 ↗ similar to what the 554 was pre-

1:57:53 ↗ pandemic, 12minute headways, a bus along

1:57:56 ↗ I90 corridor. Then we had a one seat

1:57:58 ↗ ride to Seattle. We're not going to have

1:58:00 ↗ that in the future. So, for isans to be

1:58:02 ↗ taxed extra to receive what really is a

1:58:05 ↗ reduction in service moving forward with

1:58:07 ↗ the BRT is not something we're willing

1:58:09 ↗ to accept. And um again, Mayor Mullet is

1:58:12 ↗ providing a lot of leadership on this as

1:58:14 ↗ well and feels very strongly. And so we

1:58:17 ↗ are working very diligently, Thomas and

1:58:19 ↗ I and many others at the city at um

1:58:22 ↗ trying to have a campaign to save

1:58:25 ↗ Isiquaz light rail station. And in that,

1:58:29 ↗ please mark your calendars. I'm going to

1:58:31 ↗ put a hold on your calendars. We would

1:58:32 ↗ love for you all to attend on February

1:58:34 ↗ 24th. Let me get the time down.

1:58:39 ↗ We would like to have a uh rally

1:58:43 ↗ starting at 5:30. We think 5:30 to 6:30.

1:58:47 ↗ A rally to save Isiqua light rail. And

1:58:50 ↗ what we want to do is certainly invite

1:58:53 ↗ all of you and all of our other partners

1:58:57 ↗ and people interested and supporters of

1:58:59 ↗ transit in Isiqua to rally together and

1:59:02 ↗ learn more about where current status is

1:59:04 ↗ with the light rail station and the

1:59:06 ↗ light rail alignment to from Bellev to

1:59:08 ↗ Isiqua. Um what the city is planning on

1:59:11 ↗ doing about that and we're going to be

1:59:13 ↗ asking for some good oldfashioned

1:59:15 ↗ grassroots support. So that means we

1:59:18 ↗ want people to write letters and emails

1:59:20 ↗ to the Sound Transit board in support of

1:59:22 ↗ transit and specifically our light rail

1:59:25 ↗ station and maintaining that. Um we're

1:59:27 ↗ also going to be asking folks to um come

1:59:30 ↗ down and attend the Sound Transit board

1:59:32 ↗ meetings and support light rail. We

1:59:35 ↗ we're looking at what kind of swag we

1:59:38 ↗ can have so we can be visible to those

1:59:39 ↗ Sound Transit board members, providing

1:59:42 ↗ public comment, all of that because

1:59:44 ↗ we're going to need everyone's support

1:59:46 ↗ in order to keep this light rail

1:59:47 ↗ station. We're also working with our

1:59:50 ↗ employers. Uh, Mayor Mullet has been

1:59:52 ↗ going around to several of the bigger

1:59:54 ↗ businesses in Isiqua, obviously,

1:59:56 ↗ including Costco, but also along the I90

1:59:58 ↗ corridor just beyond our borders because

2:00:01 ↗ we have a lot of employees going to

2:00:02 ↗ those major employers um in Belleview

2:00:05 ↗ and um and a lot of uh a lot of jobs

2:00:10 ↗ also in Isiqua that residents are coming

2:00:11 ↗ from all over. So, this this light rail

2:00:14 ↗ station is key for future job growth in

2:00:16 ↗ the region. Um, and so we're getting

2:00:18 ↗ support from our major employers and

2:00:20 ↗ property owners and developers for that.

2:00:23 ↗ Um, and so we just we need your help.

2:00:26 ↗ And so, uh, what I'm asking from this

2:00:29 ↗ group is any help that you can provide

2:00:32 ↗ in again writing personal emails to the

2:00:34 ↗ Sound Transit Board and helping show up

2:00:37 ↗ and informing your neighbors. Um Thomas

2:00:40 ↗ is going to be the keeper of our uh list

2:00:44 ↗ of interested folks who wants who want

2:00:46 ↗ to help. So we can send kind of email

2:00:48 ↗ blasts of hey there's a meeting next

2:00:50 ↗ week. Can you show up? Can you help

2:00:51 ↗ write emails? That kind of a thing. So

2:00:53 ↗ we'd love if there's other people that

2:00:55 ↗ you know um should be on this list of of

2:00:59 ↗ interested folks then uh please send

2:01:01 ↗ those suggestions Thomas's way. We're

2:01:04 ↗ going to be putting together that list

2:01:06 ↗ certainly next week, but ongoing through

2:01:08 ↗ this campaign. Um the rally on February

2:01:12 ↗ 24th is to help galvanize some of this

2:01:15 ↗ local support in Isiqua, including some

2:01:17 ↗ other regional uh stakeholders like

2:01:20 ↗ Transportation Choices Coalition and

2:01:22 ↗ others. Um and uh this is all gearing up

2:01:26 ↗ for a board retreat that is happening in

2:01:28 ↗ March, mid-March. It hasn't been

2:01:30 ↗ scheduled yet. We don't know exactly

2:01:31 ↗ when it's going to occur. we know it

2:01:33 ↗ might be around mid-March. So, um that's

2:01:36 ↗ kind of what we're gearing up for. And

2:01:37 ↗ there's going to be another board

2:01:38 ↗ retreat in June. So, right now we're

2:01:40 ↗ kind of um you're going to see a lot

2:01:42 ↗ more in the news and in local blogs and

2:01:45 ↗ other places about our proposal and how

2:01:47 ↗ we want to um keep our light rail

2:01:49 ↗ station and how we want to partner with

2:01:50 ↗ Sound Transit in order to do that. But

2:01:52 ↗ we really really need uh a lot of the

2:01:55 ↗ community to show up and support this

2:01:57 ↗ and make sure that Sound Transit keeps

2:01:59 ↗ their promises um that they made to you

2:02:02 ↗ all as voters in ST3.

2:02:05 ↗ Any questions?

2:02:09 ↗ Uh how much do you have in in support of

2:02:13 ↗ this message around cost effective

2:02:16 ↗ building in versus other places that uh

2:02:19 ↗ you know essentially we're competing for

2:02:20 ↗ dollars that are limited?

2:02:23 ↗ >> We are

2:02:26 ↗ >> we are

2:02:27 ↗ >> to support our

2:02:29 ↗ >> Yeah, it's a good question. Um, so you

2:02:33 ↗ know, what was originally in the ST3

2:02:35 ↗ package was what's called the Ski Link,

2:02:38 ↗ South Kirkland, Isiqua Light Rail. Um,

2:02:41 ↗ it's unclear at this point how um how

2:02:47 ↗ committed Kirkland is to their segment

2:02:50 ↗ of the line. And so it's possible that

2:02:53 ↗ Kirkland is very happy with bus rapid

2:02:55 ↗ transit and maybe is willing to just let

2:02:59 ↗ their light rail line go. Um that's kind

2:03:02 ↗ of early indicators what we've heard

2:03:04 ↗ from Kirkland so far. And if that's the

2:03:07 ↗ case then u maybe that frees up some

2:03:10 ↗ dollars for Isiqua. The other thing that

2:03:12 ↗ you should be aware of and that we're

2:03:14 ↗ talking with u many regionally about is

2:03:16 ↗ the principle of sub area equity which

2:03:19 ↗ is uh governs sound transit's

2:03:22 ↗ investments and something that's up for

2:03:23 ↗ discussion for them. Sub area equity

2:03:26 ↗ basically is that um where we collect

2:03:30 ↗ tax dollars from to fund Sound Transit

2:03:32 ↗ will also receive benefits of their tax

2:03:34 ↗ dollars. So, uh, at this point they have

2:03:38 ↗ to make investments in the east side

2:03:41 ↗ because they've been taxing us for

2:03:42 ↗ years, but what those investments are is

2:03:45 ↗ up for debate. So, again, they may feel

2:03:48 ↗ like, well, maybe BRT satisfies that um,

2:03:53 ↗ sub area equity policy. Um, we would

2:03:56 ↗ maintain it does not. And so, what we're

2:03:58 ↗ trying to do is take a different

2:04:00 ↗ approach from, let's say, Seattle.

2:04:03 ↗ Seattle has been saying, "We need more.

2:04:07 ↗ We need more." And trying to get more

2:04:09 ↗ and more of Sound Transit's dollars.

2:04:11 ↗ Well, Isiqua is saying, "We want to

2:04:14 ↗ partner with you and reduce your costs

2:04:16 ↗ and make this easier." And so, um, we

2:04:19 ↗ want to be able to help Sound Transit

2:04:21 ↗ have a really easy win here um to make

2:04:24 ↗ it uh to make it appealing and help keep

2:04:27 ↗ their promises to voters where Seattle

2:04:29 ↗ is just wanting to take more and more

2:04:32 ↗ essentially. So, we think we have a

2:04:33 ↗ different approach that's going to be

2:04:34 ↗ appealing to the Sound Transit board.

2:04:36 ↗ Um, and uh, and so that's how we're

2:04:40 ↗ hoping to maintain a competitive edge,

2:04:42 ↗ but we do need we we do need to make

2:04:45 ↗ some noise in a Saka to make sure

2:04:47 ↗ they're aware that we want this and

2:04:49 ↗ we're going to hold them accountable to

2:04:50 ↗ the promises they made to us.

2:04:52 ↗ >> I think you can glad you haven't shared

2:04:54 ↗ that our comments. That would be very

2:04:57 ↗ helpful.

2:04:57 ↗ >> Love that. We are working on that. So,

2:04:59 ↗ we're gonna we're putting together some

2:05:01 ↗ email templates for folks to kind of

2:05:03 ↗ choose from to be able to send out and

2:05:05 ↗ you can, you know, it's a starting

2:05:06 ↗ point. You can send it as is or you can

2:05:08 ↗ doctor it up and make it more of your

2:05:09 ↗ own. Um, and we'll be coming out with

2:05:12 ↗ much more specific messaging, but right

2:05:14 ↗ now we're we're gearing up and we want

2:05:15 ↗ to make a big splash.

2:05:21 ↗ >> Uh, Thomas, do you have any more staff

2:05:24 ↗ aboard? I don't, but I know that Julian

2:05:26 ↗ wanted to mention something that I was

2:05:28 ↗ going to, so I would love to have him uh

2:05:30 ↗ have this time.

2:05:34 ↗ You want me to share report?

2:05:35 ↗ >> Yeah,

2:05:38 ↗ >> I just have a quick uh shout out for the

2:05:41 ↗ Isqua climate action plan as a metrics

2:05:44 ↗ committee. Uh that is meeting starting

2:05:46 ↗ next week. Uh so we're going to Stacy

2:05:49 ↗ came and talked to us at our last

2:05:51 ↗ meeting which was ago. Uh

2:05:55 ↗ part of what we discussed with her was,

2:05:57 ↗ you know, shifting things from like

2:05:59 ↗ implement the transportation plan to do

2:06:03 ↗ some advocacy of climate metrics and

2:06:05 ↗ that. So we're getting that stuff kicked

2:06:07 ↗ off. I guess states get talked to us

2:06:08 ↗ next month. Uh so a couple as well. Uh

2:06:16 ↗ I think that's all I have for the for

2:06:18 ↗ the chairs report.

2:06:21 ↗ Uh Erica, you're on. You're the actual

2:06:23 ↗ chair. Anything to add?

2:06:27 ↗ >> Uh thank you, acting chair. Um thank

2:06:31 ↗ Yeah, thank you for uh having grace with

2:06:33 ↗ me showing up very late. I was

2:06:34 ↗ experiencing the very thing that we

2:06:36 ↗ discuss. I was in gridlock traffic on a

2:06:38 ↗ highway. Um nothing to report from me um

2:06:43 ↗ other than I'm here in Olympia for the

2:06:44 ↗ next couple months. Um, I think you'll

2:06:46 ↗ see me teams in next month, but then I

2:06:49 ↗ should be back by March. So, um, yeah,

2:06:53 ↗ hearing the other end of, uh, Sound

2:06:56 ↗ Transit's budget wos wearing my other

2:06:58 ↗ hat a little bit. So,

2:07:04 ↗ >> right. Uh, so that'll conclude the chair

2:07:07 ↗ report. Uh, Julian,

2:07:08 ↗ >> yeah,

2:07:09 ↗ >> you have the floor. Well, I mean, I'm

2:07:11 ↗ glad that uh I get to write the

2:07:14 ↗ soundtrack. That's I'm glad about that.

2:07:18 ↗ But I'm kind of bummed that I get to uh

2:07:21 ↗ you know have the nice discussions

2:07:23 ↗ according to the work plan uh later in

2:07:25 ↗ the year. Um I will be doing another

2:07:27 ↗ term uh here on TAB um or going for

2:07:30 ↗ another term. Uh that's because I am

2:07:33 ↗ moving to the Netherlands in August

2:07:36 ↗ uh for a master's program. and public

2:07:39 ↗ policy. And so I'm going to master

2:07:42 ↗ university which is kind of in the

2:07:43 ↗ southeast corner that notch of

2:07:46 ↗ Netherland between Belgium and Germany.

2:07:49 ↗ Um and so I'll be spending a year there.

2:07:52 ↗ It's probably um hopefully much longer

2:07:55 ↗ than a year as well. Uh, I'm so really

2:08:00 ↗ excited for all the biking that I get to

2:08:03 ↗ do there and the trains and all the

2:08:06 ↗ other public transits, public

2:08:08 ↗ transportation infrastructure from the

2:08:10 ↗ Netherlands and Germany and Belgium

2:08:12 ↗ everywhere else. So really really

2:08:15 ↗ looking forward to that. But it's been a

2:08:16 ↗ really wonderful four years on so uh you

2:08:21 ↗ know and informed why policy. So that's

2:08:26 ↗ for sure. Uh but yeah, it's been amazing

2:08:29 ↗ for years.

2:08:30 ↗ >> Thanks for

2:08:32 ↗ >> Yeah, it sounds like a great

2:08:33 ↗ opportunity.

2:08:35 ↗ I clearly need to invest more in

2:08:37 ↗ multimodal so that we can compute

2:08:42 ↗ the challenge that you think pretty well

2:08:44 ↗ when you do that.

2:08:48 ↗ Just looking for incorporating your

2:08:50 ↗ learnings from your experience into

2:08:52 ↗ that.

2:08:53 ↗ Uh yeah, hoping hoping to to sustain it

2:08:56 ↗ longer term in the Europe uh at least

2:09:00 ↗ for the last few years. So yeah,

2:09:08 ↗ >> okay. Any other announcements?

2:09:12 ↗ >> And hope it's okay. Um but I'm pretty

2:09:14 ↗ sure I have a ballot and they're due

2:09:15 ↗ February 10th. It's a school district.

2:09:19 ↗ So please be sure to vote. Shameless

2:09:21 ↗ spot.

2:09:23 ↗ Thanks. Uh, any other announcements?

2:09:27 ↗ Uh, hearing none, uh, I will pronounce

2:09:29 ↗ the meeting and adjourn at 8:11 p.m.

2:09:33 ↗ Thanks everyone for staying late

2:09:35 ↗ discussions.

2:09:38 ↗ Any question?

2:09:39 ↗ >> Thank you. Make great your children.

Approved minutes

Extracted from the next meeting's packet, where this meeting's minutes were approved as a consent-calendar attachment.

Open PDF

Attendance

Council / Members (8)

Erika Boyd

Adam Fuchs

Julian Mydlil

Victoria Monroe

Cynthia Krass

Lamir Magus

Allie Morton

Carlos Besana

Staff (7)

Thomas Valdriz, Senior Planner

Marina Bandla, Senior Transportation Engineer

John Mortenson, Transportation Engineering Manager

Andrea Lehner, Deputy City Administrator

Chris Grgich, Fehr & Peers

Tinotenda Jonga, Fehr & Peers

Jim Peters, Citizen Engineers

Excused

Hany Maklad

Derek Su

Recommendations & actions (1)

Sentences extracted from the narrative containing words like recommended, requested, directed, moved, or approved. Best-effort — verify against the full minutes for context.

a) Minutes of October 22, 2025 The Minutes were approved by unanimous consent.