Committee on Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities 12522

The December 5 meeting of the Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee will come to order.

The time is 9.31 a.m.

I'm Alex Peterson, chair of the committee.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Councilmember Herbold?

Here.

Councilmember Morales?

Councilmember Sawant?

Councilmember Strauss?

Present.

Chair Peterson?

Present.

Three present.

Thank you.

And Council Member Morales will be joining us shortly.

I'll announce her when she's here.

And Council Member Sawant is excused.

We have a very long agenda today, 14 items, some of which are substantive.

So we are going to adjust the agenda because we do have some council members who have a prior engagement.

They need to leave at 1145 a.m.

So, we will be talking fast.

Everything's on the agenda.

All the links are there.

All the information's there for the public.

And so, colleagues, if there's no objection, I'd like to move items 10, 11, and 12 to the end of the agenda.

Moving items 10, 11, and 12 to the end of our agenda.

So, hearing no objection, today's revised agenda will be adopted.

All right, chair's report.

Good morning and welcome to the final meeting of the 2023 Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee.

I'm grateful for everyone who has contributed to these committee meetings over the last year and over the past four years I've been chairing this committee.

I wanna thank our legislative IT department, Ian, Son, Eric, for your support.

Thank you to everyone at Seattle Channel for making us look good on TV.

Thank you to the deputy clerks, Linda, Amelia, Jody.

Also, thank you to our security team for keeping us safe here and our public safe to attend these meetings in person at City Hall.

Thank you to our central staff, especially those supporting this committee, including Calvin Chow, Brian Goodnight, Enlish Whitson, and others.

Thank you for the incredible work you all do to prepare for each committee meeting.

I also want to thank our amazing committee clerk, Hannah Thorson, and everybody who's reviewing the legislation, the analytical memos we get from central staff, the analysis you present, answering our questions on the fly here at our committees.

Thank you to General Manager and CEO of Seattle Public Utilities, Andrew Lee, and Director of Seattle Department of Transportation, Greg Spatz, for your leadership, and also all that your teams do, both in the office and out in the field.

Thank you to my colleagues, Council Members Herbold, Morales, Suwan, and Strauss, for your commitment to a committee that comprises more than $2 billion of our city budget.

It was even bigger two years ago.

And finally, a thank you to the people who come to these meetings, who view the meetings on TV on Seattle Channel and come to City Hall.

Again, 14 items on today's agenda, so we will try to conclude the meeting by 11.45 a.m.

To save time, I'll skip my summary of the items since I already mentioned these during our council briefing yesterday and during the week prior.

LET'S SEE.

OF COURSE THIS AGENDA IS PUBLISHED ONLINE FOR EVERYBODY.

SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND LAUNCH INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

THIS TIME WE'LL OPEN THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THE TRANSPORTATION SEATTLE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMITTEE FOR OUR HYBRID MEETING.

WE HAVE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO GIVE PUBLIC COMMENT BOTH ONLINE AND IN PERSON.

As is typical, the public comment period for this meeting is normally up to 20 minutes.

Each speaker will be given two minutes to speak.

For remote speakers, once I call a speaker's name, you'll press star six to begin speaking.

For all public commenters, please begin by stating your name and the item you are addressing.

As a reminder, public comment should relate to an item on today's agenda or to our committee's oversight responsibilities.

You will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left.

You still have 10 seconds when you hear the chime, but begin to wrap it up.

Okay, the regular public comment period for this committee meeting is now open.

We'll begin with the first speaker.

We're gonna hear from our speakers in person first.

So Cecilia Black, followed by Dylan Young.

Oh, can you start over?

Yeah, yeah.

Can you hear me okay?

Yeah.

Okay, cool.

My name is Cecilia Black.

I am a D4 resident, a wheelchair user and organizer with Disability Mobility Initiative.

And I am speaking in support of CB120658.

I wanna just first thank Council Member Peterson and Morales for supporting this bill and Council Member Peterson for getting this on the agenda today.

Over half of our city blocks either don't have sidewalks or have sidewalks in such poor condition that it impacts mobility.

We should hear this as a crisis in our transportation system.

Many people with disabilities can't just walk around uprooted sidewalks or hop over a flooded sidewalk or push through gravel and grass pedestrian zones along streets.

We're either unable to physically access basic needs like public transit or forced to use the street.

Between 2016 and 2020, people with disabilities were involved in 4% of total traffic accidents, yet accounted for 53% of people killed in Seattle.

The state of Seattle sidewalks is a safety and transportation crisis for people with disabilities.

But everyone uses a sidewalk.

Kids need sidewalks to get to school.

We use sidewalks to get to the light rail, to change bus lines, to walk our dogs.

Even when you park a car down the street, you use a sidewalk.

They are the one piece of our transportation system that everyone in Seattle uses.

Sidewalks are the foundation of a transportation system, yet they are our absolute last priority.

This ordinance is such an important step to ensure that sidewalks are included in our transportation planning.

Thank you for taking the time to hear this, and I urge you to vote and pass CB120658.

Thank you.

And Council Member Morales has joined us.

Next, we have Dylan Young, followed by Lynn Domingo and Madeline Jones.

Go ahead, Dylan Young.

Hello, my name is Dylan Young.

I'm a resident of Danny Triangle, so Seattle, obviously.

And I'm definitely here in support of the sidewalk ordinance.

Walking around Seattle, which I do regularly, and a wheelchair, but you figured till you understand what I mean.

Sidewalks are the most fundamental thing that gets us around and they're great sidewalks and they're bad sidewalks.

And so it's very much a challenge when I encounter a bad sidewalk, either I have to go on the street or potentially fall out of my chair.

The only time I fall out of my chair generally is if I hit a hidden or mystery crack in the sidewalk.

The other element that I would add or open my mind up to how important sidewalks are is I'm young and robust relatively.

My mother, who was in her early 80s after hip replacement surgery and onset of Parkinson's disease, was using a walker and we would go out and Things that I would think would not be that big a deal on the street or on the sidewalk, she would have a hard time navigating with her walker.

I could jam down the street and I'd look back and she's behind me because there's a crack or there's gravel.

These little things that even I, who think of myself as relatively able-bodied in a wheelchair, would look at my mother and go, oh my gosh, she can't do that.

So sidewalks become more important as my mother's aged and her desire to walk around It's still there, but it cuts into where she can go, what she wants, what she can do.

And so I'm in support of funding sidewalks.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, Lynn Domingo, followed by Madeline Jones.

Good morning and thank you very much for taking this legislation.

Hoping that you will be able to pass this legislation so that in 2024 we will not have to go back and address this as a very essential issue for all people, especially for Those that have wheelchairs, and like I, from the National Federation of the Blind, we require about four feet, but we don't even have four feet, and we can't socialize on the sidewalk competing with all the other items on there.

It would not be a benefit if we don't pass this legislation as we see roadsides and agencies coming through, building, offering jobs, but also offer a benefit for the community to enjoy our walkability city.

I really want to thank Lisa.

Thank you very much for supporting legislation that I've worked on in the past and Councilman.

Morales, and thank you, Alex, for chairing this.

I'd also like to thank Dan Strauss for continuing on this and also looking at the people with disabilities.

He's the only person that actually has Braille cards.

So he's actually reached out and worked with our community at the National Federation of the Blind.

I'm also with LELO, a legacy of Leadership of Equality and Organizing, sorry, we're getting old now, but I got here and I really thank the Disability Mobility Initiative.

Thank you.

Next we have Madeline Jones, and then we'll switch to our online speakers.

There are about six of them.

Hi, I'm also here to talk about the sidewalks.

I'm here to speak on behalf of myself and my friends who couldn't be here today.

I'm disabled.

I'm a part of the disabled community in Seattle, and I've also worked as a caregiver in this city.

Whilst I am disabled, I'm privileged to not have to use mobility aids to get around.

As a caregiver, however, I would commute across the city regularly on foot and on public transportation with my client.

She used a wheelchair.

and we were frequently in danger of injury and death due to inaccessible sidewalks.

To cross the street or get around damaged or missing patches of sidewalk, we would often have to walk down busy streets alongside fast cars.

When traveling on sidewalks littered with potholes, she would be shaken and jostled in her chair as she was pushed over them.

In fact, due to bumpy streets and sidewalks, I have known multiple people to literally lose wheels off their wheelchair, leaving them, if they're alone, stranded and potentially severely injured.

My client and I were lucky in these situations to have each other.

There are many independent disabled adults who would be trapped if, for example, they cross a street and the sidewalk on the other side is too damaged to get up.

Cars are ruthless killing machines, especially for people who can't run away from them.

And that's what I mean when I say I'm privileged.

That is an absolutely unacceptable thing to consider a privilege.

Not getting run over in the street due to the city's negligence, not losing a wheel and being stuck alone and in danger just because you need to leave the house like every other person in the city.

Inaction in this situation will cause death.

By doing nothing, the city would be making itself a dangerous place for its most statistically vulnerable citizens.

All we ask is for equality, and we won't get that until we can walk down the sidewalk.

Thank you.

Thank you.

To our online speakers, we're going to start with Kimberly Huntress Inskeep and then Deb Barker.

Go ahead, Kimberly, press star six.

Thank you, Chair Peterson.

My name is Kimberly Huntress-Inskeep.

I live on Capitol Hill, and as someone who can't drive, I rely on our transit system and biking and walking, and I urge you to support the sidewalk ordinance.

Sidewalks are a basic part of any transportation network, yet, as other folks have noted, so many parts of our city lack any sidewalks, and So often when sidewalks are in place, they are so poorly maintained that they present barriers instead of offering people ease of movement around our community.

So yeah, this is long overdue.

And just thanks to everybody who's worked on this, both at Disability Mobility and also the council members.

And please, please move this forward so we don't have to come back and keep doing this work.

Thanks so much.

Thank you.

Next, we have Deb Barker, followed by Gordon Padelford.

Go ahead, Deb.

Hi, thank you so much, Chair Peterson, and thank you to the Transportation Utility Committee for all of your hard work over the years that we all have been tuning in.

I'm a West Seattle resident, and I am requesting that council postpone of the vote today on Council Bill 120726. I request that the interlocal agreement be amended to disclose the reality of area tribal politics.

Specifically, the Duwamish tribal community has its ancestry on the West Seattle Peninsula.

The Duwamish tribe, who who greeted the settlers when they came to Puget Sound hundreds of years ago, sorry, 150 years ago.

It was Chief Seattle who welcomed the communities, the white communities here.

And Chief Seattle is still very treasured here on the Duwamish Peninsula, the West Seattle Peninsula.

The Duwamish are not federally recognized through political maneuvering while the Muckleshoot and the Suquamish tribes are.

Federal funds were used to repair the West Seattle High Bridge, which actually connects to the Fauntleroy Expressway.

And I understand that federal funds can't go to non-federally recognized tribes, but the cultural land grab that is proposed with non-peninsula tribes having the ability THERE ARE PAID FOR ACTUALLY TO PUT ARMS ON WEST THEATER BRIDGE IS WRONG.

I URGE YOU TO DELAY THE VOTE AND AMEND THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.

THANK YOU.

NEXT WE HAVE GORDON FOLLOWED BY AMARA SHERMER HORN.

GO AHEAD GORDON.

Good morning council members.

Thank you for all your hard work over the years on the Transportation Committee.

My name is Gordon Fidelford.

I am the Executive Director of Seattle Neighborhood Greenways.

I'm calling in support of the sidewalk initiative.

We have 154,000 instances around the city of sidewalks that are in disrepair and these are extremely problematic not only for accessibility but also for safety.

The Centers for Disease Control signs that trip and fall hazards are the leading cause of injury for Americans over the age of 65, resulting in 3 million emergency department visits annually across the country.

And so this common sense legislation really just means that when we're going out and we're doing a major project, we'll also be repairing sidewalks at the same time and taking care of the basic mobility of our streets.

So it makes a lot of sense.

Really grateful that we're getting this over the finish line before the council wraps up for the year.

I do have one question, which is whether the amendment proposed for arterial major maintenance projects on this bill would narrow it too much.

And I look forward to hearing that in the discussion.

For instance, would it have precluded the 15th Ave Northwest major paving project in Ballard from doing sidewalk repair?

So love to hear that question answered if there's time.

Thanks so much.

Thank you.

Next we have Amara Schermerhorn followed by Tanisha Spulveda.

Go ahead, Amara.

Hello.

My name is Amara Schermerhorn and I'm here with Disability Mobility Initiative.

I'm asking for support of CB1206658 that will address Seattle's prominent sidewalk problem.

I'm a low vision pedestrian who enjoys the several modes of public transportation that the city offers, but over half our city blocks do not have sidewalks or severely impede mobility for pedestrians, especially those with disabilities.

There is an opportunity to improve connectivity further by prioritizing sidewalk repairs that accommodate for those who cannot drive, which also increases visibility for drivers as well.

So by prioritizing sidewalk repair, F-DOT can greatly increase mobility for everybody on the streets, whether they're driving, walking, or rolling.

And yes, thank you for listening.

Thank you.

And our last speaker online is Tanisha Sepulveda.

Go ahead, Tanisha.

Hi, thank you.

Yeah, thank you for your time, everybody, today.

I am Tanisha Sepulveda, and I am a member of the Empower Movement and working with Disability Rights Washington, Disability Ability Initiative.

And I'm here in support of the sidewalk ordinance bill as a power wheelchair user and as a longtime lover of the city of Seattle.

I am grateful for the sidewalks and connectivity we do have within the downtown area.

But once I moved outside of the city, more in even West Seattle, I came to realize that access was not as connected.

The sidewalks are in disrepair.

There is maintenance needed.

And as a power wheelchair user, I have to use the sidewalks.

And when I cannot, I am then forced out onto the street, which is a great risk not only to me but also to people driving.

And by adding these sidewalks, that connect to transit, they connect to grocery stores, they connect to our community.

As Cecilia was saying earlier, you know, sidewalks are like the first connection to getting anywhere.

And they should be the priority when connecting because if you can't access a transit stop via sidewalk, then building more transit stops isn't really going to be helpful to a community, as well as people who want to enjoy our beautiful green city.

which we really try to build up for just the environmental friendliness.

So as far as our built environment goes, I believe it should also be accessible to everybody in the community who uses it and that it shouldn't be an afterthought.

It's only going to get more expensive the longer we put it on and by not allowing this access to sidewalks, we're decreasing access to opportunities.

So please support this bill.

Thank you.

Thank you, that concludes our list of speakers from the general public.

Now we'll move on to the first legislative item on our agenda.

Will the clerk please read the full titles of the first and second agenda items into the record.

Agenda items one and two, reappointments of Inga Manscoff and Dennis Gathard as members to the Levy to Move Seattle Oversight Committee for terms to December 31st, 2027 for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you, colleagues.

As you know, the Levy Oversight Committee serves as the main oversight role to ensure the levy is being implemented as the voters intended.

As a reminder to the viewing public, this is the $930 million nine-year property tax levy for transportation projects.

approved by voters in November of 2015. While that levy is expiring next year, its original authorization ordinance still requires ongoing oversight.

So we're fortunate to have a couple people willing to be reappointed here so we can keep going.

We'll go ahead and turn it over to Katie Olson from SDOT.

Yes.

Thank you, Chair Peterson, for the summary of the Levee Oversight Committee and the Levee to Move Seattle, which funds transportation improvements across the city.

As mentioned today, we have two reappointees to the committee, and I'm here on their behalf to speak about their work on the committee.

So first is Inga Manstrop.

Inga has served with strong leadership on the Levee Oversight Committee, and she is the current co-chair of the LOC.

Inga has been instrumental in helping to spearhead the LOC's work, shaping meeting agendas and gathering information to develop the LOC's recommendation for the future.

And second is Dennis Gathard.

Dennis holds a very important role on the LOC as the committee's designated bridge engineer.

And he too has devoted many hours of his time into understanding SDOT's bridge program and asking important questions so that the LOC can make informed recommendations for the future as well.

So with that, I conclude my introduction to these reappointees and I'm available for any questions that you may have.

Thank you, Katie.

Colleagues, I've attended nearly all of the Levy to Move Seattle Oversight Committee meetings during my term as the Transportation Chair, so I've had the honor to work with both Inga and Dennis over the course of our terms, and we're fortunate to have both of them willing to continue to serve so that we can reappoint them and continue in this important oversight role as required by the original ordinance.

Colleagues, any comments or questions before we move to a vote?

Okay.

Colleagues, councilmembers, I now move that the committee recommend confirmation of appointments 2695 and 2694, items one and two on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of the appointments.

Any final comments?

Will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to confirm the appointments?

Councilmember Herbal?

Yes.

Councilmember Morales?

Yes.

Councilmember Strauss?

yes chair peterson yes four in favor none opposed thank you the motion carries in the committee recommendation to confirm the appointments will be sent to the december 12 city council meeting thank you katie we'll see you tonight will the clerk please read the full title of the third agenda item agenda item three draft recommendations for move seattle levy renewal for briefing and discussion Thank you, yes, we actually have a Move Seattle Levy Oversight Committee this evening.

And we're fortunate today to have two other appointed leaders from the Move Seattle Levy Oversight Committee with us to walk us through their draft recommendations for what might come next after the 2015 Transportation Property Tax Levy expires next year.

The formal input of the Oversight Committee is required by section nine of the original ordinance, 124796, That was approved back in 2015 for that nine-year, $930 million property tax levy.

So I'll turn it over to Kevin and Rachel, two esteemed leaders who volunteer their time to serve on the Oversight Committee.

Thank you for being here today.

Awesome.

Thank you, Chair Peterson.

Just checking that you can both hear my voice and see my screen.

Yes.

And same with me.

Yes, can you hear my voice and see my screen?

This is Rachel.

Yes.

Okay, great.

Well, thank you chair Peterson for the invitation to come here today.

And also, thank you for your service on the levy oversight committee over the.

4 years that you've been on it, you've been an active participant contributor to the committee.

We appreciate your work.

As you said, my name is Kevin Warner.

I am the current co-chair, along with Inga Maskoff, who you just reappointed.

Thank you very much for that, to the committee.

I'm here with Rachel Benchimel, who is a past co-chair of the committee.

She's currently our secretary for the committee, and the two of us will be tag-teaming this presentation.

So we're going to talk about, first of all, just a reminder of what the Oversight Committee purpose is and why we're here, even talking about recommendations in the first place, where we're at with those recommendations.

Then I'll turn it over to Rachel to talk about some early comments that we have through our process, as well as reemphasizing the timeline for generating our final recommendation.

So just to kind of...

Cut to the chase.

Rachel will reiterate these same points, but we are going to be recommending that the voters approve a new levy after this current one expires next year.

We believe that the levy has done a tremendous amount of good work for the City.

We'll get into that and some specifics here, but we believe that this is an important component of the City's transportation budget and of its resources to move forward.

The ordinance requires us to make our recommendations by March of next year.

So we'll talk through what those look like preliminarily, but we're still in the process of developing those.

Okay, so the oversight committee, as Char Peterson alluded to, it's a, it's a group of volunteers, plus a council member and the city's budget director.

There's 16 of us in total.

You can see the list of all of us here on the screen.

I want to thank the committee and the council for your support of these individuals being on the committee.

The committee, I think, has done really great work over its time.

And again, we all, oh, one other point I wanted to make on this.

We also have connections that have been really important to the advisory boards, the modal advisory boards for bicycle, transit, freight, and pedestrian.

Each of those boards have somebody that sits on the committee, as well as the designated engineer that Chair Peterson talked about.

And this has, I think, created a pretty powerful collection of people to oversee the levy over the last nine years.

I'm not going to read this, but this is this is language from our website as well as from the ordinance about the purpose of the committee.

In a nutshell, we are here to do oversight.

We are here to look at how the levy is being executed year in and year out.

We typically send a letter to the council and to the mayor on an annual basis, reflecting our observations over the previous year.

And then.

to the point of this briefing and where we're going with the next levy, the ordinance itself requires the committee to be looking ahead to the next levy at the end of this current one, which is where we're at.

So the ordinance requires the committee to make recommendations to the mayor and to the council on where we go next.

And so it specifically calls out looking at the city's success in project implementation, including the ability to control costs and manage costs.

It requires us to look at the availability of alternative revenue sources that could provide a more direct link between the tax or fee paid and the use of the city's transportation system.

And then also the underlying need for funding to support the uses identified in the levy itself.

So that's how we will be organizing our letter, which will contain our recommendations that we'll be delivering next year.

In terms of preparing recommendations, I want to say a little bit about where we've been over the last couple of years.

We decided to look at the current levy by program.

There's 30 programs identified within the current levy.

We spent the last year and a half doing deep dives on all 30 of those programs.

We've asked SDOT to come to our meetings and share with us program by program where they're at, what they've accomplished, what obstacles they've run into, and what ideas they have for the next levy.

So we've been doing that for, as I said, the last year and a half, and we're gonna be rolling that up into our recommendations.

In terms of other revenue sources, we did do, I would call it exploratory work to look at what other sort of revenue sources might be coupled together with a future levy in a package to look at how we might resource the next levy sort of decade-ish, if you will, of transportation funding needs for the city.

So that's what's going to be delivered.

It'll be sort of an exploration, and we'll talk about that more in our letter when we get to that point.

Underlying need for the future levy.

As I said, I want to say this very clearly, very strongly.

We support the need for our levy.

We recognize and appreciate how important this levy is for meeting The current and future needs of transportation funding in the city and we really, really support that.

We're also gonna be, and this is important, given our role, we have a unique perspective on oversight.

We're gonna be looking at how that oversight role could be shaped and improved in the future.

There's a lot of things that I think work well in this current levy in terms of how the committee's put together, already talked to, but there's some things I think we see as a committee that could be improved in terms of oversight for the next levy, and we'll be including that in our letter.

So, with that, this is the list of 30 programs that are in the current levy.

You can see they're divided by three larger programs, Safe Routes, Maintenance and Repair, and Congestion Relief.

And with each of those three larger programs, they break out into the 30 programs that you see on your screen.

This is where we've been doing those deep dives I've talked about over the last year and a half.

And this information is all available on the Oversight Committee's website, thanks to Katie Olson and her predecessors for staffing us and making this possible.

So, with that, I'm going to pass the baton here to Rachel, who will walk through the rest of the slides, and she'll talk about where we're at with our recommendations.

So, Rachel, the floor is yours.

Okay.

I'm Rachel Ben-Shmuel.

As Kevin said, I'm now Secretary of the Levee Oversight Committee.

And today, what we wanted to do is share a little bit of information about SDOT's success in program implementation.

And in March 2024, we're gonna send a detailed recommendation, including what we call a transportation package, which means not only the levy, but a series of possible other funding sources that the city might consider.

Next slide, Kevin.

Thanks.

So of the 30 programs that SDOT administers, you can see when we've done our oversight, SDOT is meeting or exceeding 27 of the 2015 goals, 2015 being the beginning of this levy, which is really great.

There are two that I want to call your attention to, however.

One of them is Vision Zero, where the projects might be meeting the goals, but the city really isn't any closer to eliminating traffic-related deaths than it was in 2015. So we would like to have this addressed in a future levy.

And while And now the next one, bridges.

While the number of bridges receiving seismic upgrades is meeting these original goals, the specific bridges aren't.

And what was dropped was, well, there are a number of bridges dropped in 2020 because they exceeded the programmed amount.

But notably the Ballard And the Fremont bridges were dropped because of this.

And we want to address the seismic upgrades of bridges.

Next slide, Kevin.

Here are some highlights.

The John Lewis Memorial Bridge or the North Gate Pedestrian Bridge.

I won't read them all for you.

But I did want to point out tree planting, a favorite of mine, because SDOT has done a really good job with mapping tree planting all over the city.

And it now uses a racial and social equity index maps as one of its tools in tree planting.

And I think that's a great direction for the city to go in part because what usually happens is trees get planted where development goes and I'd like to see it go where development doesn't necessarily go, which is in underserved areas.

Next slide, Kevin.

So what's next is that we're going to be making, as Kevin said, a strong recommendation for a transportation package after this current one expires next year.

And we'll send our final recommendations to the city council and the mayor As outlined in the ordinance, and with that, I complete my part of the presentation and thank council member Peterson.

In particular, because I think this might be your last meeting and so this is kind of a.

Poignant event in a way.

Thank you, Rachel.

Thank you, Kevin.

Really appreciate it.

I'll see you tonight at the Oversight Committee meeting.

And I appreciate this preview.

Again, colleagues, this is following through on Section 9 of the original Ordinance 124796, which lays out this requirement for the Oversight Committee to provide input.

It also lays out criteria for that input, including the exploration additional or different revenue sources because it doesn't have to be 100% property tax and those who wrote the 2015 ordinance had the foresight to note that and to ask for that to be thought about as we come up to the expiration.

Also, really, I want to lift up the issue of giving the oversight committee even more power and authority for the next time we have a massive transportation capital package, including potentially giving it auditing powers or the resources to conduct audits on occasion if they need to do a deep dive.

That was something I think that was a frustration of many Oversight Committee members is there was just the inability to do a deep dive when that was required.

And so we could fix that for the next one.

So thank you, Kevin and Rachel.

Colleagues, any comments or questions for them?

You'll get to obviously, especially Council Member Strauss-Morales, we'll get to engage with them more next year when you receive the official letter from the Oversight Committee.

All right, thank you for being here.

See you tonight.

Thank you.

Bye.

All right, will the clerk please read the short title of the fourth agenda item?

Agenda Item 4, Council Bill 120721, an ordinance accepting various deeds and easements relating to the State Route 99 Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program, laying off, opening, widening, extending, and establishing portions of rights of way, placing the real property conveyed by said deeds and easements under the jurisdiction of the Seattle Department of Transportation, and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

Thank you.

And colleagues, I know when we're looking for holiday cheer, we always look for easements and indemnifications, and this committee will not let you down today.

So thank you for being here today.

We've got Seattle Department of Transportation with us to walk us through this ordinance that accepts deeds and easements related to the State Route 99 Alaska Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Project.

I want to briefly first thank Calvin Chalver, our Council Central staff, for his memo on this, which is attached to the agenda.

and uh calvin do you have any opening remarks for us no council member no no opening marks thank you all right we'll turn it over to sdot good morning

Thank you, Councilmember Peterson and members of the Committee for having us on your agenda today.

I'm John Lazor, SDOT Director of Interagency Programs.

I'm joined today by Gretchen Hadle, Senior Real Property Agent for SDOT.

I want to acknowledge and thank Gretchen for her hard work to prepare these property transfers and the authorizing legislation.

The purpose of this legislation, Bill, thank you.

If you could advance to the next slide.

The purpose of this legislation is to accept various deeds and easements from the Washington State Department of Transportation related to the SR-99 Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program.

The deeds and easements will be placed under SDOT's jurisdiction and incorporated or laid off as city right of way.

Quickly as background, in 2009, more than a decade ago, the state of Washington, the city of Seattle, and King County agreed on a deep board tunnel replacement for the Alaskan Way Viaduct.

The state legislature endorsed the replacement in state law, and the state subsequently established the program to implement both the viaduct demolition and replacement with the tunnel and other related projects.

John Potter, it's a little difficult to show the area in a map now because the viaduct is gone, but the areas that will be.

John Potter, accepting property and are just to the left of this map near the south south tunnel portal and just off the right side of the map at the north funnel tunnel portal.

um following adoption of the program by the city and the state uh the state entered and city entered into various agreements to identify respective roles and responsibilities to implement one of those agreements specifically set for the fourth the process by which the state would relinquish certain property acquired for the program after construction was completed WSDOT is in the process of completing their 30th and final public works project for the Alaska Way Viaduct Replacement Program.

And the city and the state have agreed on the program transfer properties as required under the agreement.

This legislation is the vehicle by which the city would accept those properties.

And then we have a couple of maps that are difficult to read, but I'll try to help you navigate.

The first one shows the south portal area.

This is the area south of Dearborn Street to roughly Atlantic.

And there are nine slivers of properties that help essentially complete the city right-of-way were used for tunnel construction and are no longer needed by the state, but do help complete our city right-of-way and city trail system.

And then the second map shows the north portal area up near Seattle Center, 6th and 7th Avenue, just south of Harrison Street, and five additional slivers of property that, again, help complete our right-of-way system.

So the legislation before you today, we're asking for your recommendation to approve acceptance of these properties as city right-of-way.

And with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any comments or questions?

Again, we do also have Calvin Chow from Central Staff here who wrote a memo for us and is posted online.

Okay, thank you.

This seems pretty straightforward.

Calvin, did you want to add anything?

No, Councilmember.

Okay, thank you.

Well, colleagues, I'll go ahead and move this.

There'll be one more chance for comment or questions.

Councilmembers, I now move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120721, item four on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the Council Bill.

Any final comments or questions before we vote?

All right, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass the Council Bill?

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation to pass the council bill will be sent to the December 12 city council meeting.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you, John.

Will the clerk please read the short title of agenda item five into the record?

Agenda Item 5, Council Bill 120723, an ordinance relating to the East Marginal Way Corridor Improvement Project North Segment under the Heavy Haul Network Program, East Marginal Way, authorizing the Director of the Department of Transportation to acquire, accept, and record a deed for street purposes from King County, laying off, opening, widening, extending, and establishing a portion of right-of-way.

right of way, placing the real property conveyed by said deed under the jurisdiction of the Seattle Department of Transportation and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

Thank you, colleagues.

This council, though, would accept deeds from King County for the East Marginal Way project.

And we have Seattle Department of Transportation here again to provide details.

And before I turn it over to them, I want to again thank Calvin Chow from our council central staff for his memo on this.

Calvin, do you have any opening remarks for us?

No, council member.

Thank you.

Okay.

Well, with that, we'll turn it over to Estat.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Thank you for including us on this council meeting today.

We're actually here.

I'm Megan Hoyt.

I'm the project manager for the East Marginal Way project, which is just about to go into construction.

And these are some administrative things that need to happen before we go into construction.

We're actually going to be talking about agenda items five, six and seven with this presentation because all relate to the same project.

So I'll cover all of them here.

Thank you.

Great.

So from our mission, vision, values and goals, we really focus on a dependable, safe transportation system.

And that's what this project really focuses on.

It is a safety project.

It's also a mobility project in this case, specifically about freight mobility.

We are a big freight project and also make significant improvements for people walking and biking on this corridor.

Next slide, please.

Today, I'm going to give a very, very short COB, Bethany Collins, overview of the project just giving the context of why we're here today, but our goal is to accept three different things we have the first Council bill which does accept this deed for street purposes.

COB, Bethany Collins, Very small property, not as big as john just explained we're just south of him.

with this project.

We also have something a little different because they don't come up very often, which is franchise agreements governing railroad rights.

And we need to make some adjustments again before we start construction.

Next slide, please.

This visual gives a sense of what the East Marginal Way project keeps mobile, which is a lot of freight traffic going to Seattle port terminals.

It also is a very flat and very busy corridor used for people biking to and from downtown seattle and you can see a lot of trains in this picture there's rail yards both the big burlington northern santa fe yard and also the smaller yard that we're going to get into more details on because it relates to our franchise agreements next slide so the project is a very much a freight project we have a heavy haul network and this project is going to be reconstructing the entire east marginal way corridor between spokane and Massachusetts Street.

It is going to be making some changes to signals for freight efficiency, and it is going to put in a fully protected bike lane for anyone biking along here between Atlantic and Spokane.

Next slide, please.

Okay.

This is the first item up for discussion.

It's Council Bill 120723. It's another deed acceptance.

And highlighted on the map here is a very, very small King County wastewater parcel because they have some underground facilities here.

We needed to purchase a very small part of it.

And if you go to the next slide, I will explain why.

It's a very simple building.

It's not too exciting.

It has a sidewalk that's right in front of it.

And as part of our project, we're going to be reconstructing that sidewalk so that it aligns with the future reconstructed roadway.

And it looks like that sidewalk, you'd expect it to be entirely within the city right of way.

But due to some historical, some things in the past, part of this existing sidewalk was actually King County property.

So what this deed did is it said this part that's the sidewalk, the city of Seattle will purchase that and make it formally the right of way so that part of the sidewalk will not be on King County property.

We made that purchase over a year ago now, paid a little bit of money, and this is just the legislation to formally accept it.

Great.

So the next two council bills, 120715 and 120713, relate to what you see here, which is the Whatcom Yard.

It is a rail yard that's between SR 99 and the East Marginal Way Roadway.

It is jointly...

used by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad and Union Pacific Railroad.

And what this legislation proposes is just changing the legal descriptions that are within the existing franchise agreements.

And most of these were made a very, very long time ago.

We're not changing proposing changing any of the actual language was in the franchise agreement over who does what, or anything, just the actual legal description.

And I'll explain Why, which is we have situations where there is now no railroad track, but the franchise agreement still includes it in the legal description.

And then right here, I'll give some detail about how the project itself is proposing changes to where the track goes.

So if you go to the next slide, please, there's this two bins of track and the red markings started Atlantic street and go down to where the track is now severed within the Whatcom yard.

There was a purchase by the Washington State Transportation in 2009 that basically paid the railroads to remove the track for work on SR-99.

The franchise agreements should have been updated then, but they were not.

So this is a chance for us to just clean up the books and we change the legal description to show that the railroads no longer have railroad rights in that area because they already took their tracks out and were paid to do so.

The green is where we amend the franchise agreements because we're making some changes and I'll give some detail on that on the next slide.

This is our very, we've learned a lot about rail design as part of this project because we have a situation right here at South Hanford Street, which is really busy freight signal that we want to optimize as part of our freight improvements for the project.

And there is a dotted blue line there that goes right through the right into the intersection a little bit and that is an existing railroad track it does not get used very often but the presence of that track made it very hard for us to optimize the signal and make a very short protected crossing for the protected bike lane the railroads have agreed to consolidate track crossing so that we can remove the the dotted blue line and all the tracks there and have just one rail crossing of south hanford street but that means that the tracks need to make a bit of a mirror image of themselves so that we can reconnect to all the tracks within the watkin yard just by having the one crossing um and so i think the next slide gives a better sense of what it actually looks like here we go it's my pictorial of if we have a protected bike lane here at the very west edge of this yard you can see the west track removed in the middle of the intersection there That's the track that would go away, and those little yellow lines are where the track would come out now.

The legal descriptions, it is very hard to review a legal description for accuracy if you're not a surveyor.

So we've worked with a surveyor, and they have basically just changed the legal description in these franchise agreements to now reflect those future yellow lines.

And that is the summary of those three bills.

Thank you for that excellent and informative overview.

And appreciate that we put this together in one PowerPoint so the council members can see how everything fits together.

And then, of course, we'll be voting on each item separately.

The second two items, we've got amendments.

But just wanted to give an opportunity to Calvin Chow.

Again, he wrote a memo for us from City Council Central staff.

And just to confirm, Calvin, no amendments.

No issues that you identified, no problems that you identified with these three pieces of legislation, correct?

No issues.

Just to hold up again that we did receive some technical changes from the land surveyor for the Whatcom Yard piece, so there will be amendments for both of those Whatcom Yard legislation.

Right.

Good.

So this first one, this first piece of the three pieces does not have an amendment.

So I'll go ahead and move that.

And then we have, we can, there's still time for questions.

Council members, I now move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120723, item five on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded.

I recommend passage of the council bill.

Any final comments or questions before we move to vote on this first of three pieces, which does not have an amendment?

Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

Just very briefly, I want to just say I'm a huge fan of this project and really appreciate that there's a real focus on enhancing multiple modes of travel and the fact that the importance of this area for bicycle access to downtown from West Seattle was felt very strongly by commuters, particularly people who were choosing to commute by bicycle.

was highlighted during the closure of the West Seattle Bridge.

So I'm really, really excited for this project to take another step.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold.

Any other comments or questions before we vote?

Okay.

Will the Clerk please call the roll on the Committee recommendation to pass Council Bill 120723, Item 5 on our agenda?

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation passed.

This council bill will be sent to the December 12 City Council meeting.

And we'll go ahead and even though we have the overview PowerPoint for these next two items, we're gonna go ahead and work through the parliamentary procedure, read them into the record.

We've got technical amendments for each of them.

So will the clerk please read the full title of item six into the record?

Agenda Item 6, Council Bill 120713, an ordinance relating to the railroad franchise granted to the Oregon and Washington Railroad Company, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Oregon, its successors, and assigns amending Section 2 of Ordinance 18030 as amended by Ordinances 26254, 30947, 75816, 77271, 92571, 117479, and 118994 to amend the description of certain railroad rights of way for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you.

Colleagues, again, these agenda items five, six, and seven are closely related.

This is item six.

We've already had the presentation.

Again, city council central staff provided a memo, did not identify any issues except the need for the technical amendments.

From Seattle Department of Transportation, Megan, did you have anything to add for this agenda item besides your presentation?

No, I think the presentation gave the good visual.

Thank you.

Okay, good.

All right.

And then, so let's go ahead and I'll move the item and then I'll move for the amendment and then we can have Calvin walk through the technical amendment for us.

Council members, I now move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120713. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

I'll now move that the committee adopt Amendment 1 as presented on the agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the amendment.

Calvin, can you walk us through this technical amendment?

Sure, Councilmember.

So the amendment is attached to the agenda, Amendment 1. It's a pretty long section of legal description, so you won't see changes until you get to approximately the third page.

And there's large numbers of sections that really reflect the northern section of track, which no longer exists.

And so it's removing a lot of that from the franchise area.

And then there are some just smaller surveying changes that are describing the future track as well.

And so largely it's.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any comments or questions about this technical amendment?

OK, it was moved and seconded, so let's go ahead and vote on the amendment.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 1?

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and Council Bill 120713 is amended.

Any final comments or questions before we vote on the bill as amended?

Okay, seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass Council Bill 120713 as amended.

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you, the motion carries and the committee recommendation to pass the Council Bill as amended will be sent to the December 12 City Council meeting.

And now we will move on to agenda item seven, which is the third of the three.

and there will be a technical amendment for that as well.

Will the clerk please read the full title of item seven into the record?

Agenda Item 7, Council Bill 120715, an ordinance relating to the railroad franchise granted to the Chicago, Milwaukee, and St. Paul Railroad Company of Washington, its successors, and assigns, amending Section 2 of Ordinance 13633, as amended by Ordinances 18823 and 92572, to amend the description of certain railroad rights-of-way to reflect the termination of railroad operations north of Whatcom Yard and reconfiguration of Whatcom Yard for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

Thank you, colleagues.

As I mentioned, this was addressed in the previous presentation from SDOT and also included in Calvin Chow's memo from central staff.

And so I'll go ahead and move the item and then we'll move the amendment and there'll be time for questions if necessary.

Council members, I now move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120715. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of the bill.

I now move that the committee adopt Amendment 1 as presented on the agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt the amendment.

And Calvin, as before, are you able to walk us through this technical amendment, please?

Councilmembers, this is largely the same as on the previous legislation.

It is correcting some of the surveying marks and again, removing some sections where the track is no longer existing.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any comments or questions before we move to vote on this Amendment 1?

Okay.

Will the Clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 1?

Councilmember Herbold?

Yes.

Councilmember Morales?

Yes.

Councilmember Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and Council Bill 120715 is amended.

Any final comments or questions before we vote on the bill as amended?

Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass Council Bill 120715 as amended.

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation to pass the council bill as amended will be sent to the December 12 City Council meeting.

Thank you very much.

All right.

I promised indemnifications.

They're coming up.

Agenda item eight.

And just a reminder, folks, we have moved items 10, 11, and 12 to the end of the agenda.

to make sure we have time to vote on everything.

So let's do now agenda item eight.

Will the clerk please read the full title of item eight into the record?

Agenda item eight, Council Bill 120722, an ordinance related to street and sidewalk use, expanding the indemnification and hold harmless requirements, which are currently directed toward permittees to include all those making use of public place as use is defined in Seattle Municipal Code 15248 and amending section 15460 of the Seattle Municipal Code for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

Thank you.

The Seattle Department of Transportation is here again to present their legislation that expands indemnification requirements regarding street and sidewalk use.

Again, I wanted to thank our city council central staff, Calvin Chow, for his memo on this, which is attached to the agenda.

And Calvin, do you have any opening remarks or concerns or jokes before I turn it over to you?

Councilmember, I know Elise will go over this, but I just wanted to highlight that this is not new policy.

This is cleaning up sort of code language just to, it is just cleaning up code language and does not reflect any new policy changes.

Thank you.

Okay, well, let's turn it over to Elise from SDOT.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Thanks for having me here today.

Bill is getting our PowerPoint up, but My name is Elise Nelson.

I am the Public Space Manager for Street Use and Acting Division Director for Street Use as well.

Today we will talk about our minor Title 15 Code Amendment that's related to indemnification and hold harmless.

So next slide, please.

SDOT's vision, mission, and core values always guide our work.

This work here today ties into, I think, excellence.

because we're trying to make changes that improve our customer experience and right size when we require street use permits and make sure that's the best tool for the use.

Next slide.

so today we are looking for a vote on council bill 120722 and like cal just noted it's a minor cleanup not a shift or new policy just to make sure we're clarifying indemnification responsibilities due to a larger update that we completed that was effective earlier this year next slide The ordinance that we did adopt earlier this year added the following language that's on this slide.

It really made it possible for SDOT to exempt certain minor uses from street use permits as long as we had an established director's rule to guide that, to provide standards and guidance for that use.

And so that's kind of what's making this new legislation coming up now.

So next slide, please.

So here's two slides or two examples of how we've implemented the legislation that was adopted earlier this year.

So first off, we have, oh, next, back to that last slide.

One more back.

There we go.

So we've already made two changes via new director's rule.

One more slide, Bill.

There we go.

This is the one.

Thank you.

First off, we are allowing businesses to have retail displays against their building frontages as long as they meet the standards that are in the SDOT director's rule.

And then more recently, we updated a director's rule to create a way for people to have signs that are overhanging the public right-of-way without having a separate street use permit for the long-term use.

So those are just two examples of how we've implemented that new policy that was effective earlier this year.

Now, next slide, please.

So again, the updates in front of you today are to make it clear that the rules on indemnification apply to the use of the public right-of-way and not to a permittee, and this will address situations where we have SDOT directors rules that say a permit is not required, but also situations where a permit is required, but for whatever reason we don't have one at the present time.

Next slide, please.

And I know you have a packed agenda, so I'm going to keep it short and sweet today, but I'm happy to answer any questions you may have for us that.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And thank you, Calvin, for noting that this is really a cleanup legislation and that you don't have any issues with it.

Calvin, did you have anything else to add?

No, nothing to add.

Okay, thank you.

And Councilmember Herbold.

Thanks.

I understand that this is a technical bill and cleanup language, and it's not...

does not cover the issue of, it's covering indemnification, not the issue of what things are, require an annual permit and what don't.

But since I have you here, I wanna just ask the question because I've received complaints, concerns, wishes that things were different from business owners in my district about, and maybe this has changed, but about the need to get an annual permit for an awning Is that something that's still required?

Or is that maybe a misunderstanding of a permit requirement?

I think it's almost always a misunderstanding.

We don't require long-term permits for things that qualify as overhead weather protection.

That was a change we made maybe six or seven years ago.

So it might be that they are kind of remembering the way things used to be.

But for the most part, if it qualifies as overhead weather protection, so it's providing protection from the weather, like days like today, that should only need permits for installation and not for the long-term use.

Got it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any other comments or questions?

All right.

Well, I now move that the committee recommend passage of council bill 120722, item eight on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the council bill.

Any final comments or questions before we vote?

All right, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass the council bill?

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation to pass the council bill will be sent to the December 12 City Council meeting.

Thank you, Elise Nelson.

Thank you.

And thanks, Calvin.

All right, will the clerk please read the full title of agenda item nine?

Agenda Item 9, Council Bill 120724, an ordinance vacating a portion of Northeast 48th Street, lying between 24th Avenue Northeast and the Burke-Gilman Trail in the University District, and accepting a property use and development agreement outlining ongoing petitioner obligations and responsibilities related to the Burke-Gilman Trail connection.

On the petition of Trinity Trailside LLC, clerk file 314380 for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you, colleagues.

As I understand it, this is a street vacation in District 4 that helps grant street access to the Burke-Gilman Trail.

This street vacation is here for final approval meaning all the public benefit requirements from 2019 have already been set, and we're here today to vote on the approval of having met those conditions.

We have our Seattle Department of Transportation here, which has determined that the project has met or is meeting the conditions.

Lish Whitson from Council Central Staff is also here.

Thank you for your memo on this, and that is attached to the agenda.

Lish, do you have any opening remarks before we turn it over to SDOT and the Design Commission?

I think you covered what I was going to say.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you.

All right.

Well, good to see you, Estat.

And I guess we'll start with Beverly Barnett.

Good morning.

Yes, good morning.

Thank you for having us at committee today and Before we jump into the project, I do want to say to the chair and the committee, what a pleasure it's been in these last four years to work on vacations issues with you.

They're always pose interesting issues and the guidance and engagement with the transportation committee and the chair has just been our pleasure.

So today we know you have a packed agenda.

We're going to try to go really crisp.

So I'm going to speed talk.

And then we have Michael Jenkins, who is the Executive Director of the Design Commission, who also is going to go quickly.

And then our PowerPoint presentation will be done today by Mark Brands with Site Workshop.

And he also has practiced speed talking.

So we'll try to get through everything really quickly.

So again, thank you for having us on the agenda today.

We're really happy to get this through this year.

And I think as the chair noted and as Lish Whitson's memo notes, The Council has a two-step approval process, and so we come forward with the final legislation.

When the project is done, the utility issues are addressed, easements and maintenance agreements are completed, and the Council always cares very much about the public benefit features, whether those are in and protected.

So I can affirm that they have met all the conditions, paid all the fees, and this is really ready for final Council action.

I also did want to, in particular, note the Burke Gilman Trail connection, which is part of the public benefit.

It was really driven by um, community priorities and parks department, looking at ways to get people on and off the Burke Gilman trail.

And the developer really embraced this as a piece of the public benefit.

So I think it works really well.

And I really wanted to call out that it came from the community and parks and the developer just put it in and it looks great.

So I think, um, uh, of course, uh, available for questions, but I will just jump to, um, Michael Jenkins, uh, for his comments on the review.

Thank you, Beverly.

And good morning, Council members.

You know, just very briefly to build on what Beverly and Lish have briefed you on.

When something comes to the design commission for the public benefit package, we really like to see what we call a big move.

Where is a significant commitment in advancing the public realm as a result of the vacation and to offset the implications of the vacation.

What you'll see in this presentation are two big moves.

The relationship between providing an important link from the Burke-Gilman Trail to not only new significant multifamily development that this developer has created, but to the shopping areas around there and other commercial activities.

at University Village, incredibly important.

What you also see are public realm enhancements at the site that really advance what we see and want for our right-of-way in terms of promoting and advancing the pedestrian experience, creating opportunities for unique ways for drainage and infiltration.

It really set an important standard here And we thought that those two things comprised the big move that we always want to see.

So I just want to say thanks again to the development team for your commitment and seeing this project through.

Thank you, Michael.

I'll take over from here in Beverly.

This is Mark Brands, a landscape architect at the site workshop.

Thank you, council member.

James Meeker- Peterson for getting this on the agenda, I know it's a very busy year end for you, as you wrap up your term pretty very much appreciate that so i'm going to share a presentation, on behalf of phoenix property group, who is the client.

James Meeker- That do that right.

Yes.

Can you guys see the presentation?

Yes.

Okay, good.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

So this project, as Michael mentioned, really is all about the pedestrian.

The big move is what you're seeing on screen, which is a direct connection from the Burke-Gilman to 25th Avenue Northeast, which directly links into the University Village.

So this is the big move where we've set the mass of the building back.

It is a, again, it's a street vacation.

Sorry, I'm not able to advance here.

There we go.

So it's a roughly 9,741-square-foot street that has been vacated.

The existing condition as it was really serviced these small two- to three-story walk-up apartment buildings right adjacent to the Burke-Gilman Trail.

The next slide shows the existing conditions at the time.

You can see the street on the upper left.

upper image, and Burke Gilman is on the top of the page.

Just off the page is 25th Avenue, the arterial.

Bottom are the existing street conditions, and you can see the two to three-story walk-up buildings that the street primarily served.

The project that has been built and is out there today, and a very successful one, is a student housing project with roughly 270 units, a very small amount of parking.

We find that students don't use parking, so there's a one-story parking garage below, that serves the building itself it's about a two and a half acre site and from the image here you can see the large setback to the left of screen that produces this direct connection so we've essentially replaced the street that service cars and some parking for the units with a pedestrian connection directly linking the burke gilman trail to a primary right-of-way and a well-used u-village shopping site so these are the Go through these one by one very quickly.

It includes the direct connection on number one from the Burke-Gilman to 25th Avenue.

A curbless street is one of the streets using our streets illustrated manual, implementing very much focusing on pedestrians.

Some amenities at the Burke-Gilman Trail, landscape restoration that you see from time to time along the Burke.

And then the first private implementation of the Seamless Seattle Wayfinding Program, First benefit is this direct connection that Michael and Beverly spoke about.

Very much focusing on the pedestrian connecting the Burke-Gilman Trail.

You don't see this often on the Burke.

There are very few occasions where we get opportunity to directly connect from the Burke to a right-of-way really dedicated to the public.

And so we had the opportunity to do that.

And this is where the aha moment happened.

This was the big ticket item that we all discovered by setting the mass of the buildings back, the three buildings, and allowing for this to happen.

And this is what you see today.

This is a view to the east from the Burke directly connecting off the distance.

There is a village.

Um, and, uh, as you cross and it also hits magically.

A pedestrian controlled, uh, signalized cross crossing across 25th Avenue and arterial.

Second benefit is a curbless street.

And as my friend Lyle Bicknell likes to say within the city, this street has a lot of curbs for a curbless street, but that was mainly for the protection of planting.

You could have cars that prevent them from driving into the planter.

It's about 25,000 square feet of improvement the developer took on here.

So a very significant one, but focus on the pedestrian.

So there are no barriers to crossing the street for a pedestrian.

is student housing on the right of the screen.

That's the project trail site.

On the left is a market multifamily building as well.

So there's lots of activity.

There's a lot of buzz on this street now, which is really great to see, very much focused in on the pedestrian.

The third benefit is amenities along the Burke.

Again, something you don't see very often.

Bench, drinking fountain, a bike fixing station.

You don't see these things often.

And it also included a wayfinding sign, and I'll get to that in a moment.

So this is a pit stop, if you will, directly connected to this intersection with the setback, developed by the setback and that direct connection to 25th.

Fourth one is restoration along the Burke.

You see this along the Burke happening more often, which is fantastic to see a lot of invasive species removed, replaced with native species that are conditioned to this environment and really increase habitat and really focus in on increased canopies within our city and climate change and heat island effect.

And then the last one is wayfinding, which always ends up, I think, Beverly on our tickets, right?

But this is the first time we were able to implement it at the Seamless Seattle wayfinding.

I think the last time a private developer will probably do this.

And I say this because it was a lot of work to produce the mapping, the content, going these signs.

And so the city now is, SDOT is now taking contributions from developers as a public benefit to implement themselves to control that asset.

Uh, was the developer allows, you know, for the footing and the setup of this.

And I'll just point out 1 thing is for Beverly.

There is 1st, right?

Amendment, uh, a language on each of these signs that say that this is a public space.

So that's very clear on each of these signs at the either end of, uh, of the, uh, the connection in this case.

So that's it amenities, connection, wayfinding, restoration, a curbless street again, very focused in on pedestrian space.

Thank you very much.

Um, and I'll just leave it at that for any questions.

Thank you, colleagues.

Any comments or questions before we approve this council bill, which memorializes the fact that the developer did meet the conditions, as Beverly Barnett noted?

All right.

Well, let's go ahead and do the parliamentary procedure to get this moving.

Council members, I now move the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120724, item nine on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Thank you, it's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the council bill.

Any final comments or questions before we vote on this?

Okay, will the clerk please read the roll, call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass the council bill.

Council member Herbold?

Yes.

Council member Morales?

Yes.

Council member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation to pass the council bill will be sent to the December 12 city council meeting.

Thank you.

Thanks everybody.

Nice to see you all.

Thank you.

All right.

So as I mentioned, items 10, 11, and 12 will be moved to the end of our agenda.

I'll still refer to the items with those numbers.

just to confuse you.

No, just to match what's on the agenda.

But we're gonna move items 10, 11, 12 to the end, which takes us to item 13 on our agenda, the resolution honoring Cheryl Chow.

So let's go ahead and move to that.

Will the clerk please read the full title of agenda item 13 into the record?

Agenda item 13, resolution 32119, a resolution providing an honorary designation of South Mount Baker Boulevard between 31st Avenue South and 32nd Avenue South as Cheryl Chow Boulevard for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you.

This legislation is brought forward by Council Member Morales and I believe I'm supposed to turn it over to Calvin Chow first from Council Central staff for a quick overview and then to our sponsor, Council Member Morales for her remarks.

So if that works for you, Councilmember Morales.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Yes.

So this piece of legislation does exactly what it says in the title.

The location is just on the north side of Franklin High School.

And I think it'd probably be more appropriate for Councilmember Morales to speak as the sponsor of the bill or of the resolution.

Great.

Councilmember Morales, please.

Thank you, Chair Peterson.

Thanks, Cal.

So yes, this resolution would provide, as we said, an honorary designation of Mount Baker Boulevard between 31st and 32nd Avenue South as Cheryl Chow Boulevard.

The resolution commemorates our former city council member, Cheryl Chow.

She served as a council member between 1990 and 1997. Councilmember Chau passed from cancer exactly 10 years ago this year, and my office was approached to steward this street renaming.

Councilmember Chau was a lifelong resident of District 2, a Franklin High School graduate, where she also served as principal.

and was a strong advocate for young people and public education.

During her tenure, she was instrumental in the expansion of five different community centers, as well as the creation of urban rest stops.

There was an online petition circulating that has garnered over 1,100 signatures in favor of this resolution, many recounting their positive memories of Cheryl, such as her work with the Chinese Girls Drill Team, her mentorship of South End youth, And so with that, I hope to get the support of my colleagues to pass this resolution.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, colleagues.

Any comments or questions about this resolution?

All right, thank you, Council Member Morales for bringing this forward and presenting that in our memory.

Council Members, I now move that the committee recommend adoption of Resolution 32119, Agenda Item 13. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend adoption of the resolution.

Any final comments or questions before we move to a vote?

All right, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to adopt the resolution?

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you, the motion carries and the committee recommendation to adopt the resolution will be sent to the December 12 City Council meeting.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

Actually, don't go anywhere because we're gonna go to item 14 on our agenda.

Will the clerk please read the full title of what used to be the final agenda item into the record?

Agenda item 14, Council Bill 120658, an ordinance relating to sidewalk construction and pedestrian mobility improvements, adding a new section 157040 to the Seattle Municipal Code for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

Thank you.

This legislation was also brought forward by Council Member Morales.

So we originally heard the legislation in our committee on September 19. We had several public speakers on this.

There's some of them are still here.

So we'll also vote on a clarifying amendment that is attached to the agenda.

So I will turn it over to Calvin Chow from the Council Central staff.

And then we will hear remarks from our sponsor, Council Member Morales.

Okay.

Thank you, council members.

I'm using the presentation from September just to remind folks of what is in the legislation.

The legislation does add a new section to the code that requires SDOT to install sidewalk on at least one side of the street and evaluate the sidewalk conditions and correct identified deficiencies when it undertakes a major paving project.

And this legislation also allows for the SDOT director to determine that full compliance may not be possible due to physical features the usage of the street or financial constraints and it requires the sdot director to present an annual report to council to clarify how they are implementing this legislation for the upcoming year the legislation also includes a section that prioritizes sidewalk installation repair for other sdot projects that are not the major paving projects for the broadly in line with articulating our priorities for pedestrian movement, access to schools, parks and recreation facilities, transit stops, high density land use areas, and also equity considerations.

There is a clarifying amendment that you will be considering, and I know there were some questions in the public comments, and maybe I will save that discussion for when that amendment comes up.

I'll turn it over to Council Member Morales.

Great.

Thank you, Cal.

I do want to start by thanking Councilmember Peterson, Chair Peterson, for holding this second discussion for our bill to include sidewalk construction and major maintenance, maintenance in major repaving projects.

I also do want to thank the folks from Disability Mobility Initiative who spoke today.

I'm a little under the weather, so I decided I would come back to my office.

So sorry for leaving you out there.

As I mentioned in September, this legislation comes from collaboration with Disability Rights Washington, Ana Zivartz, and the Disability Mobility Initiative, Smart Growth America, Commute Seattle, Seattle Neighborhood Greenways, as well as former SDOT Director Sam Zimbabwe, America Walks, and the legislation is supported by the American Heart Association.

So all of these community members, organizations are very interested in this change and supportive of the change because we know that in Seattle we have almost 4,000 lane miles of roadway for cars in the city and approximately 25% of Seattle streets lack sidewalks.

So when one in three Americans can't drive, When we know that folks with disabilities, elders, young people, people who can't afford a car, need to be able to navigate through their community, it is dangerous for them if we aren't meeting their mobility needs.

So we know there are parts of the city that have fewer sidewalks.

Those are also often the areas that experience elevated pedestrian vehicle collisions and deaths.

And this is particularly true in my district.

Many of our sidewalks that we do have are also in disrepair.

They've got uneven surfaces, missing curb ramps that really make it hard for people with mobility devices, parents using strollers to navigate the city.

And I have witnessed too many times people in wheelchairs having to actually get off the sidewalk and into the roadway because it's crumbled or it is just not a safer passage for them.

So we know that sidewalks are essential public infrastructure.

They provide a public good.

They enable mobility for everyone, regardless of their age or ability, something that car infrastructure doesn't really do.

And there's more public on-street parking than miles of sidewalk in Seattle.

And just to put a finer point on that, we spend an incredible amount of taxpayer money to subsidize parking spaces that for most of the day sit empty.

while we ask private property owners to shoulder the majority of the burden of building and maintaining our sidewalks.

And that is the public infrastructure.

So we're really trying to make sure that we are moving the dial on increasing the ability of our neighbors to get around safely.

So what this bill would do, as Cal mentioned, would require new sidewalks and maintenance of existing sidewalks to be included in new repaving projects.

And this is in line with former Councilmember O'Brien's bill to include non-motorized mobility lanes, also known as bike lanes, into road repaving projects and closely resembles sidewalk regulations in Washington, D.C. It would require an inventory and report of road repaving projects to be presented to council by February of each year and a report from the SDOT director on why they would elect not to install sidewalks in particular projects.

And lastly, as it relates to funding, my office and the folks who've been advocating for this are pursuing this change ahead of the Seattle Transportation Plan levy renewal as a way for us to kind of set the benchmark for sidewalk funding in the next transportation levy.

As it stands right now, our sidewalk installation and repair budget is negligible at best.

Lastly, our constituents want this level of accountability.

They want us to be able to make this kind of investment.

According to a recent poll by Northwest Progressive Institute, over three quarters of Seattle residents surveyed support safer spaces for walking and support wider sidewalks.

Additionally, half of surveyed Seattleites say that maintenance should be the responsibility of the city, not private property owners.

So we're hoping that this will set a benchmark.

It'll allow for us to better fund this really important piece of public infrastructure and really provide more equitable access and more equitable mobility for all of our community members.

Thank you, Chair Peterson.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

And I also want to thank Anna Zavartz from Disability Mobility Initiative and the people who spoke today.

Thank you for coming here.

And we have an important amendment for this as well.

So let's go ahead and, Calvin, are you able to walk us through that amendment, please?

Should I move it first?

Sure.

Yes, we can move it first.

And go ahead.

I move Amendment 1.

Okay, great.

And let me back up a little bit.

I got ahead of myself.

So I'll move the underlying bill and then let's go ahead and move the amendment.

So council members, I now move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120658, item 14 on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded in recommend passage of the Council Bill.

And we'll go ahead and bring the amendment in front of us and then I'll call on Councilmember Herbold.

I now move the committee adopt Amendment 1 as presented on the agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

And Councilmember Herbold, did you want to speak now?

Go ahead.

I did have a question about the base bill, not about the amendment.

Is that okay?

Yes, please.

I know I could look it up myself, but I'm wondering if either one of you could let me know how a major paving project is defined.

The legislation says it's defined in 1580010. I have not had time to look that up, but am interested to know, and I bet members of the public are interested to know how we define major repaving project.

Thank you for that question.

Go ahead, Kyle.

Christopher McConkey, counselor I do not have that language in front of me, but largely the way that it's operationalized is by the specific budget line items that the capital programs that that.

Christopher McConkey, Do the work, and that is actually one of the main purposes of the clarifying language and the proposed amendment to clarify which which.

Christopher McConkey, tip projects are are included or not included, so I think maybe that will be a little more.

Christopher McConkey, Clear as we get to that that conversation.

Thank you.

Yes, please go ahead and show us, if you don't mind sharing your screen, Calvin, for the amendment, which I agree will be very helpful.

Sorry, my screen is...

Here we go.

That's okay.

And this is on the agenda as well.

Yes.

Here we go.

So the proposed amendment does make some changes, really clarifying, trying to make that distinction between the capital projects and essentially repair projects.

So it makes some changes to the subsection.

Sorry.

First of all, it reorders the language just for clarity of reading, and then it makes a couple edits to include the word capital for Roboy improvements, and then to be specific about the CIP projects that this that would not be subject to this requirement, which is the ship seal, pothole repairs, arterial major maintenance projects, and emergency repairs.

And I think the question that really came up in the public comment was about the arterial major maintenance program.

That program is essentially a repair program.

It's meant to be a fast response sort of within a week or two kind of framework of responding to problems, largely up to about a block or two of a street where there are bad conditions.

And it is sort of at the upper limit of what the city can do with our own crews before we have to open it up for a public works contract, where it becomes, generally speaking, it becomes a much bigger project that is subject to all those kinds of requirements as well.

So the rationale for not including that in this requirement is essentially one of speed and budget.

If you do include, make it subject to these types of requirements, you increase the scope of what this project would have to involve.

If improving the sidewalks triggered stormwater code, you would push out the amount of time and prep work that was necessary to do it so that might actually take the project outside of what our crews could do so it ends up becoming a larger project anyway so really not really the intent of this program which is to be a quick response to emerging conditions on the street The Arterial Major Maintenance Program does deal with curb ramp situations when they occur.

That actually accounts for about 30% of their existing program budget.

So that would be another consideration if there were to increase additional sidewalk scope into it.

It would mean there would be less resources to do the breadth of projects, but that is, of course, a budget issue, not so much a policy issue.

Um, but that is the intent for that, that is the rationale for proposing.

This is to kind of make a distinction between these quick response repair projects and sort of our broader capital programs.

Uh, when we fully redo a project like 15th, which is going on in, in Ballard, um, there is, there is greater scope.

There's better, there's more design, um, uh, uh, experience and resources to incorporate that into the scope and then to program it into better doubt as part of the broader project.

Thank you for that explanation and thank you Council Member Morales for this amendment and Council Member Strauss.

yes thank you chair and thank you councilman morales for bringing this bill forward i'm a huge supporter i think it's great work calvin i appreciate the summary about this amendment and specifically looking at the proposed movement over here at arterial major maintenance when i look at the presentation from sdot to this committee on i believe it was may 2nd of this year yep may 2nd of this year I see a number of projects that they highlighted, Occidental Avenue South, 44th Avenue Southwest, Northeast Princeton Way, and 98th Street.

What you described is true, that there are a number of curb ramp additions, and it does seem that these projects are Maybe not the fast response.

I look at both 44th and Northeast Princeton Way.

It seems as if there's longer structural issues that have been present, which are being addressed by ESTAT.

I'll get to my question, which you started to address even before I could ask it about 15th Avenue Northwest.

and the difference between that project and the arterial major maintenance program specifically with 15th avenue i know that two projects were merged there was the structural element for the leary way overpass in addition to what was initially described as a simple paving project not a lot of changes were to either lanes or through curbs or pedestrian infrastructure, it seemed much more akin to this Northeast 98th Street project or the Occidental Avenue South project as described in SDOT's May 2nd presentation.

Question here is, can you give me a little bit more of an understanding of the difference between the 15th Avenue roof paving project and what this arterial major maintenance is?

It's largely scale and budget size.

So the 15th repavement project was a larger project that was completed under, well, was funded under the arterial, arterial asphalt and concrete replacement projects.

It's a different program that is considered sort of a higher category of capital improvement, typically bidded out under public works requirements, sort of that higher threshold of project.

The arterial major maintenance project is the level below and it really straddles that border where we could do a lot of that work with our own crews.

There are occasions where a project might get large enough where we come against that public bidding requirement and would have to bid it out.

but it's largely one of scale.

The 15th Avenue project is a longer project.

There's room to kind of add that scope and push that scope out.

The arterial major maintenance project is really meant to be about a block, two blocks of street.

So this is not exactly a, I wouldn't say there's a pure science behind this, but it's largely driven by sort of that project management and budgeting considerations.

Thank you, Cal.

Very helpful.

All right.

Council Member Herbold.

Thanks so much.

So going back to my earlier mention that the legislation relates specifically to projects that are defined as a major paving project, I have folks who are helping me out with those definitions.

Thank you, Newell Aldrich.

And he sent me the definition from chapter 15.80.

And Major paving project is defined.

It says any paving project of more than one million.

This includes arterial asphalt and concrete program and other discrete corridor improvement projects identified in the CIP.

And then it goes on to say major paving project does not mean routine maintenance, pothole repair, restoration of utility cuts, or emergency repairs.

Given that that language is already part of the ordinance, I'm just still struggling to understand what this amendment adds.

So that that that existing code, which was part of the bike lane requirement, it essentially makes the same distinction it the distinction being that it's so I think the purpose of this is to have a similar clarification for this section of the code that's related to the sidewalks and essentially mirror the same the same requirement over here on this piece of legislation.

Belt and suspender approach.

Thank you.

Chair, if I might.

Yes, thank you.

So yeah, thank you, Cal.

Thank you, colleagues.

I will say this amendment was proposed by SDOT.

And the idea here is to make the changes that provide for SDOT crews to do emergency repair work that goes beyond pothole repair.

It is my understanding that it wouldn't affect our goal of including sidewalks in major projects.

And I think that's what Cal's trying to clarify.

But the idea is to make sure that we can still achieve the goal, but not have the requirement for these emergency repairs that are really intended to be a little bit smaller scale without triggering the requirement to do the big sidewalk installation.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

And I also support this amendment.

So let's go ahead and vote on this and then we'll vote on the underlying bill.

All right, will the clerk please call the roll on adoption of Amendment 1?

Council Member Herbal?

Yes.

Council Member Morales?

Yes.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Chair Peterson?

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and Council Bill 120658 is amended.

Any final comments or questions before we vote on the amended bill?

Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

I just want to add my thanks to Council Member Morales for bringing this forward, working with SDOT and Calvin Chow and central staff.

Really, really appreciate the attention to our sidewalk needs.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I'll add my two cents that to help pay for additional sidewalks, transportation impact fees are a potential source.

So look forward to seeing how that goes next year.

All right, seeing no other comments.

Clerk, please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass Council Bill 120658 as amended.

Council Member Herbal.

Yes.

Council Member Morales.

Yes.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Chair Peterson.

Yes.

Four in favor, none opposed.

Thank you.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation to pass the Council Bill as amended will be sent to the December 12 City Council meeting.

All right.

We have applause in the chambers.

All right, well, let's go back to items 10, 11 and 12. And we'll have the clerk please read the full title of the 10th agenda item into the record, please.

Agenda item 10, Council Bill 120726, an ordinance relating to the Seattle Department of Transportation authorizing and directing the director of the Seattle Department of Transportation to execute interlocal agreements with the Suquamish Tribe and the Muckleshoot Tribe and ratifying and confirming certain prior acts for briefing, discussion, and possible vote.

Thank you.

This legislation would authorize an interlocal agreement between the City of Seattle and the Suquamish Tribe and the Muckleshoot Tribe regarding art proposed for the West Seattle Bridge columns.

Thank you, Calvin Chow from Central Staff for your review of this legislation and your memo, which is attached to the agenda.

Calvin, do you have any opening remarks or concerns before?

I do not have any.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And we did hear public comment about this.

We received a few emails about this with some concerns, so that might determine whether we take action today.

But we're going to go ahead and hear the presentation.

We appreciate all the work that's gone into this thus far.

Okay, we'll turn it over to Esteban.

Stephan Winkler, Go ahead.

Stephan Winkler, Thank you.

Thank you, Council members.

My name is Stephan Winkler with SDOT.

And today we will be moving through Council Bill 120726. Through an acknowledgement, setting some context and purpose.

And then also highlighting the project details and the engagement process.

Next slide.

So essentially, Council Bill 120726 authorizes SDOT to execute an interlocal agreement with Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and the Suquamish Tribe to deliver the Fauntleroy Columns Art Project.

Next slide, please.

So we'd like to acknowledge that we are on the ancestral lands and waters of the Coast Salish and Duwamish people, whose descendants include, but are not limited to the federally recognized Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and the Suquamish Tribe.

We further acknowledge that these descendants are the original, present, and future stewards of these lands and waters.

We recognize and honor the sovereignty of the region's tribes and acknowledge and respect the government-to-government relationships that the City has with these tribes.

It is in the spirit of government-to-government collaboration and doing more than just a land acknowledgement that we are here today.

Next slide, please.

So the columns of the Fauntleroy Expressway serve as a unique canvas to showcase the art of the Suquamish tribe and the Muckleshoot Indian tribe and descendants of the Duwamish people, promoting cultural awareness and recognizing their contributions to the regions history, and continued presence.

The interlocal agreement upholds tribal sovereignty and promotes trust between tribes and the city.

It aims to establish a constructive relationship based on shared goals and values, promoting collaboration and cooperation to achieve common objectives and address challenges.

The column art will be financed by the remaining funds from the Reconnect West Seattle program, which is part of the wider West Seattle Bridge program.

Next slide, please.

So this interlocal agreement was designed to, as I stated, uphold the sovereignty of the tribes while accommodating changes and implementation and maintenance expenses.

The agreement needs to achieve a delicate balance between acknowledging the independence of the tribes and safeguarding the broader objectives.

Here's a few of the highlights.

It will be funded with a total of $133,000.

That's been set aside.

That is approximately 66,000 going to each tribe for completing the column murals within 2024. The tribes will collaborate on painting the mural art between 7 and 14 columns of the Fauntleroy Expressway near the intersection of West Marginal Way and Sheelan Avenue.

There's an image of that shown in the slide.

The city will review the tribal's design to avoid traffic sign colors and offensive content, and if necessary, both parties will collaborate to address concern.

Ownership will follow the Visual Arts Right Act, and the column murals will be retained ownership by the tribes.

Next slide.

So discussions regarding this project commenced in early 2022. The Seattle Department of Transportation then reached out to Tim Reynon, the city's tribal relations director, to seek guidance.

Tim played a crucial role in guiding our approach to collaborating with the tribes in a manner that demonstrated our respect for their sovereignty.

And in May of 2022, an initial meeting was held with the Muckleshoot and Suquamish tribal representatives, the Office of Intergovernmental Relations, and SDOT to discuss the project.

to see if there's any mutual interest.

And from June 2022 to July 2023, periodic follow-up meetings occurred between OIR and the tribes to discuss continued interest in the project.

And during this time, SDOT works with law to draft intergovernmental agreements.

And in July 2023, SDOT and OIR met with the Squamish and Muckleshoot tribes to discuss the project and proposed agreements further.

And then in October of 2023, SDOT and OIR held a follow-up meeting with the Suquamish tribe.

And in November 2023, we held a follow-up meeting with both the Suquamish and Muckleshoot tribes.

During these meetings, tribal representatives confirmed their interest in participating in the project and reviewed and approved the proposed agreement.

Next slide.

So the approval of this ordinance is highly anticipated it demonstrates the kind of government to government collaboration discussed during the tribal nations summit and serves as a testament to the city's commitment to building trust with tribes and upholding their sovereignty, thank you.

Thank you.

And colleagues, I know we did receive some comments about this legislation from the public, and I would like to turn it over to our district council member who is most familiar with this area.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I just wanted to lift up the fact that we are receiving some emails from members of the public who have concerns about the outreach done to the Duwamish either the Duwamish Tribal Organization or the Duwamish Tribal Services, two distinct organizations that do a lot of work around addressing the needs of the historic indigenous people of this area.

And I did reach out to SDOT last night about what sort of engagement has been done with the Duwamish.

I really appreciate the response I got from SDOT and the lifting up of other projects that the city and specifically SDOT is working with the Duwamish on.

Those are great projects, the crossing project at the Longhouse, as well as funding for mental health services that I and Councilmember Morales has sponsored in previous budget years, working with Duwamish Tribal Services and the Human Services Department.

So those types of engagements are great.

And in no way, I think, for me, mitigates the need to have some engagement on this project as well.

I am sort of reading into the response that I received from SDOT that there hasn't been engagement with the Duwamish Tribal Organization or Duwamish Tribal Services.

And if I'm incorrect, I definitely want to be corrected.

But yeah, it would be really helpful to know what sort of engagement has occurred, if any.

And again, appreciate the work being done on this effort so far.

Thank you.

Let's hear from SDOT first, and then we can hear from Council Member Strauss.

Go ahead, Stefan.

Well, first, I'd like to state that the city recognizes and values the essential services and support that the Duwamish Tribal Organization and the Duwamish Tribal Services provides to our Native communities.

I appreciate you uplifting the projects that we're working with them on.

I'd also like to uplift that additionally we've secured $20,000 in 1% for arts funding, which will be combined with $40,000 to $45,000 in municipal art plan funding for another art project near the Longhouse.

And the arts department is partnering with Duwamish Tribal Organization to launch this in early, starting to begin moving through it in 2024. So due to this parallel art project, we did not move into a formalized engagement process with the Duwamish Tribal Organization or the Duwamish Tribal Services.

Okay.

Thank you for that information.

Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for this briefing and this report.

As Councilmember Herbold noted, there are a number of projects that the Duwamish Tribal Organization is working with SDOT on, just signaling that I am comfortable voting on this bill, this interlocal agreement, both of them today.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Strauss.

Councilmember Herbold.

Thank you, and I appreciate Council Member Strauss sharing with us his comfort level with voting today.

I do request that we consider a hold on this legislation with the hopes that the extra time would give SDOT the opportunity to have some maybe not a formal engagement, full-blown process, but to have some conversations with the Duwamish Tribal Services and the Duwamish Tribal Organization about the plans for this project.

Thank you, Councilmember Herbold.

I appreciate that.

Since you're the District Councilmember in this area, that is very important.

wanted to see if Council Member Morales had any thoughts.

I did confer briefly with SDOT.

It seems like on this particular one, obviously there's been a lot of work done over the last couple of years and for it to go into the next month is not problematic as I understand it, but wanted to hear if anybody else had any comments.

because we did have the benefit of hearing the presentation today, we have, everything's online for the viewing public, and so it'll be easy to pick up and move expeditiously in January.

Okay, so we'll go ahead and...

move on to the next item.

Appreciate the discussion and I think the council next year can pick this up quickly.

Really appreciate SDOT's work on this and the explanations and appreciate the public comment as well.

All right, so we'll go ahead and read item, will the clerk please read the full title of item 11 into the record.

Agenda item 11, bridge asset management plan preview for briefing and discussion.

Thank you.

This briefing and discussion serves as a preview to SDOT's bridge strategic asset management plan.

One moment.

So as you may recall, the Seattle Transportation Plan has been, a draft of that has been unveiled and discussed at great length in the public as we look forward to a new transportation capital package.

But that's just part of the story, the asset management of what we already have, what the Biden administration would call fix it first is also necessary.

And as we know from the when the West Seattle Bridge cracked and closed, and we did an audit of city-owned bridges back in 2020, there was a need to do more thorough asset management of our city-owned bridges.

The audit itself called for a bridge asset management plan to be updated.

And so I appreciate SDOT Director Greg Spatz putting more talent and resources to this, we'll hear from Ms. Garcia, speaking of talent, bringing this to bear and we've got Kit Liu from SDOT as well.

So really appreciate you putting this forward.

We know you're playing catch up here and trying to get these asset management plans completed so that the public has a full picture of our transportation needs going forward.

So we'll turn it over to SDOT.

Thank you.

I'll wait for Bill to put up the presentation.

My name is Angel Garcia.

I am the Asset Program Manager in Roadway Structures within SDOT.

And I'm here today to update everyone on the Bridge Strategic Asset Management Plan.

In our vision, our vision, mission, value, and goal, Seattle is a thriving, equitable community powered by dependable transportation.

We are on a mission to deliver a transportation system that provides safe and affordable access to places and opportunities.

And our core values and goals are equity, safety, mobility, sustainability, livability, and excellence.

The purpose of today's briefing is to provide a status update on the 10 recommendations of the Seattle Department of Transportation's Strategic Approach to Vehicle Bridge Maintenance is warranted, excuse me, Bridge Maintenance is warranted audit report.

Slide, please.

And today we're going to talk about key takeaways, the path to the BSAMP, recommendation updates, lifecycle cost analysis, and have time for Q&A.

All right, so our key takeaways from this presentation, you're going to learn that we have one implementation, one recommendation implemented, three recommendations that have been submitted to the auditor.

And I've heard back that those have been marked as tentatively approved and will be marked as implemented next year during the annual update.

We have five recommendations that will be completed by year end and the BSAMP will be finalized in quarter one in 2024. All right, so pathway to the BSAM.

The audit gave us a really nice path to a strategic asset management plan.

First, we had to sharpen our bridge management oversight, come into compliance with FHWA for bridges.

We scaled back reimbursable work that our maintenance crews did so they could prioritize bridge maintenance.

And we turned private inspection oversight back to owners of those private structures.

We then turned to analysis where we created lifecycle plan scenarios.

We calculated end of life estimates.

Uh, we are completing a staffing, uh, excuse me, we're completing staffing requirements and I racist also justice principles, applying to those staffing requirements as well as conducting technology upgrades, cost benefit analysis.

And all those are going to be summarized in the bridge strategic asset management plan.

All right, so together the audit again creates the B sample holistic process proactive approach to bridge preservation the plans for the right treatment.

At the right time, and this is showing you kind of where we're at with the sections of the B sample we've got our inventory and condition completed.

The bridge performance lifecycle plans and risk management are very close to being finalized that will be completed by year end.

and then the implementation plan that will bleed into first quarter of 2024. Slide please.

So then in terms of the recommendations, recommendation one was that SDOT should take immediate steps to resolve all issues identified in the 2019 Federal Highway Administration Review.

We're completed with that.

We've submitted that to the auditor's office and they have marked that completed.

The biggest update of this one from last year is that the historical correspondence, that was the one remaining item.

has been migrated into our new system.

So we're fully into our new file management system and in compliance with FHWA.

Slide please.

Recommendation two is implemented, and this is that SDOT should reduce the share of the department's bridge maintenance workload that it currently dedicates to reimbursable projects unrelated to SDOT's bridge maintenance.

Such a change could be done incrementally.

There's no change from last year.

We've changed our policy to limit reimbursable work that's performed by our crews, allowing them to focus on complex multi-day bridge repairs.

slide please recommendation three the seattle department of transportation should develop just legislation to replace ordinance nine six seven one five to address current city of seattle bridge maintenance priorities to ensure adequate oversight of private bridges uh we've again submitted this recommendation to the auditor's office who has marked it tentatively approved slide please um Ordinance 96715 has been amended since its initial adoption and states that the director of transportation may inspect structures annually or as often as deemed necessary for public safety.

Slide, please.

Recommendation for the Seattle Department of Transportation should develop policies and procedures to adequately oversee private bridges.

To oversee private bridges that align with the revised version of ordinance 96715, as mentioned in recommendation 3. Slide.

So, for recommendation for a new policy was approved by the director in September of 2023, the policy states that bridge inspection inspectors will perform safety inspections every 4 years and review the owner furnished.

Structural inspection every 2 years, this policy will reduce safety inspections from 49 to 12 annually.

We've submitted the policy to the office of city auditors.

And again, they have tentatively approved that recommendation three and four have been met.

So recommendation five is the Seattle department of transportation should conduct a staffing analysis to determine the number and type of staff requirement staff required for the implementation of a bridge preservation program.

Um, and this is pending where you expect to have this completed by year and.

Immediate needs were identified earlier this year.

3 new positions were secured with the 2024 budget, a manager, 3 to oversee all capital bridge programs, a senior electrical mechanical engineer to oversee movable.

Bridges and administrative administrative specialist, too, to support the maintenance teams.

The finding the final.

Staffing analysis will be completed for two of the lifecycle scenarios, preventative maintenance and preventative maintenance plus by the year end.

Slide, please.

Recommendation six.

The Seattle Department of Transportation should incorporate race and social justice initiative values into the staffing analysis of its bridge program.

Slide, please.

As that is completing a race and social justice toolkit to incorporate initiative values into the staffing analysis, the toolkit has been drafted and will be completed by year end.

The overall objective is to harmoniously integrate the toolkits recommendations for more equitable, diverse and inclusive work environment and set a precedent for employment strategies, aligning with broader city wide initiatives on.

racial, and workforce equity.

The toolkit recommendations came from internal work sessions with our maintenance team, the SDOT change team, and human resources, and are related to diversity and inclusion, promotion, staff morale, recruitment.

Next slide, please.

Recommendation seven, is that the Seattle Department of Transportation should conduct a cost benefit analysis of technology upgrades needed to improve staff efficiencies as part of their staffing analysis.

And again, that is pending and will be completed by year end.

Slide please, Bill.

Thank you.

The technology upgrade cost benefit analysis.

There are six upgrades that we focused on workflow optimization, which would identify and eliminate redundant functions and processes across different teams within roadway structures.

Digital bridge inspections, which would allow our inspectors to create inspection reports in the field and eliminate the the need for most paper notes, programmatic scheduling for bridge operations, which would minimize manual interventions and promote resource efficiency, develop data insights related to preventative maintenance inspections performed by our maintenance crews, implement a dashboard or a reporting system to provide actionable insights, and mobile data collection and standardized data collection, which would integrate with our asset management enterprise system to collect asset inventory and maintenance data and eliminate paper forms.

It would also standardize the data being collected for analysis.

The outcomes show that roadway structures could gain potentially up to 25% efficiencies if all six recommendations were implemented over two years.

slide please then we get into recommendation eight and nine which is that sdot should update its estimated useful life of their bridges using the condition data of individual bridge components and recommendation nine which is that sdot should then update its useful life estimates of its bridge to plan for preservation work and life cycle cost slide please So this is pending, it will be completed by the end of the year.

A life cycle cost analysis was done for six life cycle plan scenarios based on annual funding thresholds that prioritize preventative maintenance to maintain bridges in good and fair condition to extend the life of the bridges up to and beyond its design life.

The analysis period for all the scenarios um was a 30-year analysis period what you're looking here on the screen is a graphic of kind of a what happens to bridge life with preventative maintenance and without the dash line shows without without any per preventative maintenance, you'll see that decline from good to fair and poor condition happen much more rapidly.

Or if you applied preservation treatments, you're extending the life of that bridge quite significantly over time.

If we go to slide the next slide, please the life cycle scenarios.

That you're seeing, I'm going to read these off from right to left.

There's the unconstrained scenario, which is that every bridge receives the right treatment at the right time.

And the outcome of that is over 30 years.

We have 0 bridges in poor condition and then we.

scaled that to a state target performance that keeps 10% or 90% of its bridge inventory in good and fair condition.

This comes fairly close to the unconstrained, so we added additional scenarios.

You look at the Preventative Maintenance Plus.

Again, the outcome of this is we get 90% of bridges in good and fair conditions for only 30 years, and we're running into some problems.

We've also had to do bridge replacement with lower cost alternatives, such as retained earth or geofoam for that particular scenario.

And then we get to the Preventative Maintenance Plus, or excuse me, Preventative Maintenance.

That differs a lot of bridge replacements.

And it, it extends the length of time.

Bridges are in good and fair condition, but we're starting to see.

Our poor condition creep up the next scenario is current.

Funding with levy, which is kind of similar to what.

Our current threshold for bridge.

Budget is, and again, we've had to defer replacements for many bridges and has limited funds for rehabs and repair.

And then you get to current funding without.

Levy, which is a very bare minimum and we have anticipated bridge closures in this particular scenario.

So, if we go to the next slide bill.

What we're seeing is that it's a critical priority to establish preventative maintenance programs that follow industry best practice.

And we still have some dollars for major capital investment for rehab, reconstruction, and seismic retrofit.

um and what you're looking at this this graph here the bar chart represents the cost of each scenario the blue is the preventative maintenance dollars the orange is those major capital investment and the line graph you're seeing is the projected outcome if their condition states in good fair and poor at the end of the 30-year analysis period for each um each scenario.

So as you can see in the unconstrained, the red is a zero because everything is in good and fair condition.

And we have a high level of capital investment for bridge replacement, bridge rehab, and seismic retrofit, and the preventative maintenance dollars are relatively low in this particular scenario.

So what you're seeing is the more investment, the better condition that you're getting.

So slide please.

Then we get into the preventative maintenance treatments and cycles.

Again, so if you start from the unconstrained over on the right, the purple is showing like where you're getting the right treatment at the right time within each scenario.

So we're able to carry, we were required to carry that through for bridge inspection, bridge cleaning.

um also is being able to carry through through all the scenarios it's a relatively inexpensive treatment to do uh to preserve the elements on our bridges that could cause potential deterioration um it this is also establishing a deck and joint program We currently do not have a deck and joint program, but we are just addressing issues that are condition-based.

It is establishing some ideal maintenance cycles for movable bridge components.

And then you could see how those timeframes from the ideal are determined.

Extending within the current funding with levy and current funding without levy scenarios because we, we can't maintain those ideal treatments in those particular scenarios.

If we go to the next slide bill.

What the analysis has showed is that.

There are preventative maintenance recommendations that we just kind of ran through rather quickly.

There's the actions to align with the city's current practices, such as continue our bridge painting program and fund a bridge cleaning and deck and joint program and identifying ongoing funding to preserve bridge preservations.

So those are at a high level what the analysis recommendations are.

If we go to the next slide, Bill, even with preventative maintenance, there is still need for capital investment.

And what you're looking at here is in the unconstrained scenario, the list of recommended replacement and what that would look like over 30 years.

We broke the list out into 10 years, then 11 to 20, and then 21. to 30 years and beyond.

The bridges that are recommended for replacement over 30 years in the unconstrained scenario is based on deterioration curves that were developed as part of the life cycle analysis.

and sequence the structure based on decommission recommendation.

Excuse me, the sequences, the structure based on decommission recommendations, functional considerations, deterioration, and anticipated substructure seismic costs.

For this analysis, when the structure hits its end of life, They are recommended for replacement and then they kind of scale through rehab as funding is constrained in the scenarios.

For rehab, we generally get to extend the life of a structure up to 20 years versus replacement where you're getting generally 75 plus years out of the structure.

So then if we go slide, please, Bill.

So all that will get summarized into the BCM, which again is still pending at this time.

And we will plan on having that completed in quarter one of 2024. Slide and that's the end of the presentation.

So if there's any questions, we'd be happy to take those at this time.

Thank you very much for going through all the recommendations from the original city auditor report on city owned bridges.

And there's been a lot of work done and a lot of more work to do.

So we look we're glad that that Director Spatz brought on more people to address this priority, and obviously there's going to be a lot more funding that's needed to address this, but having SDOT ready to go for not only repairs and maintenance but also seismic upgrades and in some places replacing parts of bridges that are have deteriorated beyond their useful life so thank you for this presentation and we'll look forward to the next council carrying this on um kitlu did you want to add anything i i do not uh thank you okay thank you All right, thank you for this presentation.

Let's go on to the final item on our agenda.

And that is item 12. Again, we removed the items around at the end of our agenda here.

So item 12, let's read that into the record.

Agenda item 12, Seattle Public Utilities Race and Social Justice Initiative Update for briefing and discussion.

Thank you.

We have today presenters from Seattle Public Utilities, including our, I see our CEO and General Manager, Andrew Lee.

Thank you for being here with your team.

We'll turn it over to your presenters now.

Good morning.

Or good afternoon.

Well, no, it's still morning.

Go ahead, Andrew.

Am I coming through okay?

Okay, Councilor, am I coming through all right?

ANDREW LEE How do I do this?

ANDREW LEE Okay.

My name is Andrew Lee.

I'm the general manager for Seattle Public Utilities.

SPU has a longstanding 20-year commitment to race and social justice, and we center racial equity in all our work.

This means investing in communities to right environmental wrongs while simultaneously averting unintended consequences.

economic displacement or business disruption.

As part of our ongoing commitment to race and social justice, the mayor asked executive departments to report to council on our progress with respect to racial equity goals, including racial equity toolkits and racial equity action plans.

And so thank you, Council Chair Peterson and members of the committee for having us here today.

With me today to present on our progress are four of SPU's key race and social justice leaders.

We have Steve Hamai, a senior racial equity advisor, Niu Fuavoi, our SPU talent acquisition manager, Idris Beauregard, deputy director of people, culture, and community, and Ellen Stewart, deputy director for our drainage and wastewater branch.

So I'm going to start us off, though.

We can go to the next slide.

Today we're going to provide a very quick overview of our race and social justice accomplishments across multiple different areas, as shown on the left-hand side.

So I'm not going to go over these right now, but we're going to go into these in a little bit of detail.

This past year, one of our major efforts was focusing to redefine and reinforce our commitment to environmental justice communities.

And so our vision for environmental justice is that we seek to be a government party that co-creates environmental solutions and strengthens communities by centering racial equity, sharing power, and prioritizing the experiences of those that are most impacted by our policies and practices.

As part of this effort, we defined four commitments related to our work in environmental justice communities, and those include first, building relationships with those communities, which means not being transactional, but really being relational in our approach.

Number two is creating economic justice opportunities and access to green jobs, again, in the communities that are impacted.

Thirdly, is building resiliency to climate change through holistic investments.

This key kind of aspect of this work is our work in South Park to provide resistance or resiliency to sea level rise.

And then lastly, providing healthy environment and utility services in every one of our environmental justice communities.

You're going to hear examples of how we are applying these principles later in this presentations.

One of the most important demonstrations of our department's commitment to RSJ is our continued application of racial equity toolkits.

Every year we complete multiple toolkits, and then we work to apply those recommendations to our daily work.

This year we applied toolkits to the South Park Water Quality Project.

We also applied it to our project management methodology, which actually affects all of our capital projects, our education programs in our watershed, and then lastly, our work to address flooding in Delridge and Longfellow Creek.

At this point, I'm going to pass it off to Nu'u, who will talk about our work in the hiring and also in contracting.

Nu'u, you're muted.

Sorry.

Thank you, Andrew.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I'll be talking about two things, our affirmative hiring processes and women and minority business enterprise utilization.

Before we launch into specific examples on the slide, I want to look at our hiring metrics and performance within the past five years to respond to the question of whether we are making a difference.

The first area is on the demographics of our recruiting and hiring efforts.

Second is the demographics of SBU workforce.

The charts on this slide show two measures.

The darker blue bars on the left is the percentage of new hires that were PIPOC employees.

The light blue bars on the right is our overall employee demographics.

As you can see, over the past five years, our pipeline carrying percentages have increased, which also increased the overall employee demographics of SBU workforce from 46% in 2019 to 53% through the third quarter of this year, not including our fourth quarter numbers.

That's a 7% increase of our workforce demographics within this five-year period.

Next, please.

This chart shows the women and minority business enterprise utilization, actuals against goals.

For 2022, bars on the left in blue, and 2023 through Q3, bars on the right.

In 2022, of the nearly 35 million consultant dollars spent, 9.5 million of that went to Wimpy firms.

Representing 28% of utilization are exceeding our stated goal of 23%.

For 2023, we will also exceed our goals for consultant spending in purchasing.

In 2022, we also exceeded our 21% goal.

For 2023, we are currently just under our 23% goal, but this data is through Q3, so we expect to exceed our goal by year-end.

Passing on to our next presenter, Idriss Berregard, Deputy Director for People, Culture, and Community Branch.

Hey, thank you Nu'u and thank you council members for having us today.

I just wanted to reiterate SPU's mission, which is to foster healthy people, environment, and economy by partnering with our community to equitably manage water and waste resources for today and future generations.

And the next slide is part of how we're doing that, and that's improving our customer experience.

We're extending flexible pay plans to support our customers facing challenges that were due to COVID.

This initiative prioritizes flexibility and dignity.

It offered assistance to those managing utilities account in their difficult times.

So that's something that we're really proud of.

We also enhanced our quality assurance program.

Quality assurance program is crucial to meeting our customers' needs, and it's forever evolving.

By enhancing the evaluation process for our utility account reps, they're the folks who answer calls when customers call about bills or changing solid waste services and other SPU services that are provided, we reinforce our commitment to fairness and equity.

This initiative aims to create a culturally inclusive environment, ensuring respectful and supportive interactions with every customer.

And House Bill 1329 emphasizes our commitment to preventing utility shutoffs during extreme heat.

That temperature is above 90 degrees, and this will provide a vital lifeline for our customers.

Aligned with our SPU values, this initiative ensures reliable utility services during challenging weather conditions, and it prioritizes our community welfare responsiveness.

Our next slide shows the utility assistance impact.

With over 356,000 customers enrolled in our UDP program and 1.5 million in emergency assistance funds distributed, we're making significant strides in ensuring access to essential services.

The distribution of the 1.5 million in SPU emergency assistance funds further underscores our commitment to supporting those facing immediate challenges.

And finally, the return of the city's energy utility and resource summit.

We're excited to announce the successful return of this summit in collaboration with City Light and HSD.

We engaged with over 100 service providers at the Museum of Flight in October.

This summit exemplifies our commitment to collaboration, sharing essential information about utility assistance programs, conservation efforts, housing resources, and the affordable Seattle portal with our community partners.

And these are just a few ways that we're aligning with our SPU mission and being people-centered.

Next off, I'm going to pass it over to our Deputy Director, Ellen Stewart, to talk a little bit more about how we're aligning our mission with these efforts.

Thank you, Dries.

We've also improved our strategic business plan process in several ways, including diversifying our customer review panel, adding 11 members from diverse and underrepresented communities in the city, creating a community survey to inform our planning process for the strategic business plan.

And we did a lot of summer outreach to increase people's base knowledge of SPU and our services, including translating that into over 10 languages for the community.

We're also striving to improve community outcomes in the Duwamish Valley by improving our internal procedures and coordination for incident response.

You're all familiar with the catastrophic flooding that happened in South Park last year.

We've increased staff training and preparedness and positioned staff as liaisons to community during flooding events.

We've been present all year at community meetings and events to share information and help prepare the community for this winter.

It also includes coordination work with our community partners with Duwamish River Community Coalition, Just Health Action, Via Communitaria, and we continue to refine our procedures and our approaches so that the community approves of our processes.

The CBOs are under contract to our lead for implementing our public information campaigns.

Next slide.

We simply can't achieve our outcomes through government services alone.

What's needed is for us to partner and to creatively partner with the private sector to build a greener and more equitable economy, specifically around our water and waste business nexus.

Our Restaurant Greece Disposal Community Jobs Initiative is a great example of this partnership.

We had eight applicants who completed two days of lectures, hands-on training, and small business support to start them up with a new green business.

This effort grows small, local BIPOC businesses, helps SPU reduce backups and overflows in our wastewater system, and keeps our pipes flowing by providing a disposal process for excess grease in restaurants.

It supports restaurants being in compliance with our local code, and it protects public health and the environment.

We also have a building deconstruction workforce training program where we work with low income and formerly incarcerated workers to gain new skills and deconstruction to expand capacity in this market while building marketable and transferable skills for themselves in construction and demolition field.

I'm going to turn it over to my colleague Steve Hamai at this point.

Thanks, Ellen.

My name is Steve Hamai, and I just wanted to cover very quickly the utilities commitment to ongoing staff training and development and learning in regards to race and social justice.

We recognize that with a lot of turnover in our utility and a lot of new folks coming on board, we need to be sure to skill everyone up to maintain our utilities commitment to race and social justice principles and practices.

And to that end, we have a slide here that is listing a whole host of trainings that we have offered across every single branch or line of business within the organization, as well as numerous guest speakers that are able to come in from outside of the city to really talk about their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and to really inspire us as an organization to keep our efforts moving forward.

I would just like to say that one key aspect around our training and development program is to really make sure that our employees are going through this effort as a cohort and not treating this training and learning as just an individual experience, because we find that when people are in attendance together in race and social justice training, that there is actual follow-up that can occur back here in the workplace.

Next slide.

My last slide here is just to talk about Seattle Public Utility's role across the nation in leading what is known generally as diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.

We are actively involved in many utility federations that are very large and very well known within the industry.

That includes the Water Environment Federation, the American Water Works Association, the US Water Alliance, and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies.

where various leadership staff in the organization here in Seattle are playing key roles in pushing an agenda of diversity, equity, and inclusion forward throughout the entire industry.

It should also just be noted that utility is really quite the reputation across this nation as being one of the really sort of key leaders in the industry when it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Many staff here are tapped often for their expertise in really implementing race and social justice in the organization, speaking at numerous conferences throughout the entirety of the year.

And with that, I'd like to pass it on back to our general manager, Andrew Lee.

Thank you, Steve.

In closing, I actually just wanted to make three acknowledgements.

First, I want to acknowledge the amazing work of our staff, like Steve, Idrees, Ellen, and Na'u, who are incredibly committed to this work.

Second, I wanted to acknowledge and thank the strong commitment from our mayor and our city council.

Your commitment to advocating for those who've been most marginalized has made a difference in serving our most vulnerable communities.

And lastly, I want to acknowledge the people in the communities that we work with.

They challenge us every day, and they have the most unwavering commitment to justice for people of color.

We would not be where we are today without their advocacy and their partnership.

And with that, thank you.

Thank you very much to everybody presenting today and all the work that goes into this effort.

And thanks to everybody at SPU and all your staff out there in the field as well.

It's been a real pleasure to work with you over these past four years.

Well, I don't think there are any comments or questions from colleagues.

So we'll go ahead and this was our final item on the agenda.

So appreciate you all staying for as long as you did.

and we will go ahead and adjourn the meeting.

Colleagues, the time is 12.06 p.m., and this concludes the December 5th and final meeting of the Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee.

Thank you again, everyone who supported this committee over the past four years.

We are adjourned.

Bye.