Seattle City Council Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee 6/7/22

morning.

The June 7, 2022 meeting of the Transportation and Seattle Public Utilities Committee will come to order.

The time is 931 AM.

I'm Alex Peterson, chair of the committee.

Will the clerk please call the

Council Member Morales.

Here.

Council Member Strauss.

Present.

Chair Peterson.

Present.

For present.

Thank you, and Council Member Swan is excused.

Colleagues, if there's no objection, today's proposed agenda will be adopted.

Hearing no objection, the agenda is adopted.

Good morning and welcome to the Transportation Seattle Public Utilities Committee.

This is the first time we're conducting this committee meeting in a hybrid manner with people attending both virtually and in person.

So we ask for your patience as we work to navigate this new hybrid format.

Today we plan to vote on two bills from Seattle Public Utilities.

One is to accept an easement from the State Department of Natural Resources to install a replacement sewer line.

And the other bill is essentially a technical correction because it accepts to property deeds to perfect sp use property rights for those two parcels originally acquired in 1986. Next on the agenda, we will hear the race and social justice initiative report from our Seattle Department of Transportation.

And for the last item on the agenda, we will discuss a joint resolution with the executive regarding Seattle's potential preferences regarding Sound Transit's West Seattle Ballard Link extensions.

After today's preliminary discussion, we'll be inviting all council members back to a later committee for further discussion and a possible vote.

I do wanna give a warm welcome to my colleagues who are going to be, everybody's been invited to this committee meeting for the Sound Transit items, so we will be welcoming them to the committee, even though they're not members, because we wanna get their feedback early on the resolution.

So at 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 online.

We're also welcoming it in person.

Nobody's signed up in person yet.

The way we'll normally do this is we'll alternate between people who've signed up in person and folks who have signed up online.

Right now we've got about 18, 19 people who are signed up online and nobody's signed up in person yet.

So, we'll go ahead and because it's 19 people normally we have a 20 minute.

public comment period, but I'll go ahead and extend that to 30 minutes.

And that would, if my math is right, give everybody about a minute and a half to speak.

So each speaker will be given a minute and a half to speak.

We're extending the public comment period to 30 minutes.

I'll call on the speakers two at a time and in the order in which registered on the council's website.

And if you've not yet registered but would like to speak, you can sign up before the end of this public comment period by going to the council's website, seattle.gov slash council.

And if you're jogging over to City Hall right now, you can sign up in person with the sign-in sheet that's here in the city council chambers.

For those who are online or remote, once I call a speaker's name, staff will unmute the appropriate microphone and an automatic prompt of you have been unmuted will be the speaker's cue.

It's their turn to speak.

And as usual, you would press star six to begin speaking.

Speakers will hear a chime when 10 seconds are left of the allotted time.

Once you hear the chime, we ask that you begin to wrap up your public comment.

If speakers do not end their comments at the time, at the end of the allotted time, provided the speaker's microphone will be muted to allow us to call onto the next speaker.

When you begin speaking, please state your name and the item you're addressing.

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

If you're providing public comment remotely, once you have completed your comment, we ask that you please disconnect from the line.

And if you plan to continue following the meeting, please do so via Seattle channel or the listening options on the agenda.

The regular public comment period for this committee meeting is now open.

And we'll begin with the first speaker on line.

Please remember to press star six before speaking.

We're gonna hear from Michael Stewart and then Jordan Crawley.

Go ahead, Michael.

Good morning.

My name is Mike Stewart.

I'm executive director of the Ballard Alliance, an organization representing hundreds of businesses and thousands of residents in Ballard.

First, thank you, Chair Peterson and Vice Chair Strauss and members of the Transportation Committee for hosting today's meeting, which includes a review of the city's draft resolution to sound transit regarding the West Seattle Ballard Link Extension Project.

The West Seattle to Ballard Light Rail Extension is really a transformative project that will have a significant positive impact upon communities throughout the region.

For Ballard, a hub urban village that has received a tremendous amount of residential growth over the past decade, this project will deliver on the promise to provide needed transportation infrastructure to a community that has accepted significant growth and the challenges that come along with it.

Ballard's united in its desire for a tunnel alignment with the station located on Northwest Market Street at 15th Ave Northwest.

The station placed in this location will not only serve the abundance of residents and transit riders located in the central Ballard core, it will also help preserve our maritime and industrial lands for their intended use.

The draft resolution before you today is spot on.

We fully support the resolution's assertion that station access be provided from the west side of 15th Avenue Northwest, as well as from both sides of Market Street.

A station located at 15th is the only option that will ensure pedestrian safety.

A 14th Avenue station would not only put pedestrians at risk with a long crossing of a major freight corridor, it will also completely miss the mark in serving the existing and ever-growing residential core in Ballard.

Additionally, should the resolution include the recommendation study on other segment areas, we would endorse additional study of alternative stations located west of 15th Avenue Northwest.

Finally, I just wanted to commend the city staff that have worked tirelessly.

Thank you, Mr. Stort.

Please do also send in your comments to council at seattle.gov if you haven't already.

Next, we're going to hear from Jordan Crawley, followed by Jane Zalutsky.

Hi my name is Jordan Crawley speaking to the resolution.

As the Assistant Director of Alki Beach Academy in West Seattle I'm here to speak on our program's behalf.

In 1999 our owner's son who has autism was enrolled in the West Seattle Child Care Center and after just one day of care the program expelled him saying they didn't have the capacity or resources to care for him.

Julianne and Jamie promised themselves that if they could ever open a program they would and they would do so with the express intent of accepting providing for and nurturing every child.

As we plan an expansion to a capacity of 300 children it is heartbreaking to know that everything we've built might be destroyed.

We have made it our life's work to provide quality care and without batting an eye this city would encourage ripping hundreds of child care slots from Delridge.

As a program owned and operated by a first generation American and woman of color our primary concern is continuing to provide uninterrupted high quality care to children in the Delridge corridor.

Our biggest frustration with these proceedings is the fact that nowhere in the draft EIS is our program mentioned, let alone that DEL 5 and 6 would demolish us.

In conversations with Sound Transit, they claim they will attempt to address their oversight in the final EIS, but now cities are using this severely incomplete and mistaken information to determine preferences, and that's how we end up in situations like this.

A city prepared to demolish what will be its largest childhood provider without noting it even exists.

The future of our families, employees, and program are held in the hands of people considering whether to destroy our lives and our city is prepared to drive them to it.

Please do not support DEL fixing your resolution.

Thank you.

Next, we're going to hear from James Lutsky followed by Eugene Wasserman.

Go ahead, Jane.

And for James Lutsky, go ahead and press star six to speak.

Press star six.

Thank you.

Okay, there we go.

Hi, James Lutsky, Executive Director, Seattle Center Foundation.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment today.

Seattle Center resident organizations are very excited to welcome Link Light Rail to Seattle Center Uptown.

We know that a large percentage of our visitors and attendees will arrive that way, making this station one of the busiest in the system.

We have spent the last 14 months staff board consultants learning about this complex project and we want to thank Seattle Center Director Nehlems and his staff Marshall Foster and Sarah Maxana and their staff for their collaborative approach and for council members and staff who have or will be coming out to tour the station locations at Seattle Center.

We did not come easily to the conclusion that the Republican Street Station location was untenable.

but we are extremely appreciative of the city's conclusion to support the mix and match alternative.

There is still so much we don't know about that option, but we're going to take the same thoughtful approach to make sure that the city and Sound Transit are well aware of the concerns of the unique arts and cultural organizations along Mercer Street.

We look forward to continue to partner with all of you to make sure that the best possible decisions for this massively complex project are realized.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Next we have Eugene Wasserman followed by Frank Yergon.

Go ahead, Eugene.

Hi, thank you council member Peterson and members of the city council.

I'm here representing Eugene Wasserman here representing the North Seattle Industrial Association.

We have members in Ballard and also in Magnolia on the South side of the ship canal.

I just want to second Mike Stewart's comments on the location that the mayor's picked for this resolution.

And we think it's invaluable to have it under the shift canal and also a station, not a 14th, but a 15th.

And I also want to second the comments.

If you're going to start in this resolution, if you're going to study other things, we would prefer that the station be located more West of 15th and downtown Seattle out of our industrial area.

but also where it's more appropriate and where more riders would ride Sound Transit in the heart of the business district.

So thank you very much for your time listening to me.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next, we actually have Brian Chow, followed by Frank Yerrigan.

Go ahead, Brian.

Hi, this is Brian Chow.

I'm with the T organization, Transit Equity for All.

representing the CID and our basic push is to have 4th Avenue or another option.

And having 5th Avenue as a selection is very bad for the whole region.

And this is a human cost issue.

And if you folks go on 5th Avenue, it'll wipe out Chinatown and there will not be any Chinatown.

I really appreciate it if you do the right human thing and choose 4th Avenue or another alternative.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Frank Aragon followed by Megan Hennen.

Go ahead, Frank.

Good morning and thank you, Alex.

My name is Frank Aragon and I'm involved with preserving and protecting the Chinatown International District neighborhood since 1972. 50 years ago, I initiated and co-led with the late Alan Sugiyama and several others a protest of the Kingdome groundbreaking ceremony.

We believed then that the Kingdome would have a devastating impact on the CID's cultural, historical, and the quality of life of the residents, particularly low-income elderly who lived there.

Small businesses would suffer as well.

Presently, we find ourselves in a similar struggle against on-transit light rail expansion into or near the CID.

We find the Fifth Avenue route unacceptable.

Please remember, 134 years ago, the Chinese were forcibly removed from Seattle.

And then 80 years ago, the Japanese-Americans suffered the same fate.

And in 2022, we will not let history repeat itself in the CID.

We are here to stay.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Next, we have Megan Hennen, followed by Deb Barker.

Go ahead, Megan.

Good morning.

My name is Meg Hannon, and I am representing the 2,500 members of the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce to comment on the proposed resolution for a recommended preferred alternative for the West Seattle and Ballard Link extension.

We are longtime champions of expanding transit in Puget Sound and enthusiastically support extending light rail to Ballard and West Seattle and the regional spine to Everett and Tacoma.

The most important thing you can do to open light rail on time and manage costs is agree on a recommended preferred alternative consistent with what voters approved in 2016. The resolution as drafted reflects many of the positions of the business, community, and arts and cultural interests along the alignment with the Seattle Venture Chamber have been convening and meeting with since the beginning of the year.

As the project advances, we encourage you and Sound Transit to work collaboratively with the public to refine, design, and develop construction and mitigation plans.

Constructing new infrastructure in an urbanized area will have impacts.

However, people who live and work along the alignment and businesses recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic may not endure the impacts described in the draft EIS to realize the benefits of light rail.

This is true in the Chinatown International District, as noted in the resolution, as well as downtown, South Lake Union, Seattle Center, and the rest of the alignment.

We ask that the city work with Sound Transit to identify different construction approaches to avoid or minimize impacts and develop robust mitigation plans.

This will take more than a business as usual approach.

We also encourage the city to continue to work with the Delbridge community, including major employers in the neighborhood, to optimize the recommended preferred alternative.

that alternative unfortunately represents.

Thank you very much.

And for all speakers, please do also email your comments, if you can, to council at seattle.gov.

Next, we have Deb Barker followed by Paul Howery.

Go ahead, Deb.

Hi, good morning.

My name is Deb Barker.

I'm a West Seattle resident, a member of the Sound Transit Advisory Stakeholder Advisory Group from 2018 to 2019, current member of the Sound Transit community advisory group, or the CAG, and I am writing, sorry, I am speaking today in favor of the tunnel option into the West Seattle Junction.

I am in favor of the South Corridor over the Duwamish Waterway, but most importantly, I am here to speak about some, not favorably speak, but speak to bad design, bad station design, violates all the principles of training that many of the station areas entail.

Station areas are placed in a node so that there is a walk shed all the way around that node.

I am very, very disappointed by the proposed alignment of the Delridge segment to be at the Andover slash Delridge location.

That is a very, very poor location for any potential transit-oriented development, which is desperately needed within this corridor.

And the city of Seattle bears a huge responsibility to ensure that there is equitable transit-oriented development.

Putting a station at the intersection of Andover and Delridge is a horrible mistake.

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

And again, please do email your comments as well.

Next, we've got Sergio Zamora followed by last name Stroup.

Go ahead, Sergio.

Hello, I'm speaking.

My name is Sergio Zamora and I'm a neighbor from the Avalon and Del Rich Corridor in West Seattle.

I'm here to speak on behalf of all the neighbors that we have been talking with across an array of different events and forums in which we have found no support for the rich option that was mentioned by several previous callers.

This is the option that is next to the steel mill.

We find this location to be far away from the community it intends to serve.

is next to a steel mill, so there's an opportunity to create any type of development to facilitate transportation and switching between buses and the train in that location.

It also displaces different businesses that serve normally low-income communities.

Our request is really to support, but to study and investigate other options like the L1A for a full tunnel.

And the primary request is to request Sound Transit to provide more transparency on, from all the comments that we're providing, which comments, how many people were supporting Bill 6 versus how many people were speaking against Bill 6. Just transparency.

That's the primary ask.

Show us how many people in the community want this station and how many don't want it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we've got, it says Kirstie and Scott Stroop, followed by Rick Cooper.

Go ahead, Kirstie and or Scott.

Hello, thank you for allowing me to speak today.

My name is Scott Stroop and I'm here to speak in opposition of the proposed recommendation of Dell 6 and the Dell Ridge Station location.

Specifically, how this proposed station location will result in the forced closure of Alki Beach Academy, the largest daycare facility in the Delridge Corridor.

I can't emphasize this point enough as a parent of a one-year-old.

Childcare right now is nearly impossible to get and it's only been worsened by the pandemic.

I know from direct experience as we waited several months to get into Alki Beach Academy due to its high demand.

Alki Beach Academy provides both high quality and affordable care that our child and many other families desperately need and can afford.

The last thing we should be doing right now is displacing a child care facility that serves so many families in West Seattle and directly impacting our young children, like our daughter, who have already been so affected and set back by this pandemic.

Our children need facilities like Alki Beach Academy to develop the social and academic skills for future success.

I'm also concerned about how this will impact our family.

It's finding a different daycare location in our area is so incredibly hard.

Alki Beach Academy can't simply be quickly relocated.

Many families like ours will be impacted and may be forced to take care of kids at home, which is not good for our growth or the conducive to employment and financial stability or the growth of our child.

As Seattle continues to grow, it is vital that we maintain or really improve access to certain core facilities and menus like childcare facilities, such as Alki Beach Academy that serves so many families and employs so many.

Thank you very much.

Next, we have Rick Hooper followed by Joe Riley.

And I do want to recognize we may have some public commenters in person that we will have speak right after we finish these last two online speakers.

So go ahead, Rick Hooper, followed by Joe Riley.

Thank you.

I am Rick Hooper, chair of Uptown Alliance.

I'm addressing item number four in today's agenda.

I'm here today in support of your passing Resolution 32055 to provide important and significant input into the Sound Transit 3 process.

And specifically, we are in support of Section F.4, referencing the South Lake Union Station at Harrison Street on Uptown's eastern edge, and especially in support of Section F.5 relating to the location of the Seattle Center Uptown Station, moving the location from Republican to Mercer.

Our hope and goal is a fully united city community partnership excited about the potential for a high-functioning light rail station in the heart of Uptown.

with close access to Seattle Center.

But a lot of additional analysis, brainstorming, assessment lies ahead before we can all fully unite behind the Mercer Station.

Our challenge is how to get to that outcome without wreaking havoc on our community during a lengthy construction process.

In particular, how do we creatively keep cars, trucks, buses, pedestrians, bikes moving during a massive cut and cover construction operation?

We look forward to continuing our work together on creating the best outcomes with the least disruption.

Thank you so much for this opportunity to speak.

Thank you.

Next, we have Joe Riley, and then we will have the in-person speakers go.

I'll read their names when we get to them.

Go ahead, Joe Riley.

Good afternoon, esteemed council members and staff.

I'm Joe Riley, the policy director at Seattle Subway.

Seattle Subway is the leading independent organization specialized to advise on light rail issues across the Puget Sound.

We've studied every page of the West Seattle Ballard extension in great detail and hopes to be the most helpful resource to you all and build the best possible project.

Here we have a few suggestions that Seattle Subway couldn't recommend higher for council adoption, including the following.

To reduce the budget gap, strongly support providing City of Seattle, city-owned land and public rights of way to minimize the total property acquisition costs recommended or required for Sound Transit to build Wisley.

Additionally, endorse selective cut and cover where it makes sense over deep or tunneling and remove studies from study that fail to serve Seattle well in order to make room for Sound Transit to study better alignment options.

In the CID, study shallow force and study it even shallower with a cut and cover at the same grade as the existing station to save big on cost, time, and disruption, and once again, activate Grand Union Station train haul.

Relocate South Lake Union Station, which is currently not inside the neighborhood boundary at all, And at Seattle Center prefer Republican Street Station studied one to two blocks west of Seattle Center to mitigate impacts to art organizations, and very finally at Ballard

Thank you very much.

And colleagues, now we're going to switch to in-person speakers.

Those who have joined us in person, welcome.

And just a reminder, you've got a one minute and 30 seconds.

I'll call on your name and the order in which you've signed up.

And per the council rules, we ask that you wrap up your comments by the minute and 30 second mark.

Otherwise we'll have to mute the microphone and turn it over to the next speaker to give everybody a chance.

We do have a full agenda today.

So first up, we've got Alex Zimmerman followed by Marguerite Richard.

Is this microphone working?

It's working.

My name is Alex Zimmerman.

I want to speak about justice In race, yeah, something like this.

And I'm totally confused what does this mean because for 35 years, what is I live in Seattle, I don't understand what this mean.

And council don't explain to me exactly what does mean justice.

For example, red camera is adjusted.

I don't think so.

People who drive bike don't have this red camera.

I have car.

I have like a six red camera in Seattle for the last couple of years, $134.

I'm okay with me.

You know what does it mean when this money go to government?

But government talk, yes, we have right now problem.

We have like not enough money in Seattle Corporation, like how many, 30 million?

I see yesterday in TV.

Yeah, something like this.

So my question right now to you guys, for 10 year, we have red camera.

If 50 percentage money go to Arizona Corporation, we're talking about million and million dollars per year.

What is we send to somebody?

What is, I don't know why exist here, huh?

Can you explain to me why nobody, you sit in chamber sometimes for many years, don't talking about red camera.

You want make red camera only for city?

It's okay.

This will be justice and race for everybody because this money go inside system.

50% is few million.

Thank you, Mr. Zimmerman.

Thank you.

It's a minute and 30 seconds.

We're gonna hear from the next speaker.

We've got Marguerite Richard followed by Michael.

The Honorable Michael Fuller.

Thank you.

I couldn't read the handwriting.

Thank you very much.

And then we do have an online speaker that we're gonna go back to.

So we asked Paul Howery to hang on, but welcome Marguerite.

Yes, my name is Marguerite Richard and I'm from Seattle, born and raised here.

And it's very interesting that you have something Seattle Department of Transportation, Race and Social Justice Initiative report as far as equity.

I come to tell you right now, whatever it is, all the slave tactics and all the regulations and the rules that you've used against indigenous black people, it will stop.

Because there's a brighter day coming.

Because there's no excuse that you have to use a toolkit on us, and we're human beings, okay?

And I watched online, a man that was talking and engaging somewhere else now, not in this state, with the council, just like they were bosom buddies and knew each other, talked for almost 10 minutes without any interruption.

I said, wait a minute, you know, something must be wrong with this.

I said, because I done had four trespasses from here.

Where is the amen choir up in here?

For no reason at all, just using my free speech.

So you better go back up in those regulations, look at the Constitution of the United States, and see if it's standing on the grounds in which that Constitution was framed as far as equity and inclusion.

And that bell dinged, and my seconds are not even off.

They're not even up, my seconds.

Now it is.

Thank you very much.

And we have the bell go off for 10 seconds remaining, just to remind folks to start to wrap it up.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Go ahead, Honorable Michael.

Where did all these cities come from?

Where y'all at?

They're here remotely.

Now, Lisa Herbold?

You working on the color of state and federal law.

I think you need to know the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 that was signed by President Lyndon Johnson.

And the Old American Act, July 14, 1965, that was signed by President Lyndon Johnson.

And the American with Disability Act, July 26 of 1990, that's being violated by the City Council, all of y'all.

I hold all of y'all accountable that took that oath.

That's called a malfeasant oath of officers.

All nine of y'all.

I'm not new to this.

I'm true to this.

And I don't like this extraordinary abuse of your power over we the people.

And they had audacity to come to say, oh, you can only speak for two minutes.

Who are you?

We the people is paying for you.

So y'all doing this organized pimping?

We the people?

But see, my guy got your address and your phone number.

30 L-O-Y period, L period, A period, L period, R-E-V period, 977. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

We've got to go to the next speaker.

Thank you.

Your time has expired.

Thank you.

You can submit a written comment as well.

Happy to talk to you after the meeting as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We're going to hear from the next speaker.

The next speaker is Paul Howrey, who's online, remote.

Go ahead.

We're going to hear from Paul Howrey.

Thank you.

Paul Harre, go ahead and press star six to unmute.

Hi there.

Hi.

Hi there and thank you for the opportunity to comment.

I am in the West Seattle area commenting upon resolution 32055 and what I'd like to bring up is Question one, why are we recommending a Delridge segment that's actually incompatible with the DEL-6?

The two routes don't run along the line.

I am not in favor of DEL-6 because it actually puts my neighborhood at risk from an EIS situation.

The other question I have is if DEL-6 is used, Why does that take it so far out of a walkshed?

It would actually serve people.

I don't see how that supports the core values for equity and so on from the city.

The Avalon Station also creates a problem for the values two and three for providing safety and user experience from the neighborhood next to the West Seattle on-ramp.

The last thing here I will say is the 41st Street option seems to be a good option to keep things low so it's not affecting the neighborhood.

And why can't that connect to the preferred option of the tunnel and of Genesee?

Last thing, we're gonna suffer huge multiple years of construction stuff right in our backyards from this project.

Please mitigate.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

That was our final speaker.

both for the remote and in person.

So now we'll move on to the first legislative item of our agenda.

Will the clerk please read the short title of the first agenda item into the record.

Agenda item one.

Council Bill 120322, an ordinance relating to Seattle Public Utilities, authorizing the general manager, such CEO of Seattle Public Utilities to accept a non-exclusive easement within the Schill Shoal Bay Waterway for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, this bill accepts an easement from the State Department of Natural Resources to install a replacement sanitary sewer line.

I do wanna ask our City Council Central staff if they wanna make any introductory remarks or at least confirm there are no material concerns with this legislation, and then we'll turn it over to Seattle Public Utilities.

Hi, Brian, good night.

Welcome.

Good morning.

Good morning, council members.

Just again, for the record, Brian, good night, Council Central staff.

I don't really have anything to add.

SPU will describe in detail in their presentation.

As you said, this simply accepts an easement from the state in an area where SPU has installed a replacement sewer line.

The easement would be in effect for a period of 30 years and Central Staff has not identified any issues or concerns with the legislation.

Thank you very much, that's helpful context.

And before we turn it over to Seattle Public Utilities, I do wanna welcome Council Member Sarah Nelson, who has joined.

We've invited all council members to join this meeting today for the last item on the agenda.

So welcome Council Member Nelson.

And of course, just for the people in the audience, this is a hybrid meeting.

If you showed up after we started, We've had Council Members Strauss, Morales, and Herbold here.

So we will go now to this item with Seattle Public Utilities.

Welcome.

Go ahead and introduce yourself to us.

Hello, Council Members and staff.

My name is Jacques Rodriguez, and I am a member of SPU's Real Property Services team.

And today, we're going to talk about a DNR aquatic lands easement.

So this legislation will accept a sanitary sewer easement from Washington State Department of Natural Resources.

A 16-inch sanitary sewer main line was installed in 2019, and the easement was executed in 2020. Great.

And will you be sharing a PowerPoint with us?

Are you already doing that?

Sorry about that.

That's OK.

We live by PowerPoints.

Must have PowerPoint.

There it is.

Great.

Looks good.

All right.

OK, so we were.

Okay, so slide number three.

So in 2017, SPU discovered a damaged sewer line running through Salmon Bay.

SPU immediately stopped using the existing sewer line and attempted an emergency repair, but was unsuccessful.

So in the image to the right, you can see the location of the leak.

This is the location directly west of Salmon Bay Bridge and Ballard Locks.

SPU explored different options and alignments for replacing the sewer line.

Ultimately, the preferred alignment was selected.

In the image to the right, you can see where the new sewer force mainline was installed.

It's this dotted yellow line.

The new pipe installation went in via horizontal directional drilling.

So SPU worked with DNR to acquire a new easement while abandoning the old sewer main.

The image to the right shows a closer view of the new easements in green.

So this is the new easement we acquired in green.

And the red one is, it's the existing easement that was abandoned.

The only funds exchanged for this new easement was limited to the DNR administrative fee of 1,510.

In summary, SPU's requested action is for council to accept this ordinance for an easement that was already executed in early 2020. Do you have any questions?

Thank you for the presentation.

Colleagues, any questions for accepting this easement?

Chair?

Yes, Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

I do have a question just about the timing of the easement as relates to when the legislation came to us.

Is that just COVID-related delays?

looks like it was executed back in 2020. Just curious about that.

And then also, and you may have already addressed this, I might've missed it.

If the existing sewer line was not being used in order to prevent sewage for entering the waterway, is there also a backup in the area that's not shown on the map?

Jacques, are you about to answer those two questions?

Could you hear them?

Yes, I can hear them.

So the first question, yes, this legislation was prepared right before the pandemic.

And because of other priorities, pandemic hit, and there was things that were kind of left behind.

So we're finally addressing some of these legislation, cleaning up property rights now.

Okay, and the second question.

The second question was just like the impacts of not using the existing line and whether or not that created any backups.

You know, I don't believe it did create any backups.

I'm trying to, not that I recall, is Cody Nelson on the line?

I sure am.

Hi, this is Cody Nelson.

I'm the project manager for the SED project.

There were not any backups, but there was a hole in the existing pipeline.

And so that was causing sewage to enter the waterway, which was the emergency situation.

And we installed the new pipe, and then we decommissioned the existing pipe.

Because the pipe was left in place, we need to keep that old easement because the pipe does go through the waterway, which is owned by Army Corps.

And just generally, when a long period of time goes between the execution of an easement and the council's action.

Does that create any issues for the city or for the property owners or is it just a bureaucratic thing that isn't a thing that we should be concerned of or look at creating structures or approaches to avoid that kind of a gap in the future?

No, this is normal.

This happens all the time.

And this just meets City of Seattle Municipal Code requirements for accepting property rights.

And so essentially, once the property right is recorded, executed and recorded, it's valid.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold.

Colleagues, any other questions before we move to accept this easement from the state government?

Okay.

I'm just double checking my colleagues online here.

I don't see anybody.

Okay, great.

So colleagues, I now move that the committee recommend the passage of Council Bill 120322, item one on our agenda.

Is there a second?

Second.

Second.

Thank you very much.

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

Any final comments?

Okay.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass Council Bill 120322?

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 that the bill pass will be sent to the next city council meeting, which is on June 14. Will the clerk please read the short title of the next agenda item into the record?

Agenda item two, council bill 120323, an ordinance relating to Seattle Public Utilities accepting two deeds for real property acquired for the purpose of installing and operating groundwater wells or waterworks to provide potable water.

For briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you, colleagues.

This bill is essentially a technical correction, which accepts two property deeds to perfect Seattle Public Utilities property rights for those two parcels originally acquired in 1986. Just want to connect with our city council central staff, Brian Goodnight, to see if he wanted to make any introductory remarks or at least confirm that he has no material concerns with this legislation.

Great.

Thank you, Chair Peterson.

I don't have any material concerns with the legislation.

Also, the only additional introductory comment that I will make is that there are no costs to the city at this time for this transaction.

The property was paid for and acquired by the city back in 1986. So, thank you.

Thank you very much.

We'll go ahead and turn it back over to Seattle Public Utilities for this presentation.

Welcome back.

Hello again.

Council members, so today we're going to talk about Glacier and Boulevard Park Wellfield parcels.

This legislation will be accepting 2Ds for real property acquisitions completed in 1986. SPU executed the real estate transaction in 1986 for the two properties purchased.

SPU has installed, tested, and has been operating the ground water wells.

SPU Real Property Services, while cleaning up property files, discovered there was no ordinance accepting these two property deeds.

The location of the parcels are outside Seattle City limits.

They're within the city of SeaTac.

The two properties the city purchased are known as Boulevard Park Well and Glacier Well.

On the image to the right, you can see the proximity of the two properties.

They are approximately one mile from each other.

Boulevard Park well is set up as a drinking water supply.

And Glacier well, on the other hand, is not used as drinking water.

It is maintained and monitored for potential future use.

They're both not used frequently and are only used for emergency purposes.

property acquisitions.

Why are we doing this now?

As we were going through our old records, we discovered that these two deeds were never accepted by ordinance.

Therefore, we're bringing them forward now to help clean up our property files.

The Seattle Water Department purchased the two properties from the Highline School District.

That was the purchase price for each of the properties.

The Boulevard Park well is approximately 50,000 square feet and Glacier well parcel is approximately 29,000 square feet.

There are several benefits to this legislation.

Accepting this ordinance establishes jurisdiction for the land conveyed by the deeds, and there will be a clear understanding of ownership between SPU and the Highline School District.

SPU Real Property Services maintains accurate property files, and this legislation will help update the status of the records.

By accepting this legislation, this will meet City of Seattle Municipal Code requirements and acceptance of these deeds would allow the water line of business to be prepared for potential future uses of the property.

Any questions?

Thank you very much, colleagues.

Any questions for Seattle Public Utilities or central staff?

All right.

Well, thank you for that presentation and thank you central staff for your analysis of it as well.

Council members, if there are no questions at this time, I'll now move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120323 item two 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?

Okay, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation to pass Council Bill 120323.

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 that the bill pass will be sent to the June 14 City Council meeting.

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

Agenda item three, INF2070, Seattle Department of Transportation, Race and Social Justice Initiative Report for briefing and discussion.

Thank you.

Oh, we've got Director Simpson of SDOT with us and her team.

So thank you for bringing this to us, the Race and Social Justice Initiative Report from the Seattle Department of Transportation.

And thanks for bringing along your team.

We'll go ahead and turn it over to Director Simpson.

Welcome, good morning.

Thank you, Council Member Peterson.

Thank you for inviting us here to share the work we've been doing to advance equity and to support the city's race and social justice initiative.

And thank you to the committee for being here.

Equity is one of SDOT's core values, and as part of that, we believe that transportation must meet the needs of communities of color and those of all incomes, ages, and abilities.

Our goal is to partner with communities to build a racially equitable and socially just transportation system.

You'll hear today about our newly launched transportation equity framework, as well as many other initiatives and programs that move us towards a more equitable system.

At this point, I'm going to turn it over to Michelle Domingo, the Director of our Office of Equity and Economic Inclusion, and the great team that we have assembled here to present the information.

Go ahead, Michelle.

Thanks, Kristen.

We'll do a round of introductions and then get into the presentation.

My name is Michelle Domingo.

I go by pronouns she, her, hers, and my racialized identity is Asian Pacific Islander, and I'm very happy to be here today.

I'm going to pass the intro to Salma Siddiq.

Good morning, all.

My name is Salma Siddiq.

I use she, her pronouns, and my racialized identity is Black.

And I pass my word on to Anya Pintak.

Thanks so much, Salma.

Good morning, Council.

My name is Anya Pintak.

I use she, her pronouns.

I identify as Asian Pacific Islander Indonesian, and I'm SDOT's Transportation Equity Program Manager.

And I'll pass my word over to Sachi Delacruz.

Good morning, council members.

My name is Sachi Dela Cruz.

I identify using she her pronouns.

I am a Latino woman specifically identifying as Dominican.

I am the contracting equity advisor specifically also overlooking the WMB portfolio.

And I will now pass my word on to Barbie Danielle.

Thank you.

Aloha, council members.

I'm Barbie Danielle DeCarlo, and I serve as RSGI Strategic Advisor in the Office of Equity and Economic Inclusion here at SDOT.

I use she, her, and we pronouns, and I'm of mixed heritage.

My racialized identity is brown, and my cultural identities are Pacific Islander and Black.

And I pass my word to Dan Henderson.

Dan Anderson, Public Engagement Manager, ESSTAT, he, him pronouns and identify racially as white, and I will pass my word back to Michelle Domingo.

Thanks, everyone.

Can I just confirm, Bill, is everyone able to see the PowerPoint?

Fantastic.

Thank you again.

Thank you, Council, for inviting us to speak with you today about the great work SDOT is doing on equity and race and social justice.

The past two years have been very challenging, and SDOT has expanded our practice of equity, both internally and externally.

We are very excited to share with you today the work our department has achieved in the past two years.

I just want to share with you that all this work has been done in a mostly telework environment during the challenges of both the pandemic and civil rights protests.

We will have time for questions, thoughts, and responses at the end.

So we kindly ask, when you have a thought or question, to please take your pen and paper and jot it down, and we will have time at the end to discuss.

Thank you for giving us the entire time allotted today to get through all of the presentation materials we have prepared for you.

Next slide, please.

Okay, so here is SDOT's vision, mission, values, and goals.

I think it's important to highlight that equity is one of SDOT's core values and goals, and to know that equity is everybody's work at SDOT.

Next slide please.

Great.

The office of equity and economic inclusion team, and the RSGI change team are presenting to Council today on all of the equity and race and social justice work for three reasons.

And you can see here the outline for our presentation today.

Our equity and RSGI presentation is an annual required deliverable to the Seattle Office of Civil Rights, or SOCR.

This presentation also serves as a pulse check on where we are with equity as a value and goal of SDOT.

And lastly, we want to celebrate all the hard work our office, the RSGI change team, and other equity advocates at SDOT have done to move the equity needle.

Next slide, please.

Okay, so to further solidify our commitment to equity, SDOT has the Office of Equity and Economic Inclusion, or OEEI, to support the entire department.

OEEI is located in the Director's Office.

Our office uses this diagram of an umbrella to show how equity is an overarching value and goal of SDOT, and it also demonstrates how OEEI serves as an equity hub for all of SDOT.

Our office is responsible for leading the strategic vision and leadership in the planning, promotion, and advancement of equity and diversity, and leads SDOT to measurable improvements.

Our office promotes and upholds equity at SDOT through internal advocacy, partnerships, and the SDOT RSGI Change Team, employee resource groups, and the Transportation Equity Work Group, and through the portfolios of WMBI, RSGI, Transportation Equity Program, EEO, and Title VI.

And from 2020 through 2021, OEEI has doubled in size to support the growing equity work portfolios.

Next slide, please.

Okay, so you see here at Seattle's Race and Social Justice Initiative.

Our office centers the City of Seattle's Race and Social Justice Initiative and all the work that we do.

As you will see highlighted in this presentation, the goals of RSGI is imbued throughout all of our equity work at SDOT.

Next slide, please.

Okay, so there are a number of equity professional development opportunities at SDOT that we offer.

SDOT does require a minimum of 2.0 RSGI training hours, which is tied to our annual E3 performance goals as a deliverable for each staff.

In 2021, we launched a pilot called the Transformational Equity Leadership Cohort, or the TELC, an equity learning and practice that is supported by a guiding council assessment.

The cohort was comprised of over 50 SDOT staff from senior team leadership, the RSGI change team, employee resource group members, and data equity leads.

Our office also offered six learning modules called Brave Spaces, Safe Spaces, which was open to all SDOT employees, teaching staff the foundational knowledge of equity.

These learning modules are available to all staff to experience again on Cornerstone.

Our employee resource groups also grew the past two years to a total of six ERGs.

The ERGs support and create space, offer a chance to network and socialize, work on professional development, and to raise awareness on relevant issues.

We also increased our offerings of EEO, Title VI, and WMBIE trainings to all of SDOT.

I'll now hand the presentation over to Salma Siddiq, SDOT's EEO, Title VI program manager.

Salma?

Thank you, Michelle.

As SDOT's Title VI and EEO Program Manager, I'm very excited to tell you more about both programs and how they function within SDOT and the City overall.

Next slide, please.

Our EEO portfolio, while reasonably new, has taken tremendous strides in developing the program.

To date, we've conducted nine EEO pieces of training, both for people and non-people managers, and training specifically with crew staff.

These trainings will be stored on Cornerstone for folk to access as needed.

We've posted and shared our EEO policy statement, our EEO plan, and other resources on how the EEO complaint process within the program works.

We continue to collaborate internally with SDOT staff, including HR, executive leadership, change team, and other ERDs.

This year, we will conduct our first internal self-assessment.

The first will be at the end of June, followed by an annual report, either in December or early January.

Next slide please.

You will hear from Anya Pentak later in the presentation about our 200 plus TEF tactics that demonstrate our commitment to serving community equitably and how our Title VI program supports the TEF implementation through federal compliance.

Title VI states that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity.

Our Title VI work ensures regular coordination and collaboration between SDOT and the Office of Civil Rights.

We submit annual reports to WSDOT every November with input from various divisions and departments, including our WMBIE program, finance and admin services, our right-of-way division, and communications division, specifically project delivery and project development.

Next slide, please.

In collaboration with the Office of Civil Rights and the Office of Immigration and Refugee Affairs, we updated and simplified our Title VI language and translated them into Seattle's top tier languages.

In 2020, the City of Seattle updated its Title VI non-discrimination notice, its Title VI plan, its Title VI complaint process, and our language access plan, which we call LAP.

The city of Seattle continues to notify the public of their rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the city's obligation to fulfill these duties through its Title VI notice of non-discrimination and federal compliance.

SDOT also has a language liaison coordinator and they recently created the term-based program, which is the official list of SDOT's translations of frequently used terms and names.

Our term base is set up to ensure consistency in translations that we produce and serves as a tool to other city departments, community-based organizations, and partner agencies to use when referring to our projects or programs.

And I'll now pass this on to Sachi De La Cruz.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you, Salma.

Again, I am the interim WEMBE advisor here at SDOT, and I'm very excited to speak with you today about some of the work that we're currently doing, as well as how we're looking to the future.

Next slide, please.

As a whole, our WMBIE program seeks to uplift women and minority-owned business participation within the department through contracts and evaluated compliance.

We really do this through two main actions.

The first, to eliminate internal barriers through policy, and we do this by fostering support for the program through training and policies within SDOT.

And the second of which is sharing resource and information with firms, and we do so by facilitating outreach within the community and supporting community members in the work that they seek to do.

Our WMBIE commitments as a whole, our first of which is the Move Seattle levy 23% Wimby goal.

Currently we are sitting at 21%, which means we have over $101 million that have gone to Wimby firms through the Move Seattle levy.

Our second is meeting the 2022 Estat Wimby goals, levy and non-levy combined.

We have a goal of 38% in consulting and 19% in purchasing.

SDOT goals are determined by using our department's estimated spend along with historical WMBIE goals and attainment with the ultimate decision for goal selection resting with the SDOT director.

We also look to share upcoming project information with the WMBIE community.

And as Michelle mentioned earlier as well, training and supporting staff in all of our WMBIE information as well as any support that they may need.

Next slide, please.

In 2021, we had a really great year.

Despite all of the challenges with the pandemic continuing, we had $88.9 million go overall spend.

20.5 million of that went to Wimby's as a whole, 15 to Wimby Primes in consulting, and 5.5 million to Wimby Primes in purchasing attaining our 19% goal for the first time in approximately three years.

So that was a very large accomplishment.

And we are very proud of all of our division heads, our program managers and all the staff that helped make that possible.

Let us stop.

Next slide, please.

And finally, looking towards the future of 2022 and beyond, one of the things that we're looking to do at SDOT in alignment with previously mentioned TEF tactics is looking at contracting equity beyond just our WMBIE commitments and looking at our WMBIE commitments as really the floor of what contracting equity can be at SDOT.

This aligns with the transportation equity framework basis of the TEF value of economic development.

Really, the broadening of contracting equity can be found in the community-guided TEF and at least seven different TEF tactics that touch on contracting equity in addition to the indirect relation and influence to other TEF tactics and values.

I'm very excited to continue this work with SDOT partners and staff and greatly appreciate your time.

I'm now going to hand it off to Anya Pintak.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Sachi.

Good morning, council members.

Again, my name is Anya Pintak, and I am the Translation Equity Program Manager.

We're going to kick this off, this section off, with a quick video.

Go ahead and play it, Bill.

Thank you.

The Stop Translation Equity Program started in 2017. We really recognize that there are a lot of inequities when we look at the translation system.

Certain neighborhoods don't have the right amount of sidewalks.

There's a lack of transit access.

And you tend to recognize that they're in neighborhoods that have historically and currently been under-invested in.

And there tends to be a lot of communities of color living in these locations and regions.

We wanted to directly work with community members when we're thinking about key equity policies, programs, and projects that as a department we should address.

The Transition Equity Framework is a community-guided document, and I like to think about it as a North Star for SDOT.

So it's a way for us to really think about what are the key equity programs, projects, and policies that our department should focus on, especially with communities that have not traditionally had a seat at the table.

Thanks so much, Bill.

You can go to the next slide.

Stop Transition Equity.

And thanks so much council members for viewing that video.

And so just a refresher, our Transition Equity Program is housed in OEEI, and I've had the great honor of supporting this work the past four years.

You can go to the next slide, please.

The Transportation Equity Program provides department-wide policy and strategic advice to ensure that we deliver an equitable transportation system that supports our BIPOC communities and those we have historically and currently underserved.

As seen in the video, our two main bodies of work in the past four years has been our partnership with SDOT's Transportation Equity Work Group, also known as the TW, to co-develop our department's first ever Transportation Equity Framework, which we lovingly call the TEF for short.

Next slide, please.

The TW is a group of 10 community members who personally identify as BIPOC and are also connected to local organizations serving communities of color and vulnerable communities.

The TW is also a unique and special community government partnership based on intentional engagement and relationship building.

We collectively co-developed the TEF and its implementation plan through a community and staff-led process via facilitated discussions, workshop, and activities.

Trust takes time, and it took us three years to co-develop the TEF and its implementation plan, which we just recently released to the public last month.

Next slide, please.

The Translation Equity Framework is one tool to transform policies, procedures, and practices to undo structural institutional racism, and it centers our city's race and social justice initiative.

It's organized into two parts.

The part one, Values and Strategies, was co-developed in 2019 and 2020, and includes 10 values identified by the TW members as key to achieving translation equity.

The two fundamental values are engagement and decision-making transparency and accountability.

Authentic and intentional community engagement and decision-making must be done with transparency and accountability to assess impact and determine whether historic inequities are being shifted.

The other eight values are once depicted in the outer circle of the visual on this slide, and includes topics such as land use, housing displacement, mobility and transportation options, and others.

Next slide, please.

The part two of the framework is the implementation plan and includes over 200 tactics, which we co design with TW members and staff in 2021 through facilitated virtual engagement.

The implementation timeline spans from 2022 to 2028 and implementation of these tactics are department wide lift.

Tactics are organized into different categories from advocacy policy program to behavior and cultural level changes such as process and practice.

On the slide are two examples of tactics from our implementation plan.

One is a policy related tactic and the other is a process and practice.

I do want to highlight that we have started to implement tactics this year, incorporating them into staff work plans and work such as the Seattle Transportation Plan and discussions related to our future transportation funding package.

Many of the tactics identified in the test are about shifting the ways we do things that we already do and won't necessarily require significant new resources, while others will require us to identify new or reprioritize funding over time, whether we absorb costs leverage existing budget or other avenues.

I'd like to emphasize, too, that this plan is a dynamic document that will be adjusted, monitored, and updated regularly.

And with that, I'll pass my word to my colleague, Barbie Danielle DeCarlo.

Aloha.

I'll talk a little bit about RSGI here at SDOT.

So Michelle mentioned the TELC, the Transformational Equity Leadership Cohort.

And the TELC has made us profoundly aware of how we've created barriers to services at SDOT.

So one profound takeaway from the COVID-19 pandemic is the power of uplifting human solidarity and the inescapable need to humanize the work we do, which is a cornerstone of equity work and practice.

So how did SDOT create space for people to share the reflections, anger, and joy?

Well, SDOT has deepened its investment in RSJ tools.

We offer spaces to acknowledge and collectively process real-time world events that impact Black Indigenous people of color in our workplace, elevating emergent equity issues and concerns to SDOT leadership, allowing us to be in authentic relationship with community and each other, and thus being intentional in the way we provide and make services accessible presently and moving forward.

SDOT has made a positive shift.

So the key determinants of this shift were based in transformative and restorative justice processes, including using the strategic questioning tool to deepen our understanding of racialized harm that impacts both BIPOC people and those who identify as white, and to undo systemic harm moving forward So strategic questioning offers an intentional collaborative inquiry process that opens up options and solutions that may have seemed unavailable before engaging in the process.

The benefits we've experienced from the talk are far reaching and have shifted our culture of work to be more meaningful and connected in the way we work with each other and ultimately with community.

And then we get engaged in conocimiento.

And conocimiento is an intentionally and deliberately making space kind of tool.

We take time to get to know ourselves through each other.

And SDOT is shifting culture and making long strides towards becoming an equitable, trustworthy agency, aligning with its own values at every level, using the conocimiento process.

And some of the feedback we received about this was it was different to illuminate how important it is to know each other as a part of racial equity work.

Let me use the circle process.

The circle process, a solid tool for relationship building, may be our most successful equity practice yet.

effective in vetting and implementing the transportation equity framework, as well as an everyday option to conducting meetings to support equity, effectiveness, excellence.

Circle Process is a restorative communication tool that allows thoughts, ideas, concerns, questions to be heard in a safe and collaborative environment.

And some feedback we've heard about SDOT engaging in Circle Process Circle processes improve our work.

Keep using it.

Makes room for everyone's voice.

People feel valued.

It removes power dynamics.

Great answers come from it.

So this post-TELC survey comment sums up how the RSGI is impacting SDOT and how SDOT impacts the RSGI.

There is a growing openness to having difficult conversations about race and equity.

The next slide, please.

The RSGI change team is comprised of 23 members from divisions across SDOT and functions through subgroups.

We have a learning and practice subgroup who develops, leads, and facilitates curriculum toward annual RSGI learning and practice.

And learning and practice, by the way, is our new word for training.

It's a new way that we talk about training.

That includes strategic questioning and circle processes and also serves to onboard new staff to RSGI and cultivate and grow the wisdom of existing staff about the future of work and how to affect change.

We have a communication subgroup and they keep equity top of mind by sharing change team activities and they lead also an annual recruitment.

Our transportation equity implementation subgroup supports divisions in achieving RSGI goals and implementing transportation equity tactics, implementing the TEF and managing up, down and laterally.

to get teams to try new tactics and do right by community.

Tri-chairs and alumni advisors lead the change team and support subgroups and engage with leadership and citywide co-chairs.

Finally, the work plan and racial equity tool subgroup collaborates with project and program managers on achieving RSGI goals through the RET development.

They were hard at work in 2021, as you'll see in the next slide, please.

So these are RETs, and RETs are racial equity toolkits.

It's a process used citywide to guide the evaluation of policies, projects, services, and budget issues to help identify and address racial equity impacts designed by Seattle's Office of Civil Rights.

The RET team includes the project manager, members of the race and social justice change team, and those with subject matter expertise in areas including equity and data.

Some of the RETs we're proud of this year are the West Seattle Bridge Program.

And I'll just add that the West Seattle Bridge RET was the first to have the circle process, engage a little bit in the circle process.

for a short time, and we found it successful.

We also worked on the 12th Avenue South Vision Zero Corridor RET this year, as well as the East Marginal Way Corridor improvements.

Mahalo for your attention, and I pass my word to Dan.

Thank you, Barbie Danielle.

Again, my name is Dan Anderson, and I manage public engagement at SDOT.

Thanks again Councilmembers for having me.

I also am a new member of SDOT's change team this year.

For public engagement, we produce SDOT materials using a transcreation philosophy.

That means we're trying to avoid rote translation from English into other languages without cultural sensitivity.

So instead, we're using native speakers and create multicultural materials to connect with people both culturally and emotionally.

and that makes sure they get the information they need and know we're here to get their feedback and talk further about our work.

SDOT has a long and productive partnership with the Department of Neighborhoods, where we center community and build lasting relationships in the communities we're working in.

The City's Community Liaison Program is a key part of this work.

SDOT's proud to fund a Community Liaison Program Manager at DLN.

and we strategically use that partnership to identify the right liaisons for the right communities at the right point in our processes to further implement RSGI.

Over the past year, we've been drafting compensation guidelines for community-based organizations who partner with us on a public engagement work, and we're doing that because we're working hard to make sure all of our efforts are relational and ongoing, especially in communities of color and immigrant and refugee communities where SDOT's working.

We continue to meet people where they are.

We put some listings here, shopping centers, community centers, places of worship, and then online forums and community meetings more so today than ever.

COVID did create challenges for us, especially with face-to-face engagement tactics, which we've used forever, really, And SDOT made sure that we evolved our digital tools over the past two years so we can meet Seattleites wherever they are, whether that's physical or virtual spaces, wherever they're gathering.

Next slide, please.

Today, we wanted to highlight one project that shows how RSJI is implemented on the ground in communities we serve.

The examples from Lake City and the Little Brook Stay Healthy Street pilot project So Stay Healthy Streets make it possible for people to walk, roll, and bike in the street.

We installed Stay Healthy Streets as part of our emergency response to the COVID pandemic starting in 2020. They also provide an opportunity to reconsider how we might improve spaces and use streets as public spaces beyond the pandemic, do community building in the right of way.

So this Stay Healthy Streets on 32nd Avenue Northeast in Lake City, It's next to Little Brook Park and just a few blocks away from Cedar Park Elementary.

The concept for it was community generated.

So this speaks to the power of our on-the-ground engagement, and it came directly from a community liaison focus group.

So again, to the power of our partnership with DLN and the community liaison program.

SDOT also worked closely and continues to work with the Lake City Collective, a community-based organization in the neighborhood, and they've helped us plan our outreach and how to design the street.

They co-led public outreach with us during the early phases and now are co-leading a visioning process that we're started, but it's really going to increase its productivity this summer.

So this is just one example I also wanted to show here with the survey was how our multicultural and trans-created materials and videos can be effective.

So we did a digital and phone survey.

And we had folks giving us feedback in English, Spanish, and Amharic.

And what we learned was that people wanted to keep the street the way it was, that they were interested in making it permanent.

So that's what we're doing with our visioning process to understand how the city community can work together further on this.

I also want to highlight one of the photos here, a beautiful new street mural.

It honors native culture and it welcomes everyone to Little Brook.

It was installed in partnership between SDOT and Lake City Collective.

With that, I would like to pass my word back to Michelle Domingo.

Thank you.

Thank you so much Dan and the whole equity team on doing a high level view of all the work we've done in the past two years.

So this slide is a resource links to detailed reports and dashboards of the equity work we've highlighted for you today.

So they are hot links so you can feel free to click those.

The future equity at SDOT involves the implementation of the transportation equity framework over the next six years.

We will also strengthen and expand cross collaboration with the RSGI change team, employee resource groups, and the transportation equity IDT to implement the transportation equity framework tactics.

We will also continue to support and strengthen the EEO and Title VI program, as well as WMBIE program.

And finally, we will expand offerings of learning and practice opportunities for RSGI and equity.

Next slide, please.

Thank you again, council for allowing our equity team to present to you today on how SDOT continues to center equity in all the work that we do.

And now we'll have time for any questions and responses you may have about our presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

really appreciate this presentation on SDOT's ongoing work to incorporate that key pillar of their mission equity.

And I know the city council is gonna be very attuned to this issue when we receive Mayor Harrell's budget for SDOT to see how resources are allocated through your 700 plus million dollar budget, both operating and capital.

turn it over to my colleagues for any questions or comments.

Council Member Morales.

Thank you, Chair.

Well, good morning.

I don't know where we are.

Good morning, everybody.

Nice to see you all.

Thank you.

I really appreciate the opportunity to hear a lot about the internal work that you're doing.

I think it is really important for creating a culture of safety and racial equity within the department.

So kudos to all of you for that work.

I'm particularly interested in the transportation equity framework that you talked about.

And I will say, I feel like I've been talking a lot about safety issues, particularly in the South End.

And so I have a few questions, if I may chair, around this particular topic.

Yes, please.

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

So, okay, so we're talking about a transportation system that supports black indigenous people of color and communities that have historically been under invested.

And I guess the first thing I'm interested in is will this translate into things like sidewalks and traffic calming and, you know, alternative modes of transportation in areas that are lacking that kind of infrastructure.

And I'm thinking particularly of District 2 and District 5. And I guess what I'm really asking is, will this, my assumption is that through this process, there will be a reprioritizing of transportation safety projects in areas of the city that are currently kind of lower in the queue for getting these kinds of investments relative to some other parts of the city.

Thank you, Council Member Morales for that question.

I'm happy to answer.

So I will say that our TEF includes safety as one of the values that have been identified by the TW members.

And we do have a series of tactics within that value that specifically call out sidewalk.

as a need.

And so we do have several tactics that have been identified that touches that.

And that is spot on in terms of implementation.

This is where we're going to really start to really assess and look at the different needs and the budget pieces too.

So I do want to call out that we do have a public dashboard that houses all of the 200 tough tactics.

And so you can actually go into that and you can see the specific tactics that have been called out under safety related to sidewalk and pedestrian infrastructure investments.

Kristen is there.

I welcome it.

Kristen would like to chime in on the response as well.

Thanks, Anya.

I think the transportation equity framework is an excellent opportunity to look at our pedestrian master plan, which is what we have been using and which does incorporate safety data, equity data, as well as destination information to help us prioritize projects.

That is a number of years old at this point, and so I think overlaying the two is really going to help us narrow in and begin to implement the equity framework using some of the information that we have.

Thank you.

That really kind of leads into my second question, which is, I hear a lot from constituents that when they're requesting a stop sign or a crosswalk or a, you know, some sort of traffic calming, that the response is either there's no budget to do that, or, you know, you should use your voice, your choice, and see if you can organize your community to get access to some resources.

Which given the district that I represent feels really inequitable to ask neighbors who are already, you know, working a few jobs and and you know, having some challenge financial challenges to now come together and organize their community and advocate and apply and all of that.

And so I'm wondering if the department has considered an approach to road safety upgrades that is just sort of baked into the processes, as opposed to requiring residents to take time to advocate for for safety in their neighborhoods.

Is there some sort of, you know, kind of rolling projects that just get the safety improvements that they need at some point?

There are a couple.

One is, as I mentioned, the pedestrian master plan helps us identify the, we have a priority investment network for sidewalks.

And that also tells us where there's an overlay between, you know, identified safety concerns and high volume destinations and equity focused geographic areas.

There's also a number of things we've done lately around safety.

So like the leading pedestrian intervals that we've been installing on signals is a, program where we're not waiting for people to request those.

We're just installing those programmatically.

Same thing with the lowered speed limits.

We just did those across the city.

So I do think you're right that there is room to continue to build systems where we don't rely on squeaky wheels.

We don't rely on people contacting us with the issues.

And so we want to continue doing that.

Okay, thank you.

And then just my last question is, as we're talking about making the streets more accommodating and safer for people with disabilities, I'm hearing from folks who really have kind of an array of issues that they're dealing with.

So for example, you know, I'm hearing from people who have mobility needs, who use a wheelchair, from folks who have vision impairments.

And so the needs are different for how to accommodate them to be able to use our streets and sidewalks differently.

And so I'm wondering how that gets taken into consideration.

For example, Has the department considered how to implement pedestrian or bicycle safety upgrades that can also accommodate disabled drivers while still putting some traffic calming measures in place for drivers who don't have disabilities?

I don't know if that's that question is making sense but you know I'm thinking particularly of Lake Washington Boulevard, where we know I'm hearing a lot from folks who want access, so that they can get outside, so that they can walk or roll without worrying about cars.

I'm also hearing from disabled drivers.

for whom that is their access to the outdoors, but they choose to drive because they don't want to roll.

And so I'm just trying to understand if there is a way to accommodate the array of needs and still provide that access and that ability to increase the ways to get around for people who aren't in a car.

I think many times yes, sometimes no, which is probably not a very satisfactory answer.

But what I want to highlight from what you were saying and from what Anya has been experiencing and what Dan talked about in terms of community engagement is we can't do anything until we hear what people need and what they want and how they want to use their streets and access the things in their neighborhood and travel through their community.

And that's really the foundation where we need to be listening really to what people need to do, what their lived experience tells them is a good solution, and then we need to bring our expertise to that to combine our understanding that they're bringing and what their needs are with our tools that we have available to transform the streetscape.

Yeah, I mean I guess I'm thinking about, I think it's JFK Drive in San Francisco and the Golden Gate Park where you can drive on that street but only if you're disabled, right, you have to have the disabled placard enable in order to be able to use the road, otherwise it is for people who are using a different mode of transportation.

So anyway, thank you.

I appreciate all of your time.

This is big work, and I know the shift that you're trying to make is a big shift, but I really appreciate hearing about all the steps that you're taking and all the work that's going into thinking differently about how you make transportation policy decisions so that it is more equitable, really appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you Councilmember Morales and we've got a couple other council members in the queue and I just want to echo that that point you're making I know I had a similar situation with the nearly 1000 low income BIPOC residents at Magnuson Park in terms of trying to get sidewalk improvements and a crosswalk and there was certain data put in there for their decision-making, but it wasn't clear that the low income and equity data was completely baked in yet.

And I'm happy to, what's in district two to accompany you on a walking tour of some of the areas that you're most concerned about.

Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, Chair.

I just wanted to lift up and agree with everything that Council Member Morales just said, and also thank all of the presenters for taking the time, not only to present, but the immense amount of time to develop all of these practices and policies.

This is a lot of work.

And so thank you for using your time and energy to do this.

I'm just gonna piggyback on what Council Member Morales said, because during office hours, which I hold every week, the number one request I get Well, it's usually about homelessness, to be honest.

And the second one is for pedestrian safety, whether it's traffic circle.

I've had this conversation so many times.

Director Simpson knows my nuanced opinions about traffic circles and four-way stops and all of these improvements that we need to make to our streetscape to make it easier to walk, roll, run, everything because I still drive a 1972 Ford pickup from time to time, and that thing gets to zero to 60 in about 10 minutes.

And that's very different from the cars that we drive today, which are zero to 60 in two seconds.

And that ability to maneuver around tight turns at higher rates of speed is why people are asking for more lighted crosswalks, more stop signs, more speed humps.

more of all of these things.

And what I do know is that Council Member Morales and myself, we have very different districts.

And in my district, I have a lot of people who have the time to come to office hours and make these requests of me.

And Director Simpson's seen my long list.

I think there's at least 20 or 30 places in my district that have made these requests.

The point that I'll end with is just relying on your voice and your choice is is not enough.

And I, we all need a different habit.

And so, just wanted to piggyback off of the great words Councilmember Morales, and above all else, thank you for your work.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Colleagues, any other questions or comments for our colleagues at SDOT?

Councilmember Herbold, please.

Just want to thank folks at SDOT for initiating the RET, the Racial Equity Toolkit reviews for the Reconnecting West Seattle projects.

They have definitely served the impacted areas very well, impacted areas in detour routes that are primarily community.

And so I just want to say thank you to the BIPOC communities and really, really appreciate the focus and attention and the resources.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council member.

Colleagues any final comments or questions before we Say goodbye to this team at

Thank you for having us and we look forward to also hearing about the sound transit item.

Excellent.

All right, thank you everybody.

Appreciate it.

Colleagues, we're gonna move on to a last item, which will take up about an hour of time today, I imagine.

So will the clerk please read the title of the next agenda item into the record?

Agenda item four, resolution 32055, a resolution relating to Sound Transit, providing recommendations to the Sound Transit Board as to the selection of the preferred alternative for the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions Project to be studied in the final environmental impact statement for briefing and discussion.

Thank you.

Colleagues, as you know, an aspirational goal of this joint resolution with the executive is to articulate any unified recommendations for the West Seattle Ballard Link extension routes and locations of the stations.

I wanna thank all the stakeholders who have been providing ongoing input thus far, including the people who signed up for public comment today.

Several people have sent emails as well.

Today will be the first of two discussions we'll have for this resolution from Mayor Harrell.

The public will be invited back for a second discussion to provide additional public comment and all council members will once again be invited to another committee meeting so we can keep talking about this resolution.

Maybe there'll be some, some additional thoughts between now and then as well.

So I want to welcome, we've got a dream team here.

We've got Marshall Foster and Sarah Maxana.

Marshall Foster is the city's designated representative from the executive, Sarah Maxana from SDOT.

And we also have Calvin Chow, who is our transportation expert on the city council central staff.

And just want to remind folks here, we do have, you know, the hybrid meeting going on.

So we've got some council members in person, some council members on zoom.

We are In addition to the regular members of the Transportation Committee, we invited everybody.

We've had some other council members attend a previous meeting.

I'm sure we'll have some others at the next meeting, and today we are joined by Council Member Sarah Nelson, so welcome.

Okay, well let's, I wanted to give Calvin Chow from City Council Central staff an opportunity if you wanted to provide any context or discuss any parts of your, highlight any parts of the memo that you circulated.

I know councilmember, I think it's a long presentation and I'm happy to work with any council members, you know, following this meeting as well.

So maybe let's just jump to the presentation and go from there.

Thank you very much.

And that's a good point.

Council members, as you do have comments after this meeting, please go ahead and connect with Calvin Chow.

All right.

Well, welcome Marshall and Sarah.

Thank you very much.

Chair Peterson, council members.

It's great to be with you.

So I will just start with a couple of quick opening comments, and then I'm going to turn it over to Sarah, who has a really thorough presentation of everything that went into the recommendation that's in front of you.

First off, I just want to emphasize, you know, this resolution is intended to really provide the city a clear opportunity to articulate its goals and vision for West Seattle and Ballard Link extensions.

It's intended to be a tool to inform Sound Transit's decisions.

around which alternatives will advance into the final environmental impact statement.

As part of that, I think it's important to emphasize as we go into it, these are not final decisions.

Once the Sound Transit Board has decided which alternatives to advance as preferred alternatives, there's a full additional year of in-depth environmental analysis, assessment of impacts, development of mitigation plans for the entire suite of alternatives that are in the environmental document.

So I just want to emphasize that.

Why are we bringing forward this resolution?

A critical piece of this is to provide clarity and transparency to the community, as well as all of our partners around ST3 in terms of what the city's goals and vision are, and how those translate into specific choices around the alternatives.

We are at a point many years of work behind us where we have to start making some of the hard decisions about which specific options we think are preferred.

Recognizing that there are real trade-offs, significant ones, and I think you're hearing about some of those in the public comment today.

We're very aware of those and we're committed.

Really, the key thing about these decisions is it allows us to follow through then on the intensive work with Sound Transit to mitigate those impacts as we advance the work.

And then the last point I'll just make is just how important it is both for the community to understand where we are, but also in as partners to sound transit to get to some early decisions.

that are durable and allow us to move forward with some clarity as to how we would like to see the system built to ensure we can help streamline the delivery and permitting process and ultimately help to control costs for sound transit.

That is a critical priority for everyone involved in the SD3 program, including the city.

So with that, I'll turn it over to Sarah who will walk you through the presentation.

Thank you.

Ask Bill to pull it up.

Thank you so much.

So thank you for having us here today.

We do have a very meaty presentation to get through.

We will do our best to move briskly through it, pausing periodically for discussion.

Go ahead to the next slide, please.

As Marshall laid out, the council resolution is really meant to advance one vision for the West Seattle Ballard Link Extension Project.

to really articulate at this juncture in the process, the city's vision for where the system should be built.

Go ahead to the next slide.

Today's presentation is broken out into a little bit of background on the system and on the work that has been done over the last several years.

But then the meat of the presentation will be on the recommendation that is laid out in the council resolution.

For each of the four segments laid out there, there'll be an overview, of the rationale behind the position, some of the feedback that we've heard from community, as well as some of the next steps that the city would like to see take place, and then a pause for discussion.

So we don't have to wait all the way until the end to come back to questions about some of the earlier segments.

And then we'll wrap up with some next steps, including discussion of the refinements to the DEIS alternatives that have been discussed, and then next steps for the board action and the final EIS.

Next slide, please.

Thank you.

So first background.

Go ahead.

Next slide.

So the overview of the project, I think everyone on council and in the city that has been engaged with this project appreciates that the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extension Project is one of the largest, if not the largest infrastructure project in the city's history at over $12 billion.

It has the potential for tremendous transformation through our neighborhoods, giving improved access and mobility to communities throughout the city to the entire region.

But at the same time, it presents very significant construction and related impacts to existing communities, as well as permanent changes to how those communities function with their new stations.

The project includes over 12 miles of new light rail track, 13 newer expanded stations, a new second light rail only transit tunnel downtown, and two water crossings.

Next slide.

Of important note is that this is not West Seattle to Ballard.

This is two separate projects, two separate extensions of the regional system.

The West Seattle link extension is an extension of the line three that will eventually extend from Alaska Junction in West Seattle through the existing downtown tunnel and then up to Everett.

Meanwhile, the Ballard link extension will go from with an extension of the line one in the regional system, and it will go from Ballard Station down through a new transit tunnel through downtown and then continue on through the Rainier Valley, the existing system all the way down to Tacoma.

Next slide, please.

Thank you.

Where we are in the broader process.

So as Marshall mentioned, there has been years of work that has already gotten us to this point and many years ahead of us still.

The voters approved this package as part of Sound Transit 3 in 2016. The system will be delivered phased in the 2030s And we are at the tail end of the planning phase.

The planning phase is marked most notably by the environmental review process.

And we are just at the end of the draft environmental review that ended earlier this year.

And the Sound Transit Board will be confirming or modifying the preferred alternative for study in the final EIS that will take place over the next year.

We expect the final EIS in 2023. The board will then select a project to be built.

And then there'll be a federal record of decision in 2023 or possibly 2024. That work will all be followed by a city council action as well to adopt that project.

And that action is necessary in order for the city to be able to permit the eventual project through the city.

Next slide.

Thank you.

So the next several slides just go through at a very high level, the key inputs that went into the city recommendation.

So one enormous input from earlier this year was the DEIS review, the draft environmental review.

We had over 100 subject matter experts from across 15 departments in the city that reviewed and commented on the 8,000 plus pages of the draft environmental document.

In April, we transmitted to Sound Transit over 1,500 technical comments on the DEIS, as well as a cover letter that summarized our key findings and recommendations.

Next slide.

During that time, Sound Transit has done a tremendous amount of engagement throughout the system and throughout the city.

They've provided briefings, including to city council in both February and April, that really presented information about the alternatives that are in the draft EIS.

So this image is from the council presentation in February that showed for the inner bay, south inner bay, some comparison across the alternatives of key on key drivers or key differentiators.

They also convened community advisory groups, as well as briefings throughout the system.

Next slide.

The city partnered with Sound Transit throughout that engagement effort, as well as participated in some city-led engagement and community-led engagement that included briefings, workshops, one-on-one meetings, and then a partnership with Sound Transit and the Department of Neighborhoods Community Liaison Cohort on the ground working with businesses and communities, particularly in the racial equity toolkit identified communities of Chinatown International District and Delridge.

The city aims through all of this engagement to help inform decisions that are centered in racial equity and co-created and truth-checked with community.

Next slide, please.

Thank you.

Additional background still, what is feeding into this city recommendation?

The city stood up four segment teams corresponding to the segments that will walkthrough today and that also corresponded to how Sound Transit organized the community process, the segments of West Seattle and Duwamish, CID Soto, downtown, and then Ballard and Interbay.

The city stood up teams to evaluate the DEIS alternatives in each segment to identify key differentiators that really helped understand the trade-offs between the alternatives or across the alternatives and to develop recommendations based on the areas of consensus or discuss areas of disagreement and then finally highlight places in which a recommendation couldn't be reached.

The segment teams included representation from nine city departments who all have a key role or are implicated in the delivery of this project.

Next slide.

From all of that work, the community engagement, the DEIS review, the segment teamwork, the city team identified five key values that both furthered values that the city holds in all of our long-term planning documents, but really also served as ways to understand and differentiate the opportunities and drawbacks associated with these different alternatives.

To outline them quickly, racial equity, this is really informed by the multi-year interagency racial equity toolkit that we are doing with Sound Transit.

This is one of the first racial equity toolkits that's being done in partnership with another agency, and it is being done over the entirety of the project.

So started back in alternatives development in 2017, And for every phase of work, there is a new publication of a racial equity toolkit in a draft form with comments and then a final form.

And we've continued that partnership throughout.

A second core value, safety and user experience.

Really looking to put the stations where they make sense from the user's experience.

Really trying to move forward with our Vision Zero goals as a city.

and ensure that these stations are located and designed in a way that assures safe access and circulation that minimizes pedestrian risk.

The third core value is a rather large bucket community that is really looking to further community priorities and minimize harm to community.

So this is done through minimizing residential and business displacement, minimizing impacts to existing neighborhood assets, and really maximizing opportunities to further equitable TOD or other community identified priorities.

The fourth core value, environmental protection, really looking to minimize impacts to sensitive environmental areas.

And the fifth, the financial stewardship, looking to be responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars by seeking the highest benefit for dollars spent and helping keep the project on time and under budget.

Now, the interplay of all of these five values together, and as we'll highlight through each segment, you'll see that there are some alternatives will further two or three of the values and other alternatives that might further the other.

So this is all a process of trade-off and understanding how can we best maximize the benefit and access to the system while minimizing impact and harm.

Next slide, please.

Thank you.

So a word on impacts.

Just want to acknowledge upfront that this project is impactful.

This project is 12 miles of new light rail track that is being built through a city that is already built out through existing neighborhoods.

There are impacts that are identified through the DEIS and that have been discussed throughout on land use, transportation noise, aesthetics.

There are property implications.

There are thousands of potential parcels that could be impacted, could need to be acquired because of this project.

Complete acquisitions will result in displacement of residences and businesses.

The city has a key role in advocating for alternatives that minimize these impacts.

For property impacts, there are specific roles that the Sound Transit has to comply with to mitigate those impacts, to provide just compensation, to provide replacement housing and business reestablishment programs.

And Sound Transit has begun that outreach to potentially impacted properties, residents, and business owners.

The city will continue to work with Sound Transit to ensure that appropriate mitigation is applied.

But just one caveat, I guess, before we go into each segment is that a case can be made based exclusively on impacts against any of the alternatives that are being proposed right now, and that the presentation today and the recommendation from the city is really trying to find that balance of how can we maximize the benefit, maximize access, while minimizing the impacts, but acknowledge that the impacts are going to be there, and we need to work in partnership with community, with Sound Transit, with other partners to minimize, avoid, and mitigate those impacts.

Next slide.

And so we're going to go into the recommendation that is outlined in the council ordinance.

We'll walk through each of the segments, starting with West Seattle and the Duwamish area.

For each segment, we will talk about the recommendation itself, rationale based on those five core values.

We'll have a little bit on what we've heard from the engagement process so far, and then a slide on additional work needed in each of the segments.

We'll then pause at the end of each of those four segments for an opportunity for discussion.

And while I'll be the one that's kind of flying through these slides quickly, I will also be pausing occasionally and will encourage Marshall to intervene at any point to add additional content.

So let's start with West Seattle segments.

This includes in the DEIS alternatives, the segment for West Seattle Junction, for Delridge, and for the Duwamish Water Crossing.

Next slide.

So starting with the West Seattle Junction segment, this includes the Alaska Junction Station and the Avalon Station.

The recommendation from the city is for WSJ 5, that is the medium tunnel to Alaska Junction Station at 41st Street Southwest with a retained cut Avalon Station.

Go ahead to the next slide.

Thank you.

The rationale for this is from a safety and user experience standpoint to avoid the sightline obstructions during operation.

And so this image presents a rendering of what we're trying to avoid.

This is an image of WSJ1, which is one of the elevated alternatives that's in the DEIS that would create permanent sightline obstructions that would impact safety for all roadway users.

In addition, from a rationale, from a community standpoint, avoids the numerous impacts associated with an elevated guideway through an existing residential neighborhood, including noise, aesthetics, and again, the safety considerations.

And from a financial stewardship standpoint, the medium tunnel alternative offers the benefits of a tunnel alignment at a comparable cost of the other DEIS elevated alternatives.

Go ahead to the next slide.

So again, this is a rendering of what we're trying to avoid.

This is a picture that would show an elevated structure and the impacts associated with it.

What we've heard from community is strong support for the tunnel.

We've heard about concerns for the impacts of an elevated guideway, including visual and noise during construction, development constraints due to the column safety due to the sightline obstructions, as well as concerns about construction impacts and to operations and character of the business district.

Go to the next slide.

So moving to the Delridge segment, and we will take a little bit of extra time with this segment because it is one of our priority communities, as well as because there has been just a tremendous amount of community discussion and deliberation about the alternatives.

The recommendation is for alternative Del 6. This is the elevated lower height Delridge station at Andover.

One thing to note is that there are really three groupings of station alternatives in Delridge.

There is the Andover, and that's noted in the green dot that you see in the image.

There are the Delridge Way alternatives, that's Del 3 and Del 4, and then the Dakota Street alternatives, Del 1 and Del 2. And of note is that for all of these stations, while they are a couple blocks apart, but for all of the stations, the vast majority of riders are going to be accessing the station from the south by bus.

In particular, the rep priority communities that live further south a half mile or further south of the station are really going to be accessing the station by bus.

And so of critical importance is thinking about not so much where the station is located in that North Delridge area, but really about how does that bus rail integration work so that we are offering that seamless and safe experience for users of the system.

Next slide, please.

Thank you.

So this image provides an aerial view of the Delridge Valley.

To the right, the system comes in from the Duwamish Water Crossing and exits to the left towards tunnels and elevated to West Seattle Junction.

You see in the middle, Delridge Options 1A, 1B, 2B, 2A at Dakota Street.

You see a Delridge three and four on the Delridge way alternatives.

And then on the furthest right or furthest North, you see Dell five and Dell six, which are the Andover options.

And it's Dell six that would connect to the medium tunnel.

That is the recommendation of the city at this, at this point of note is that there are tremendous differences in some of these alternatives and different opportunities that present themselves for each.

The two key priorities coming out of the racial equity toolkit work that we've done in the Delridge community are to provide for that excellent bus rail integration as noted because most of the community members that are coming from further south are going to be accessing the station by bus.

But two, to minimize displacement and create opportunities for equitable TOD.

One thing to note is that the Andover option, the Del 6 alternative that is the city recommendation at this point, has the lowest residential displacement of all of the Delridge options and has comparable business displacement to some of the other options and actually significantly less than some of the alternatives that are on the table.

Andover expects about 200 residential displacements.

The other alternatives are all 320 to 600 residential units that would be displaced and businesses that would be 35 displaced with the Andover The other options range from 30 to 60.

Thank you.

And I do want to announce that Council Member Andrew Lewis has joined us.

Please continue.

So the rationale for this recommendation, and I just want to pause and take a note that a lot of time and effort has gone into this particular segment because all of these alternatives are impactful.

And all of the alternatives have opportunities and drawbacks associated with them.

One key driver was looking from the community standpoint to avoid the effects of a tall guideway, including displacements and visual impacts over the residential community.

And so actually, if I could ask you to go back to the previous slide very quickly, you notice that the Andover options that then skirt along the new core steel property before moving into the West Seattle Junction avoid the elevated structure over the existing residential community, whereas the The preferred alternative in the DEIS, which is noted in pink, that is the Dakota Street alternative, would displace two to three square blocks of existing residential residences and would create this very high elevated guideway over that neighborhood.

Go ahead to the next slide again.

This picture shows a rendering of what the Delridge Way alternatives could look like.

Again, showing the image of an elevated guideway through a residential neighborhood, creating shadows and sightline obstructions for that place where folks would be exiting the buses and getting onto the system.

So this is what we're looking to avoid with the Delridge 6 option.

From the financial stewardship as well, the Del 6 alternative links to that medium tunnel, which provides for a roughly $500 million savings to the system.

Go to the next slide.

What we've heard from community, minimizing displacement while maximizing opportunity for community-driven equitable TOD.

And so with that, we will be looking for opportunities if the Andover station moves forward to create a meaningful node there and to provide for some of that opportunity for affordable housing and other neighborhood amenities that have been identified in the North Delridge Action Plan.

We've heard the need for additional engagement with the identified communities further south in the corridor And then again, really to prioritize that seamless bus rail integration.

So making sure that folks can exit the bus and get onto the light rail system in a safe manner.

Thank you.

We do identify some additional work that needs to happen between the DEIS and the FEIS.

There's the additional engagement that was mentioned.

Ensuring safe pedestrian access and seamless bus rail integration.

This has some challenges at the Andover site, and so we are actively working with Sound Transit, and Sound Transit has already put on the table some refinements to the Andover station that would provide for safer pedestrian access from south of Andover.

And we're also interested in exploring some strategies to minimize the pedestrian freight conflict, recognizing that there's a lot of traffic that's going through that area right now, and we want to ensure that the long-term built scenario of that node would be safe and prioritizing that safe pedestrian access.

We'll be looking again to minimize displacement while maximizing opportunity for that equitable TOD.

And we'll also in all scenarios be looking for strategies consistent with city code, but consistent with what we've heard from community to prioritize the protection and long-term restoration of Longfellow Creek.

Next slide.

So the final segment in the Duwamish West Seattle area is the Duwamish Water Crossing.

The recommendation here is alternative Duwamish 1A for the South Crossing.

This is currently the preferred alternative identified in the DEIS.

Go ahead to the next slide.

So the rationale for this recommendation is that there are alternatives that are the South Crossing, which is just south of the existing West Seattle Bridge structure, There's also an alternative that is north of that structure, the North Crossing, and that the DEIS identified that the impacts to the North Crossing alternative to the maritime businesses would be unmitigable, that it would not be possible to relocate and to mitigate the impacts to those sensitive businesses.

But of important note, the South Crossing does come with environmental and community impacts that were identified in the DEIS and that we've certainly heard during community engagement, including the significant adverse impacts at Pigeon Point, and we'll be working with Sound Transit to demonstrate adequate avoidance and mitigation of those impacts.

Go to the next slide.

What we've heard, consistent with that rationale, concerns about the impacts to the maritime and industrial businesses, that's associated with all of the crossings, but particularly the North Crossing, concern about tribal impacts near and in the Duwamish, concerns about impacts associated with those South crossings to the West Duwamish Greenbelt, including tree loss and wildlife impacts.

We've got one last slide on this before we pause for discussion.

Additional work needed.

Under NEPA Section 4F, Sound Transit is required to mitigate those impacts to the West Duwamish Greenbelt.

Those are the impacts at Pigeon Point, including tree loss and impacts to the Blue Heron habitat that are included in this photo from the DEIS here.

We'll be working with them on that between the DEIS and the FEIS.

Sound Transit also needs to demonstrate complete slope stabilization for any steep slope impacts as it comes across the Duwamish and into Pigeon Point.

And then we will also be working to ensure compatibility with the long-term replacement for West Seattle Bridge.

I think with that we will pause for discussion.

Thank you very much.

That was very thorough in outlining the rationale for the various preferences you lifted up.

Our district council members are such a priceless resource for something like this.

They know their districts better than anybody else and have been talking to their constituents for years.

So I wanna first see if, this impacts both, especially District One, but also District Two.

Wanted to see if Council Member Herbold had any comments or questions at this point.

Sure, thanks.

Start with the...

positive first, really appreciate, as relates to the Andover Station, the attention to the need to minimize potential conflicts between pedestrians and freight movements in the station area.

Appreciate recognition that there is divided community perspective for the Duwamish Crossing and the language stating that there must be adequate mitigation of impacts to Habitat at Pigeon Point in the West Duwamish Greenbelt.

And want to say for Delridge, I do appreciate that there was additional language added to the draft resolution emphasizing how important transit access is for the area and emphasizing again, the need not only for a transit access study, but the need for additional protections for Longfellow Creek.

The environmental justice analysis in the draft EIS only goes a half a mile from the station locations, whereas the communities identified in the RET are further to the south.

As it relates to the fact that there is still a lot of concern and lack of a clear community consensus in the Delridge community about the support for D6.

All of the options, as you've said, do have clear impacts on residents and businesses.

And We have recently heard a lot of community opposition from the Youngstown community, and I wanna just reflect, now it seems like ancient history, but that option some of us worked on developing to address the concerns that we're hearing now, referred to as the purple option, weren't moved forward by the Sound Transit Board for inclusion in the draft EIS.

The route, Bell 5 and 6, do minimize impacts on the Youngstown community with stations at Andover, but we're hearing so much about other not considered to my understanding impacts to child care access, a significant impact on child care access for a peninsula that has a lot of child care needs.

a real lack of capacity.

Losing, I think it's 300 childcare spots on the peninsula would have a serious impact that I think needs to be looked at as an impact to the entire peninsula, not just sort of a localized impact that you might think of.

when you consider impacts to businesses or residents.

I think the broader impact, given capacity issues for childcare really need to be considered.

There's another, we've recently heard transitional resources.

It's another important facility that would be affected.

They offer 24 hour a day, seven, day a week services to folks who need serious mental health assistance.

They have co-located living facilities and a service center in the location.

Many of their clients are formerly homeless.

And as I understand it, there is a time-based covenant on the property that requires them to use the property.

as identified in the covenant for several decades.

So I'm just wanting to understand, you know, how, given that these alternatives have come out of a lot of work that everybody's been doing to try to minimize impacts to community and with a racial equity toolkit emphasis, but the reality is is that this is the only option that connects to the median tunnel.

So that puts us all in a position that if we are supporting the West, Seattle Junction median tunnel, then we have to support this option that has a lot of impacts that I am really concerned have not been properly analyzed.

And I'm, kinda throwing this out there, much like we have stated no preference for the options in the CID, I wanna maybe take some time over the next couple weeks to consider a similar approach for the Delridge segment.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold.

Sarah and Marshall, did you wanna respond to that?

I'll just say briefly Council member I really appreciate the the point of view on that is it is a very difficult decision and Sarah was describing one of the hardest in the whole quarter and.

That is an idea is not, it has a lot of merit it's a very difficult challenge, I will say you brought up the medium tunnel and the.

the reality of the, you know, the connection there.

That is important, but I just want to reemphasize, I think, for us, the RET analysis, the residential displacements in the Youngstown community, the impact of the aerial structure on Delridge and Genesee were really major drivers.

Obviously, those are points we can debate and discuss, but that was really what was driving that concern.

And I'll just concur that the staff work and the staff recommendation was for this alternative regardless of where it connected to.

The staff process that we went through looked at each segment in isolation first and advanced, did the pros and cons and advanced this one.

Again, as Marshall mentioned, because of those impacts associated with the elevated structure over the neighborhood.

Thanks, Sarah, I appreciate understanding that dynamic and that support for the medium tunnel did not drive the selection of this alternative.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold, and I know Calvin Chow also stands by REDI as a resource and to provide input.

Council Members, any other comments on this particular item before we move on to the next segment?

Okay, let's go ahead and move on to the next segment.

So I'll go ahead and start talking because I know what's coming up next.

We're going to move to the SOTO and CID segments that were grouped together for the purposes of the community advisory groups and that we looked at together and we'll walk you through each segment.

So starting with the SOTO segment, Go ahead to the next slide.

The alternatives all follow the same alignment but provide for slightly different configurations of the station itself.

The city recommendation is the draft recommendation is for Soto 1B.

This is the at grade South station option that would have the new station closer to Lander Street and would also move the existing station closer to Lander Street.

It would also include a new vehicular overpass at Lander and at Holgate.

The rationale for this was from a safety and user experience perspective, providing for better access from Lander Street to the station areas from a community standpoint, consistent with what we heard from the BIA and others, avoiding the displacements associated with alternatives that were further north.

Go ahead to the next slide.

What we've heard through the community advisory group process as well as through our conversations with community members, business owners, and the broader community support for this at grade south from the business community, both to improve that station access and to avoid some of the business displacements.

We have heard concern about the design of the lander overpass and reduced access to the properties that are on lander between 4th and 6th.

as well as concerns about construction impacts to businesses and mobility.

This includes not only the roadways, but also the existing buses that come through the area, as well as the Soto Trail and an opportunity to think about the impacts and the long-term restoration of the Soto Trail.

Go to the next slide.

So this, forgot to note, but most of these, almost all of these images are from the DEIS or from Sound Transit's online open house.

and the citations hopefully should be noted on each slide.

This is a cross-section of the recommended station at grade with that Lander overpass.

We do identify additional work needed to design the Holgate and Lander Street overpasses, to design them at acceptable grades for safe transport, to ensure that the intersections elevations at 4th and 6th, where those overpasses will connect to, can accommodate all vehicle types.

Then planning for the long-term mitigation and restoration of the Soto Trail as an opportunity that this project brings.

Go ahead to the next slide.

That moves us to the Chinatown International District.

Chinatown International District is one of our RET priority communities identified through that multi-year RET process with Sound Transit.

The recommendation right now is that no decision should be made on a preferred alternative at this time.

The CID, Chinatown International District, was the only segment for which a preferred alternative was not identified in advance of the DEIS for the very reason that not enough engagement had been done with community to understand the impacts and implications of these alternatives.

And we find ourselves now with additional analysis from the DEIS and additional voice from community saying that we need additional information before we can make a decision.

More, we find that more work is needed to understand the business and residential impacts, the construction and transportation impacts, and what strategies are necessary to avoid, minimize, and mitigate them.

And just of note, there are very significant cultural and racial equity impacts of any alternative through this community.

The city position or the recommended, the draft position in the council ordinance is that we must work with community to better understand the impacts, better understand how they would be mitigated, what solutions can exist before supporting a preferred alternative.

What's recommended for additional work is to advance a focused six to nine month planning process.

with the Chinatown International Community and Pioneer Square community members and other partner organizations, including, of course, Sound Transit, King County Metro, and others.

One, first, to more fully address the community's concerns with the existing alternatives and identify appropriate strategies to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the impacts associated with them.

Second, to identify possible modifications to the 4th Ave South and 5th Ave South, shallow alternatives that could reduce some of those impacts, could reduce some of that community harm and some of the costs associated with it.

And then third, to initiate a broader community development strategy discussion and discuss how this project can be a part of that that would further the right outcomes for this community and address the project's cumulative impacts and address the historic harm.

To the next slide, please.

So just a little bit of deep diving on some of the impacts and what we've heard and the rationale about the 4th Ave South and 5th Ave South alternatives.

Starting with the 5th Ave South alternatives from a safety standpoint and from a community standpoint, again, advancing those core values, hearing from community members and businesses that have voiced their very strong concerns about the significant impacts of the 5th Ave South alternatives.

including the significant permanent displacements.

And this image on this slide is a composite image of information provided at the community advisory groups about permanent displacements in the heart of the CID community.

So all of those parcels that are highlighted would be permanently displaced as a part of the Fifth Ave South alternatives.

Go ahead to the next slide.

Concerns, rationale and concerns about the 4th Ave South alternative.

So this would be a station that would be further removed from the heart of the CID community, locating it underneath the current viaduct structure and the 4th Ave South bridge.

From a safety community and stewardship standpoint, need additional information on how to avoid and mitigate the impacts to the local and regional mobility and the nine plus years of construction and road closures and the very high costs associated with these alternatives.

This picture is from the community advisory group meeting that showcases some of the partial and full road closures that are anticipated with this alternative of note.

There would be the six year closure of 4th Ave South.

That would be different staggered partial closures that would require the diversion of all of the traffic, the transit and general purpose traffic off of 4th Ave South.

onto 6th Ave through the existing community or over to 1st Ave South.

It would also include the four-year closure of the intersection of Main and 4th, and that is where all of the trolley buses that are coming from throughout the southeast of Seattle come through that intersection.

And so all of those trolley buses, which include, and other transits, which includes the 7 and the 36, which are both bus lines that are very heavily utilized by the local community, would be diverted and would have impacts for at least the four years of that full closure, as well as likely throughout the entire decade-long construction anticipated.

So looking for additional strategies to minimize, avoid, and mitigate those impacts.

What we've heard from community, if you could go to the next slide.

Thank you.

First and foremost, concern about the historic harm.

to this community from generations of government projects that have been built in the community, but not for the community.

This is one in a long line of projects, I-5, Second Ave extension, the stadiums, the first transit tunnel, the streetcar, the navigation center that have been having, and there has been cumulative impacts associated with these projects, and the community has experienced historic harm.

We have also heard that we have not heard any support for the deep alternatives.

So just as a reminder, the alternatives that are on the table for 4th Ave South and 5th Ave South have both a shallow configuration as well as a deep configuration.

The deep stations would require elevator-only access, and particularly during surge events at the stadiums would likely cause a good deal of congestion.

We've heard concerns about the 5th Ave South alternatives and their impacts to the heart of the CID community, as well as some support for the 4th Ave South alternatives, in particular because they avoid the 5th Ave South impacts, but also because it would better connect to the Pioneer Square community.

So we're going to pause there.

The next step slide was already featured up front for Chinatown International District.

I want to pause and see if Marshall wants to add anything before we open to discussion.

Just very briefly, I just want to underscore how much community engagement has taken place on this and just frankly, huge appreciation for the amount of volunteer time that this community has put into engaging with Sound Transit in the city.

a level of passion to preserve the district and to find ways of allowing the station that's needed, but to do it in a way that is far less impactful has just become, I think, kind of a paramount message that we've heard.

And so we really are working to try to open up the space to be able to do that well.

And do want to acknowledge Sound Transit has been there.

They have been listening.

They have been part of that discussion.

But a lot of it is not having had the time yet, frankly, to really do that deep dive work.

in that community, having only gotten the EIS out in January and comments in April.

Thank you very much.

Council Member Morales, did you have any comments on this one at this time?

I just want to thank the team here.

We've been in pretty regular conversation over the last few months and really appreciate your willingness to keep my office up to date on the kinds of community engagements that are happening, the kinds of interactions and conversations that are happening with Sound Transit.

I do think that you know, we know that there will be impacts regardless of which option is chosen.

And I appreciate the kind of steadfastness of your supporting the community in saying, like, we cannot make a decision right now because there is not enough information available to explain not just what the impacts of these will be fully, what they will be.

But even more importantly, what mitigation strategies are you willing to commit to Sound Transit so that we can make a decision?

And I think that's going to be the really important next six to nine month conversation.

So I just want to express my gratitude to all of you for the work that you're doing to make sure that what the community is hearing is getting as much information as possible so that they can choose which way to go.

Thank you, Council Member Morales.

I think we can move on to the next segment.

I just make one quick comment.

Sorry, Councilmember.

One thing I think it's important to also recognize is how important the connection between at this location is to the larger system.

I think people know that, but I just want to emphasize the one and the two lines need to make that connection.

The Sound Transit strategy and approach has been that that needs to happen in the CID for obvious reasons in terms of the alignment.

But I just wanted to bring that kind of bigger regional to bring that dimension into it as well.

Thank you.

Please continue.

Thank you.

So, we will, we will move through downtown now.

Um downtown while the DEIS treats downtown as one long segment with five stations.

Uh we're going to break it down for the purposes of discussion into three subsegments then the Denny and South Lake Union Station, and then the Seattle Center Station before moving into South Interbay.

So go ahead to the next slide.

Thank you.

The recommendation is for a mix and match approach.

The current DEIS alternatives, DT1 and DT2, offer different stations that provide different levels of access and benefit and certainly different impacts.

And so the The approach here is to select stations from across those two alignments, the DT1 and DT2 alternatives, that would optimize that access and benefit while minimizing impact and harm.

Next slide.

Starting with Midtown and Westlake on the south end of that segment, really going through the heart of the retail and office area of downtown, the recommendation is for the two stations on DT1.

This would be a tunnel at Midtown and a tunnel at Westlake at 5th Ave.

So starting with the rationale before moving on to what we've heard from community, this is a picture of the Midtown station at 6th.

So this is the rendering of what we're not proposing.

And from a safety and user experience, the alternative for Midtown at 5th instead of 6th would avoid pedestrian and vehicle conflicts at the Spring and Seneca I-5 ramps that are shown here in this image, as well as avoiding a very deep station at Midtown that would be elevator-only access.

As well, thinking from that safety and user experience, the Westlake Station is similar to the proposed Chinatown International District Station, is a transfer point between the 1 line, the 2 line, and the 3 line, And so thinking about that user experience, that transfer environment, there's a slightly shorter transfer distance between stations at Westlake associated with the DT1 option at Fed.

Next slide.

Thank you.

Concerns that we've heard.

Concerns about access from First Hill.

So acknowledging that First Hill was bypassed by the original construction of the current system.

and that First Hill, there are areas of First Hill that would be able to access this system and looking for opportunities to provide or improve that access.

I have also heard concerns about access to the very deep stations.

This is a picture from the DEIS of the Midtown Station at 6th that would be accessible only by elevator as the station depth would be over 200 feet deep.

We've also heard concerns about safe pedestrian access.

These are very steep slope areas of our downtown, so really wanting to ensure that we have the safest pedestrian access as possible.

Next slide to additional work needed.

This is a rendering of the Midtown Station or a map of the Midtown Station at 5th Ave that would connect to the Rapid Ride G line on Madison Street, which will be an important transfer bringing people into the system.

We're looking for opportunities to optimize connection to the RapidRide G line to ensure sufficient vertical circulation in the stations and to possibly study horizontal access from 3rd Ave.

So we would provide access to the station at a lower level that would be horizontal.

Next slide.

So moving further north in the segment to the Denny and South Lake Union stations, the recommendation is a mix and match approach where Coming from DT1, we would veer over to DT2 at Denny for the Denny station, a tunnel station at Terry Street, and then move back to DT1 for the South Lake Union tunnel station at Harrison Street.

This requires multiple mix and match refinements from what is in the DEIS currently.

Of note, both of these stations would provide access to South Lake Union, which is the fastest growing center in the entire region.

with a growth of, what is that, 5,400 housing units and nearly 40,000 jobs since 2015. Next slide, thank you.

The rationale here from a safety, community, and stewardship standpoint, this is a rendering of the recommended station for South Lake Union at Harrison and Seventh This station would optimize transit integration and safe pedestrian access from the Aurora Corridor at South Lake Union.

So all of those buses that are coming down Aurora, as well as connecting to Harrison Street, which is a transit priority corridor identified in all of the city's long-term plans.

So providing for that optimal transit integration at that point and safe access as folks are moving from the bus to the system.

From a safety and community standpoint, supporting access to the Cascade community and aligning with the Terry Avenue Green Street, that's at the Denny Station.

And then community and safety standpoint, this mix and match approach would avoid the Denny Station at Westlake.

And the Denny Station at Westlake would create an untenable multi-year construction impact to the Westlake Corridor that I think we go into in the next slide.

Yes.

So what we've heard from community, we've heard strong and consistent support for the DT1 South Lake Union at Harrison Station.

It's identified as a community preferred location as a transit hub, as well as hearing numerous concerns about access to the DT1, excuse me, DT2 South Lake Union Station at Mercer that would not have good pedestrian access.

And then concern about this alternative that we are seeking to avoid.

These are the transportation impacts associated with construction of a Denny station at Westlake.

That's the DT1 station at Westlake, which would require a four-year full closure of Westlake Ave through the heart of the Amazon campus there, would close down approximately two blocks for four years, all access to that area.

So from the general purpose traffic bike and streetcar would, and all of the existing bus lines that run through that corridor would need to be diverted elsewhere.

So this is really seeking to avoid that multi-year closure of Westlake and the multi-year closure of, complete closure of the South Lake Union streetcar.

Next slide.

Additional work needed.

So this is a map that's pulled from our South Lake Union Uptown Triangle mobility plan.

identifies this very spot as a transit hub for the long term.

So we are looking for continued study of the mix and match refinements to support this alignment.

So that requires additional work with Sound Transit and analysis to ensure that this that this mix and match alternative can work.

We're looking for of course transit integration at that South Lake Union station that will be intersecting with so many bus lines from other communities throughout the city.

We're looking to ensure functional transit during the construction area.

Then at Denny Station, really looking for providing for safe pedestrian access on both sides of Denny, which the current station alternatives do not do.

Moving on in the segment to Seattle Center, the draft recommendation is for alternative DT2, that is the Tunnel Seattle Center Station at Mercer Street.

And of note on this map, the neighborhood context, while this is called the Seattle Center Station, and of course, it is meant to provide critically needed and benefit of transit service to the highest visited location in the entire region with over 12 million visitors per year.

And of course, the city of Seattle is the primary property owner and landlord to the very many residential cultural and arts organizations that call that campus home.

But the station is also providing access to the uptown urban center.

It's one of the fastest growing urban centers in the city and in the region.

And this station is going to be providing access to that fast, rapidly growing neighborhood as well.

Next slide, please.

Rationale for this is from a community standpoint, avoiding some of the impacts, the unmitigable impacts to the sensitive users, those performing and recording organizations on the Seattle Center campus.

that would be adjacent to the alternative, the Republican alternative.

From a safety and user experience standpoint, providing access at Mercer, providing a station at Mercer would give station entrances both north and south of Mercer, which gives access both to the Seattle Center Station or to the Seattle Center Campus, excuse me, as well as safe access to the neighborhood.

So this is really about bridging both the campus and the neighborhood and making a station that would be meaningful to both.

from an environmental standpoint, avoiding the removal of legacy trees on campus that would be impacted by the Republican alternative.

And then this alternative would also provide greater TOD opportunity for some equitable development of parcels along Mercer.

To the next, what we've heard from community, and this is a picture of one of the first in-person events that we were able to do coming out of the, I guess, still during the pandemic with resident organizations and community members in Uptown and Seattle Center, we've heard a good deal of concern about the impacts to protected features, historic structures and assets on the Seattle Center campus, displacement of resident organizations during the many years of construction, concerns about both the temporary and permanent noise and vibration impacts, particularly to sensitive cultural venues that are recording and performing facilities.

And then transportation and access impacts, ensuring that there's access to the businesses and to the organizations during the construction period.

Additional work needed.

So this picture is rendering of that mix and match alignment that would go from the South Lake Union DT1 at Harrison over to the DT2 at Seattle Center at Mercer.

So additional work with Sound Transit to study that refinement.

Additional work to maintain the vehicle, mobility, capacity, business access on the Mercer Corridor, an area that has had experience with transportation impacts in the past.

And also thinking not just about mitigating impact, but mitigating the impacts of the detours themselves.

So looking at how can we create construction and access plans for those organizations and all of that traffic that comes through there.

Ensuring that we are avoiding and mitigating operational noise and vibration, meeting the standards necessary for those organizations to continue, including the Seattle Reps, Seattle Opera, King FM, and Pacific Northwest Ballet.

Sufficiently accommodating surge capacity.

So, of course, this is an area that has very large events, and so wanting to be mindful, just as we are in the Chinatown International District adjacent to those stadiums, that the station is able to accommodate the flow of pedestrian traffic coming out of those events, and then connecting to that pivotal station for transit integration at South Lake Union Harrison.

I think that closes out our downtown segment.

So look to Marshall to add additional context.

Just a quick comment.

Could you go back a slide for just a moment?

I just wanted to use that refinement idea as an example, the mix and match.

You see that green line connecting the South Lake Union and Seattle Center stations.

I think to us that's a good example of the power of making some refinements to the alternatives to help resolve some of the impacts in community.

And actually, I wanted to highlight it because it's an example of the kind of creativity I think we're looking for in the CID.

We've actually had a number of people comment on the fact that we're looking at refinements in other parts of the system, but we have yet to really look with community at refinements at the CID for that particular situation.

So I just wanted to use that as an example for that other, the previous discussion.

Thank you very much.

And I want to see if a council member Lewis has any comments or questions.

Yes.

Council member Lewis.

Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you for allowing me to come and crash the committee, so to speak, to talk about this alignment.

First, I want to start by thanking Sarah and Marshall for being really accessible throughout this process and really offering a lot of time in advance of this committee hearing to provide feedback.

And I think for this particular segment, there's a lot of alignment.

The only thing that I would flag for the South Lake Union Station is I have received a number of constituent requests to talk about potential mitigation, which is more, I think, for our relationship with Sound Transit than it is something that we ourselves are in the position to do, but I think we have an important facilitating role there where I would like to spend some time talking about how that station will interact with the neighborhood.

and some of the concerns of some of the potential businesses that could face displacement depending on how that's implemented.

I do also just want to echo the careful attention and focus that I've really appreciated from SDOT in seeking to flex on the alignment in the Uptown neighborhood.

That has been an extremely critical area of focus for our arts community tenants who are really, really concerned about the possible Republican street station.

And I appreciate very much the highlighting of Mercer, and I know that the Uptown Alliance and the community is in alignment with us on that as well.

And that is a very big priority in the city weighing in on this process for me, is to make sure that we are doing everything we can to fight for that Mercer alignment in the Uptown neighborhood.

appreciate that inclusion here and look forward to talking further, Sarah and Marshall, with some of the South Lake Union constituents on some of our alignment thoughts in that area.

Thank you, Councilmember Lewis.

Colleagues, any other questions or comments before we move on?

Okay, let's move on to the next segment.

So moving on to South Interbay and the Interbay Ballard segments, The system exits the Seattle Center Station and moves through a tunnel portal as an elevated structure then through Smith Cove.

There are some portions that would be some alternatives that would be at grade and then continuing north to alternatives that would either be elevated or tunnel up to Ballard.

And as you can sneak peek there, the red circle tells you a little bit about what's ahead for South Interbay starting there.

So the South Interbay segment, go ahead to the next slide.

Thank you.

The recommendation at this time is that there is not sufficient information in the DEIS related to some key impacts associated with the construction and the permanent operation of the elevated guideway through the South Interbay area on Elliott Avenue West and the impacts to the environmental critical area for the city to make a recommendation at this time.

The next slide will go a little bit more in depth into some of the concerns that informed that draft position.

There are three alternatives through South Interbay, SIB 1, which is currently the preferred alternative to the Gaylor Street station.

SIB 2 and SIB 3 would both have stations at Prospect Street.

The first rationale concerns about the Elliott Snake.

So this is Alternatives SIB1 and SIB2 would exit a tunnel portal at Republican and then would come out as an elevated structure that would weave across Elliott Avenue, Elliott Way, Elliott Avenue West three times in the course of a mile.

The impacts of that structure would include many columns and structures that would be placed in the right-of-way in the roadway itself permanent removal of turn lanes and sightline obstructions for all roadway users in that high volume freight corridor.

And these pictures here are pictures of existing conditions.

The picture on top is Linwood Link north of the Northgate station that shows what's called straddle bents with those columns that are placed on either side of the roadway and on the south.

This is Central Link near MLK.

showing how a column can come down and permanently remove a turn lane, and just gives a little bit of a sense of some of the sightline obstructions that can be associated with those structures.

Go ahead to the next slide.

Meanwhile, SIB 2, as it moves out of the elevated snake area, and then it would meet up where SIB 3 would come out of a prospect portal, would create significant impacts to Kinnear Park and the Southwest Queen Anne Green Belt, which is a landslide prone steep slope in an environmentally critical area.

This is a picture from the DEIS from the top of that steep slope looking down towards Elliott Avenue that gives a sense of the steepness of that slope, that landslide prone slope.

Go ahead to the next slide.

Concerns that we've heard, certainly concerns about freight mobility through this corridor.

So this is a high volume corridor.

This is an identified freight mobility corridor near industrial and maritime uses and continuing to provide for mobility through that corridor is of critical importance to that business sector.

We have heard support for the Gaylor Street-Smith Cove Station location.

And so importance is that their support for that station doesn't necessarily mean that the guideway that gets us to that station is without problems or impacts that need to still be addressed.

Go to the next slide.

So additional work needed, next steps really to get to a preferred alternative, looking to continue our work exploring refinements to address the concerns with this Elliott snake.

So looking at ways to modify the alignment so that it is not presenting quite so many impacts in the right of way.

again, crossing Elliott Ave three times in the course of a mile.

If there are any alternative advances that creates any impacts to the steep slope of Queen Anne, we'll be looking for complete slope stabilization, prioritizing to maintain capacity on Elliott Ave West during construction for users and transit, and then maintain Elliott Ave West safety lane capacity and property access issues and minimizing harm to industrial and maritime businesses throughout.

Continuing north in this corridor to the Interbay Ballard segment, this includes stations at Interbay and at Ballard.

The draft recommendation is for alternative IBB2B, which would be a retained cut Interbay station at 17th Avenue West and a tunnel alignment to the Ballard station at 15th Avenue West.

Of note, the Ballard station options that are on the table right now in the DEIS process include tunnel and elevated options at both 14th and 15th Avenue West.

And that Ballard is, by absolute numbers, the fastest growing urban village in the entire city, adding over 6,200 people since 2010. And the vast majority of that growth is happening in the heart of Ballard to the west of 15th.

and the majority of users of this transit system are expected to come by foot or bike from the west of 15th.

So rationale for this alternative from a racial equity and community standpoint, avoiding the impacts to in-water use or in-water construction with the ship canal crossing.

So looking to avoid the impacts of the elevated structure or the elevated options that would impact navigation, would impact tribal use, and would, a tunnel option would lessen the land use pressure on industrial and maritime jobs that exist east of 14th Avenue Northwest.

From a safety standpoint, user experience providing for safe access west of 15th Ave.

So again, acknowledging that this is a terminus of this line right now, there's going to be a lot of folks accessing this system from the west of 15th and wanting to provide for that safe pedestrian access.

from an environmental standpoint, avoiding in-water work in the ship canal to ensure or to lessen environmental impacts, and then from a financial stewardship standpoint, acknowledging that updated cost estimates for the system since the previous estimates in 2019 have shown that the cost difference between a tunnel and elevated options have decreased significantly, although there is still a delta for the 15th ave Northwest tunnel option.

Go ahead to the next slide.

What we've heard from community certainly very strong support for a tunnel alignment, avoiding all of those impacts of an elevated alignment.

We have heard strong support for the western most alignment.

And so right now that is the 15th Avenue Northwest, but we have heard and certainly heard during community comment today, members advocating for some of the earlier alternatives that were not moved forward in the DEIS, including options at 17th and 20th Avenue Northwest, have also heard concern from Fisherman's Terminal regarding bridge impacts on maritime dependent businesses.

This is a rendering from earlier in the alternatives analysis that showed the numerous other alternatives that had been contemplated at different points in the process.

Of note is that there is additional work that is needed in this segment.

We are looking for refinements to entrances on both sides of Market Street and 15th to provide for that safe pedestrian access there, and refinements to resolve the property impacts at the Interbay Station site.

So the Interbay Station that is proposed is the retained cut at 17th.

That is the station that connects to the tunnel portals that are on the table right now.

That station has direct impacts or direct conflict with the proposed development of a practice facility for the Seattle Storm.

It also has a conflict with the future site for a new substation for Seattle City Light.

So those are standing conflicts that we will continue to work with property owners and with Sound Transit to resolve those property conflicts.

And then of course, additional work to ensure that we are minimizing the harm to maritime businesses.

And that takes us to the end of this segment and we'll pause for Marshall, if there's anything to add.

Thank you.

Let's hear first from Council Member Strauss and then we can circle back to Council Member Lewis if he has comments on certain portions, but Council Member Strauss.

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you, Marshall and Sarah.

I know we've done some bike rides in the area.

We've had many discussions.

I may want to just update section two item H with a couple items, and I'd love to talk to you more about how we can connect what I am hearing, what you're hearing from my community, with what Sound Transit is currently looking at.

And if you could, Sarah, if you could circle back to the slide with all of the different options that had been previously discussed.

And the last meeting that we had Sound Transit here for, I shared my favorite little map, which is also a digital version.

This is Ballard as it was a city in 1907. And the current 14th Avenue station is located here.

And in this section, it's all industrial.

And what I really appreciate about your resolution is item in section one, item C.

really talking about what are the employment opportunities?

What are the housing opportunities?

What are the commercial?

Let me just, I'm just going to circle right back up here and read it, read it on the record.

Because I, I think that it really minimizing residential and business displacement and impacts to existing neighborhood assets, ensure compatibility with housing, employment, and industrial land uses.

maximize opportunities to further equitable TOD and other community identified priorities.

This is really important language and why this is so important to the Ballard and larger area community of the North End and District 6 is the 14th Avenue alignment does not fit within this within these parameters.

It's an area where we cannot add additional housing.

It's an area that does not have our commercial core.

It is an area that is geographically and physically separated from residential communities.

And so I see in the resolution that we are asking for that our preferred option of our two choices is 15th.

And I would say that from hearing from the community, this is what I'd love to work with you, Marshall and Sarah, a little bit more to understand how I can advocate for our position in a little bit more nuanced way because I saw with Smith Cove area that there were some outstanding items that needed to be identified for us to really take a position because Sound Transit is proposing things that are outside of the EIS that we are responding to.

the EIS that we're responding to changes, I would have a lot of different.

comments to provide, because on this map before us, we see 20th Avenue and 17th Avenue, which, my good old handy map, are, you know, here and here, which is in the core, historical core and current core of our commercial and residential area.

We've got two new seven-story buildings going up on Market Street that are west, well, right at 24th.

And so that's, to get to 14th, that's a 10 block, walk with a crossing of the third most used north-south corridor in the city only behind SR 99 and I-5.

So not only are we asking folks to walk 10 blocks, we're asking them to cross essentially what is the next level down from Aurora.

And that's why section 1 item C is so important.

And for me, I'm not sure that 15th is my preference.

Out of the option between 14th and 15th, absolutely.

But that's only because 14th really does not fit the needs of our community.

And so I'm not sure.

And I guess this is where I ask you.

And if you want to talk offline, I'm more than happy to.

I'd love to find out how we can work with Sound Transit for them to understand this in a really tactile way.

Because their original proposals of looking at 20th and 17th serve the community in such a more impactful way.

And honestly, I want to work as partners because it is just as important to get to the core of Ballard as it is to get to Everett and to Tacoma because this is a regional transportation network.

The only change that I'll ask, and Marshall, we can work on this more clearly, is under section two, item H, which is Interbate Ballard, if we could make reference specifically to section one, item C.

Absolutely.

Council Member, I'll just offer briefly, I do just wanna, you know, we've heard that question about the further west locations Absolutely.

Consistently and repeatedly, it's one of the most consistent things we've heard across the whole alignment.

I know Sound Transit has heard that as well.

You've heard us talk about there were some very clear scoping decisions that were made at the board that took those off the table.

The key thing that we're emphasizing, and I think it's worth saying here today, is that 15th is already an enormous compromise from where the original thinking was.

And that's not to say we should accept it, you know, to we're trying to make sure you're saying the city is compromising by having 15 that that is already, you know, far further east than we would ideally want to put up a light rail station to serve this neighborhood.

So we're very much holding a strong line that that is absolutely essential for all the reasons that Sarah described.

And of course, if the the basics of what's in the environmental document were to change, that is something we could talk about more, but we are trying to focus on advancing the program as it's been defined, but feel like 15th is really a must have for those reasons that you described.

Yes, I would maybe put it in a different way, which is that 14th is unacceptable, but I think we're both saying the same thing.

Thank you, Council Member Strauss.

Appreciate that clarity.

And Council Member Lewis, any comments or questions for this segment?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is the segment where I have kind of more extensive feedback for Sound Transit, and I've discussed a lot of those issues.

with Sarah and Marshall, so appreciate the opportunity to kind of talk about those issues here in open session.

And it particularly relates to the South Interbay segment, which is one of the locations where currently this resolution does not offer feedback on the alternatives that are indicated in the draft environmental impact statement.

I appreciate the phrasing that we've seen on slide 60 in the presentation, indicating support for the Gaylor Street Smith Cove station location.

or at least that that's something that's been heard in the community, and I appreciate that being recognized here.

I want to make sure that whatever action we take to go on the record, we're making it really clear that the absence of an explicit endorsement of the preferred alternative still endorses certain, you know, station locations and functions that we would like to see in what the ultimate alignment that is picked by Sound Transit is.

It seems, and maybe, Marshall, you can weigh in on this, that the concerns about not endorsing the preferred alternative stem from the Elliott Snake issue and wanting to put pressure on Sound Transit to revise and fix that particular design problem before we can go forward and explicitly endorse one of the options.

But I do just wanna echo and state the concerns from a lot of constituents in Queen Anne and Magnolia about a very strong preference for a Smith Cove station and the West Gaylord station.

that are indicated in the preferred alternative and making sure that we're working to, as we're pushing back on design, keep that same kind of access that will allow for expedient and efficient transfers from those stations to get to Magnolia.

and to other neighborhoods adjacent to those stations and what that alignment provides.

So I have a few more comments, but I think I'll hold there if Marshall or Sarah, you wanna comment at all on mostly what's indicated on slides 56 and 57.

briefly, I'll offer council member.

I appreciate that.

I think that, yeah, your point about the station itself, you know, makes sense to a lot of people.

I think that's shared at the city, the Gaylor Street location.

The issues, as you described it, and as Sarah presented, really are primarily around the guideway and how it's been laid out.

And that's where we, you know, fundamentally in terms of city policy feel that it's not consistent to support something like that at this point, but want to continue to work with Sound Transit and really shine a light on that Elliott Snake issue is something that needs to get resolved so that we can fully support an alternative there.

Can I ask a clarifying question to Marshall or Sarah?

Where do we anticipate the the tunnel coming out and turning into the guideway on this map.

Like at what point does this go from a tunnel to being on the surface?

Yeah, and maybe if we move, and you mean going from the downtown tunnel into South Interbay, not the Ballard Tunnel into Interbay?

Yes, from downtown into South Interbay.

So for the SIB1, which is the preferred alternative in the DEIS to Gaylor Street, the tunnel portal is at Republican Street.

And so if we go back a few slides, there might be a little bit further.

There we go.

Actually, that last one I think maybe had, no, it doesn't quite show the portal.

So actually, could you go back another couple of slides?

I think I have one that shows where the portal location is. be happy to follow up with you certainly to provide greater clarity on it.

So in this, the portals aren't identified clearly, but we could follow up with a map that does show it.

But as you see the Republican option at Seattle Center, which is that pink option down below, that continues west and would come out of a tunnel portal that is somewhere there where that gray line is.

And I unfortunately don't have in front of me exactly where that tunnel portal is.

And whereas the Mercer Station goes into the steep slope and then comes out of tunnel portal closer to Prospect Street.

So this is one thing that's not noted on the slides, but is noted in our comments and our work with Sound Transit is that in order to go from the Seattle Center Mercer Station to the Elliott Snake alignment that there would be a mix and match, a refinement that would be required there.

So we would be moving from Mercer into that Republican portal that would come out at Republican Street.

Sarah, I have the map that Sound Transit has used in their presentation, if you'd like me to put it on the screen.

That would be great.

Thank you.

There we go.

So that Republican portal on the far left lower corner is coming out at Republican and Fifth, and then moves into an elevated guideway all along Elliott Way.

That's the Elliott Snake portion.

It continues to Gaylor as an elevated structure, and then continues up to Interbay.

Whereas the, and underneath that, you can't see it because it's underneath it, but underneath it is the SIB2, which also comes out of the Republican portal, and then would actually have a station there at Prospect Street instead, and then continue in Central Interbay up 15th.

Well, okay, I appreciate getting to see this diagram again, but I think it kind of gets to one of the questions I had.

Does our endorsement of the Mercer alignment, inherently mean a lot of the issues with the Elliott snake would be avoided anyway, given that it's a tunnel until West prospect.

Cause the snake is that portion from West prospect back down Elliott way, right?

It is, but the, um, and I'll, I'll have to pull the language up, but I think this might be, if it's not explicit in the resolution, perhaps we could, uh, call for it.

The compatibility with the Seattle Center Mercer is a high priority in this recommendation and so we could look to clarify that language in the resolution if it's not there.

This is not meant to preclude at all the getting to that Gaylor Street station.

What were the implications of the tunnel in that comes out at prospect B?

for the businesses that are between Kinnear Park and West Prospect on Elliott.

Would that involve less acquisition from Sound Transit?

I'm just curious.

The main issue with that alternative that comes out at that portal that's noted there at Prospect Street is that that comes out at a location that is a very landslide prone steep slope in an environmentally critical area.

So that's really the biggest concern that the city team has had an impediment to moving forward.

That alternative is the difficulty in achieving complete slope stabilization.

Furthermore, to cite a light rail facility in an environmental critical area would be against existing city policy.

So you would need to have designation of an essential public facility, but then we would still need to work very closely with Sound Transit on that complete slope stabilization.

I want to just underscore from a geotech standpoint, the challenges associated with this slope and that the city team has very real concerns about the slope stabilization there.

All right.

Thanks for putting those concerns on the record here.

Yeah.

Thank you.

And I know council members, I really appreciate your endurance for this meeting and the thoroughness of the presentation.

on this resolution.

And do you want to, Marsha and Sarah, go through the next slides very quickly?

We will.

We will.

Which I think everybody across that's next steps.

We have just a handful left.

So we'll fly through a couple next steps quickly.

And I just want to, as we move to the next slide, while it's SDOT represented here at the table, just want to really underscore that this is a team effort.

And as we talk about geotech implications, you know, that this is SDOT, SDCI.

And certainly all of our partners at Neighborhoods and Policy and Community Development and Seattle Center and just throughout the city family.

So next steps, as Sound Transit presented to you in April, they are exploring refinement concepts, including cost savings concepts that are a response to the 2021 ST3 realignment exercise that acknowledged the increase in cost estimates for the entirety of the ST3 system.

Some of the alternatives or some of the refinements to the DEIS alternatives that are being put on the table are very drastic and would have very real implications for ridership and the efficiency and value of the system.

As a city position have discouraged scope reductions, any refinements that would generate scope reductions that would not bring commensurate benefit to the system and its riders.

or that are not consistent with what was committed to in the ballot action in 2016. We do, however, support strategies that would not reduce access to the system.

So here you have a couple of the strategies that have been put forward by Sound Transit, including a consolidation of the Denny and South Lake Union stations.

Again, this is two stations accessing the fastest growing neighborhood in the entire region.

So that would be a significant change in ridership and change to what was passed promise to the voters.

But there are also refinements that are being proposed to the station entrances that would move some of the stations out of private property, which is very expensive, into the right of way that could actually, in some cases, lead to better pedestrian access.

And so we are very interested and committed to working with Sound Transit to explore those types of refinements.

Next slide.

In addition, Sound Transit has been exploring additional refinement concepts that would provide additional benefit or reduce risk or other concerns to the system.

This includes, and the city has been very supportive of this work, including exploring the mix and match refinements that we've discussed throughout this presentation that would provide better, greater flexibility across the system, refinements to stations that would improve safe and non-motorized access.

So here is noted in this image, providing better access North and South of Andover Street for that Andover location, if that moves forward in Delridge, and then any refinements that would avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse project impacts.

I want to close out with a note about third-party funding.

The Sound Transit Board has recommended that there be the identification of third-party funds, so additional non-Sound Transit funds to supplement the core funding that was established as a part of that ST3 ballot measure.

Potential third-party funding amounts have decreased significantly, since that board action in 2019, and that is based on additional refine and cost estimatings, in particular, noting that the delta between the elevated options and the tunnel options at both West Seattle and Ballard have decreased significantly.

The city intends to help identify opportunities for third-party funding to support that work as the FEIS advances, as well as to explore other strategies to control costs, such as schedule benefits of streamlined permitting.

The city anticipates more formal commitments at the time of the FEIS and the federal record of decision in 2013 and 20, 2023 and 2024. Next slide.

So just to close things out with a quick timeline, we are here today, of course, on the 7th briefing you, the committee, on the draft city recommendations.

Later this week, the System Expansion Committee of the Sound Transit Board will be discussing the Wisbly Preferred Alternative.

Later this month, proposed second briefing to the committee on the 21st, possible council action as early as the 28th.

Moving back over to the Sound Transit Board side of the table, Sound Transit Board is anticipating additional discussion at the System Expansion Committee meeting on the 14th of July and then possible full board action on a preferred alternative for studying the FEIS as early as July 28th.

Thank you.

And I know that Sound Transit has changed their schedule in the past and maybe they'll change it again and provide us more time.

I'd be open to having the second discussion at our committee and a possible vote at a date later than June 21st, if that works well for folks to give us more time.

I do want to thank Sarah Maxanna, Marshall Foster, Calvin Chow for all your diligent work thus far.

really appreciative of the Harrell administration delivering a really solid resolution for us to work on.

And we will continue this discussion at a future committee meeting as our Seattle preferences come into focus so we can provide a unified, as much unified clarity as possible to the Sound Transit Board.

We are already ably represented by Council President Juarez and Mayor Harrell.

Colleagues, any final comments before we sign off at 12.42 p.m.?

Okay, thank you.

Well, colleagues, we know we can reach out to Sarah Marshall and Calvin, but for this meeting today, let's go ahead and adjourn.

This concludes the June 7, 2022 meeting of the Transportation Seattle Public Utilities Committee.

It's 12.42 p.m.

We anticipate our next meeting will be on Tuesday, June 21st.

Thank you, and we are adjourned.