>>> Good morning. March 21,
2023. 9:31 A.M. I'm Alex
Pedersen chair of the committee
Will the clerk call the role.
Councilmember Herbold.
>> Good morning. Here.
>> Councilmember Morales.
>> Here. Councilmember Sawant.
>> Present.
>> Councilmember Strauss.
>> Present. Chair Pedersen.
>> Present.
>> Five present.
>> Thank you. Colleagues if
there is no objection the
proposed agenda will be adopted
Hearing no objection the agenda
is adopted. Good morning.
Welcome to the transportation
and Seattle public utilities
committee and happy spring
season. I want to thank Linda
Barron and the rest of the cler
team for helping out with the
meeting. Our agenda today has
three important items for
briefing and discussion. First
on the agenda we have a joint
presentation from our city
auditor's office and Seattle
department of transportation to
hear about the process of the
2020 audit of Seattle's bridges
Second a presentation from dot
about an audit con democrat by
the federal department of
transportation and any impacts
for local projects and lastly a
presentation on potential
projects that could be funded i
transportation impact fees are
finally implemented in Seattle.
This is a -- although just thre
items, they are meaty items. It
will be a packed morning. So, w
will do our best to wrap up at
reasonable time. I will open th
general public comment period
for the transportation and
Seattle public utilities
committee. It looks like we hav
about nine people signed up
online and one person at least
here inspect the chambers. Good
morning. So, for our hybrid
meeting, we have people signed
up to give public comment onlin
and in person. And I will
moderate the public comment
period in the following manner.
I will start with the speakers
that registered online then I
will call on speakers that
signed up in counil chambers.
Public comment period will be u
to 20 minutes as usual. Each
speaker will be given two
minutes to speak. I will call o
the speakers two at a time in
the order in which registered o
the council website and on the
sign in sheet here in council
chambers. If you have not
registered to speak but would
like to, you can sign up before
the end of the public comment
period by going to the council
website at Seattle.gov/council
or using the comment sheet
toward the front of this counci
chamber. Remote speakers, when
call a speaker's name, staff
will unmute the appropriate
microphone and a prompt that yo
have been unmuted will be the
CUE that it's your turn to
speak. Press star 6 to begin
speaking. Please begin speaking
by stating your name and the
item you are addressing. Public
comments should relate to an
item on the agenda or to our
committee's overnight
responsibilities. Speakers will
hear a chime when 10 seconds ar
left. When you hear the chime,
begin to wrap up the comment. I
speakers do not end their
comment at the end of the
allotted time the speaker's
microphone will be muted to
allows us to call on the next
speaker. If you provide public
comment remotely, when you
complete, disconnect from the
line and if you plan to continu
following the meeting, do so vi
Seattle channel or the listenin
options listed on the agenda.
The regular public comment
period for this committee
meeting is now open and we will
begin with the first speaker on
the online list. Please remembe
to press star 6 before speaking
First we have Holly Golden
followed by Deb Barker. Ahead,
Holly.
>> Good morning. I'm holy Golde
commenting on transportation
impact fees on behalf of the
government affairs committee.
It's an issue I have heard a lo
about over the last several
weeks. I appreciate the
opportunity to speak today. In
short, impact fees are a bad
idea for at least five reasons.
First, the Seattle of seat is i
a mid of housing crisis. $16,00
per unit will make it more
expensive to build housing. It
could make pipeline projects
infeasible and the costs will b
passed along in higher rent.
They need to get housing prices
under control by lowering the
cost before squeezing more out
of new projects. We are in a
climate of economic uncertainty
This is not the moment to impos
new fees on development. High
cost is a problem for new
projects. And having
conversations daily about how t
keeper might alive. This is a
step in the wrong direction at
critical moment. Specifically i
third, there is a lot of
momentum around downtown
activation and revitalization.
Downtown Seattle lost 2,000
businesses since 2020. The city
needs to keep projects moving
forward, getting built and
moving forward. Changes can
trigger impact fee requirements
This will hurt small businesses
Fourth, covid is still a
consideration. Seattle's
occupancy is 50% of pre-pandemi
levels. It's difficult to
anticipate when the region is
still adjusting to a
post-pandemic normally. Fifth,
finally, this isn't the right
moment from a policy
perspective. As part of the lon
range comp plannest, the city i
overhauling the transportation
plan. If the city wants to adop
transportation impact fees it
must complete plans [ Inaudible
] Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next we have Deb
Parker followed by Tyler
Blackwell. Go ahead, Deb.
>> Hi, this is Deb barker. I'm
west Seattle resident. I want t
clarify that the west Seattle
bridge was closed for 910 days.
That is 2.5 years, not two
years, 2 1/2 years. When your
bridges -- you should know when
your bridges close for any
period of time, accurate detail
about how long something takes
or doesn't take is important.
So, I not only want to clarify
that the bridge was closed for
4910 days or 2 1/2 years but I
support bridge stabilization
measures in any way shape or
form. They are urgent. Council
and mayor get it done and get
SDOT on the right track to
repair the bridges. I support
traffic impact fees. I have
supported them for the last 15
years. Just do it. The fact tha
Seattle has left this funding
off its plate is an absolute
joke among municipalities
because they are collecting
traffic impact fees. Developers
expect it in every municipality
except for Seattle where you ca
make the big bucks. So, I
encourage approval of traffic
impact fees and quit leaving
money off the table and get
those bridges stabilized. Again
910 days the west Seattle high
bridge was closed thanks to SDO
for getting it back open and
thank you council members for
supporting bridge repairs.
Thanks.
>> Thank you. Next we have Tyle
Blackwell followed by Jesse
Simpson. Go ahead, Tyler.
>> Good morning. My name is
Tyler Blackwell. I am commentin
on the 2020 bridge audit on
behalf of the Soto business
improvement area. We strongly
urge the Seattle City Council t
take immediate action to
improving the aging bridge
infrastructure. It represents
hundreds of businesses south of
downtown. Our mission is to
advocate for a clean, safe and
connected neighborhood. Bridges
are an important part in how
people and goods move through
SOTO as well as connect with
other parts of the city.
According to the 2020 bridge
audit, the SOTOBIA is Thome
several bridges and in proximit
to several others rated as fair
We experience the impacts to th
west Seattle bridge and swing
bridge failures and long
advocated for the necessary
improvements to be made on the
fourth avenue bridge. We are
familiar with how vital bridge
maintenance is to protecting
human lines and helping the
economy recover. The SOTOBIA
encourage the city of Seattle t
increase funneling for proper
bridge maintenance. Thank you
for your time and consideration
on these matters.
>> Thank you.
>> Next we have Jesse Simpson
followed by Colleen. Go ahead,
is Jesse.
>> Good morning, chair Pedersen
members of the committee. I'm
policy manager for the housing
development consortium. We
represent all of the nonprofit
affordable housing develop he
was in the region as well as
associated architects,
contractors and funders. Here
today to testify about the
concerns that HDC has about the
proposed transportation impact
fees to overall housing
production and funding for
affordable housing through
housing affordability. HDC
signed on to a letter asking yo
to delay implementation of the
proposed impact fees to engage
in additional stakeholder
process and to align any
proposed impact fees with the
adoption of the -- with the
renewal of the move Seattle
levies. We know the housing
affordability is worse than
ever. We need all hands on deck
to accelerate housing
production, increase funding fo
affordable housing and reduce
the cost and time it takes to
build new homes. Impact fees
directly increase the cost to
build homes and have the
potential to reduce overall
housing production. Also furthe
reduce housing affordability
fees generating over $75 millio
per year for affordable homes.
We ask you to delay any
implementation of transportatio
impact fees. Thanks for the
opportunity to testify.
>> Thank you. Next we have
Colleen followed by Sandy. Go
ahead, Colleen.
>> Good morning, City Council
and chair Pedersen. I am
representing Northeast Seattle
community clubs. A group of us
community leaders toured the
five corners development
intersection at Northeast 45th
and U village perimeter with
director on his staff February
13th. We thought it would last
30 minutes. It took two hours.
Why the city needed impact fees
for transportation. Over 1200
new residential units were adde
in the last 18 months by
piecemeal builders on congested
streets. Another 2,000 units
will be added at the safe way
lot and student housing at
Memorial Drive. The impacts of
all of these developments
created unsafe conditions on
sidewalks and for pedestrians
that -- there was no mid
corridor crosswalks on union ba
place. The director photographe
and said it is not in the
budget. [ Inaudible ] No money
for that. No money for bikers.
No money for METRO to put a bus
stop to Light-rail. The list
goes on and on. [ Inaudible ]
Shortfalls created by city
rezones and creating wealth for
developers and sticking
taxpayers for the bills are not
doing it at all let alone the
potholes and wear and tear on
construction. It's time the
impact fees are added to
developers. They build up in a
piecemeal way to avoid making
improvements then leave town
sticking us with their profits
sticking us to pay the bills.
The tax burden is outrageous.
The social security income does
not meet the tax that they have
to pay. They can't afford it.
It's only fair that city
residents, land owners and
developments such as safe way
pay a small fee for them to
extract profit on their land
sales and impact fees are the
way to accommodate that.
>> Thank you very much.
>> All callers feel free to sen
an E-mail of your comments as
well. Next we have Sandy and
Alicia. Go ahead, Sandy.
>> Good morning. Can you hear
me?
>> Yes. Speak up.
>> Hi, yes, sorry. Good morning
This is Sandy I support the
transportation impact fee. As w
welcome new housing, we need to
insure that the infrastructure
keeps up. And that it's paid fo
by diverse sources rather than
increasing housing costs throug
property taxes. I lived in Rome
Italy for many years. The city'
3 million people still rely on
aqua ducts and roads that were
built over 2,000 years ago.
Seattle's infrastructure is muc
less robust and needs to be
upgraded to meet the demands an
strains of new density. Please
join more than 70 other
Washington cities in
implementing this common sense
fee which ensures that
development helps pay for the
infrastructure required to add
new homes. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next we have
Alicia Ruiz followed by.
>> Good morning, chair Pedersen
and members of the commute. I a
here representing the master
builders association of King an
Snohomish county and over 2600
members. Today you will hear
about some really cool things
that these funds from the
transportation impact fee will
pay for. But I need to ask you
to stop and ask yourselves at
what cost. What are you willing
to risk to make this happen? I
will tell you, it's housing. Yo
are going to risk housing? Are
you prepared for that? In the
past two years I have been
screaming from the rooftops tha
town homes are in trouble. I
hear in response that's not
possible. I see five town home
projects when I drive home from
work. Yes, well, those projects
were permitted one to two years
ago and we are building through
that pipeline but the pipeline
is running drive. There were
four town home permit
applications in January. Yes,
four. Before MHA, we averaged
between 45 and 50 town home
applications per month. The MHA
is slowly killing town homes
because projects aren't
pencilling. Builders stop
building them. The same with th
impact fee. How account city
call for more affordable housin
when they make housing more
expensive.
>> Thank you.
>> The last online speaker is
TAJIL. Go ahead.
>> Actually they are not
present. We will switch to the
in person speakers. Welcome
Patrick Foley. Either microphon
should work and go ahead and
pull it very close to yourself
so we can hear you.
>> Good morning, councilmember
Pedersen. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak today I am
Patrick Foley, doe founder and
managing partner of lake union
partners, a Seattle based
company, few independents left
in the city doing work. We are
mostly known -- started in 2009
known for doing mixed income
development, mostly in Seattle
and we do a lot of historic
preservation as well. We are
known for doing a lot of the
work at 23rd and union, Midtown
square and three other projects
at that intersection. I
highlight those and speaking
about transportation impact
fees. I highlight those because
that is the heart of the black
community in Seattle. Really
important development. We
brought a lot of members of the
community in to work with us,
participate in the project and
we transacted 20% of the block
to the land trust so they could
build 100% affordable project
owned by the black community an
that project is being built now
Our finished combined the two
projects together are about
almost 600 or close to 578 unit
total. Across the block we have
half that housing is affordable
because of our ability go in an
transact and do that work. My
concern and why I'm speaking
against transportation impact
fees, if the fees proposed toda
were in place then we wouldn't
have been able to do the
project. It would have added 8
to $10 million in costs. We hav
also given opportunities for
people to own the retail spaces
from that community. That would
not have happened. I'm speaking
out that these kinds of things
can't move forward if we keep
adding costs. Affordable
housing, you hear everyone talk
about it. If you are inser in
your desire to bring affordable
housing, you will move again
these fees forward. We want to
invest in more preservation
downtown but we won't be able
to. Hanks for hearing me out.
Appreciate it.
>> Thank you for coming down
here.
>> Okay, colleagues, that
concludes the public speakers.
So, we will go ahead and close
the public comment period. I
want to thank all the public
commenters who signed up to
speak and those who came in
person, appreciate it. We will
move on to the first item on ou
agenda. Will the clerk please
read the full title of the firs
agenda item into the record.
>> I again day item 1 progress
update on 2020 bridge audit
recommendations for briefing an
discussion.
>> Thank you. Colleagues, this
-- we will get updated on the
progress made with the
recommendations of the bridge
audited. As you know, the audit
of our city's aging bridges was
called for in response to the
unexpected closure of the west
Seattle bridge in 2020. The
purpose of the audit was to
confirm the consideration of
Seattle's bridges and to assess
how the city manages the bridge
assets. Bridges serve multiple
modes of transportation, connec
the community and keep it
moving. Several were in poor
condition meaning that they are
considered structurally
deficient. The audit provided 1
recommendations to improve
overall management of Seattle
bridge safety. We have with us
our city auditor's office and
the city department of
transportation, SDOT will join
them and we will get an update
on the progress during the past
2 1/2 years. We also want to
hear from SDOT what they are
doing for bridge safety over th
next year, beyond this audit
report. This includes not only
bridge maintenance but seismic
upgrades and preparation to
replace bridges if necessary.
So, we will go ahead and turn i
over to the presenters. We
welcome David D Jones and
Melissa Alderson from the
auditor's office and we have
with us the folks from SDOT who
are focused on bridges. So,
David G Jones, welcome.
>> Thanks for inviting us here
today to provide an update on
the status of recommendations
from the 2020 report on bridge
maintenance. If you could move
to the next slide, please. For
members of the public that are
interested in reading the
report, it's available on the
website. WWW.seattle.gov/city
auditor/-- and navigate to 202
reports. Councilmember Pedersen
asked us to complete the audit
about the bridges owned and
maintained by the Seattle
department of transportation
that I will refer to as SDOT fo
the remainder of the
presentation. He made this
request after the unexpected
closure of the west Seattle hig
bridge in March of 2020. The
closure raised questions about
the adequacy of the city's
oversight of the Bridgeport
folio. Move to the next slide,
please during the audit, we
looked at the condition of 77
vehicle bridges that are owned
and maintained by SDOT. And thi
slide that you see here now
summarizes some of the key
findings from the report. We
found that the city of Seattle
wasn't spending enough money on
the up keep and preservation of
the bridges. The condition of
the bridges had worsened over
the 10-year period we examined.
Now, these issues of
deteriorating infrastructure an
funding challenges were and are
so faced by other cities in the
United States. In our report, w
concluded and made
recommendations to encourage
SDOT to strengthen the bridge
asset management practices. Wha
I will do now is turn it over t
Melissa Alderson who will run
you through the recommendations
we made in the report and as
councilmember Pedersen, the
current implementation status.
Take it away, Melissa.
>> Thank you, good morning. As
was mentioned, we made 10 audit
recommendations which SDOT is i
the process of I am meaning. Th
status updates today will be on
the follow-up dashboard sometim
next month when we finish our
annual recommendation follow-up
process which is for all of our
audits. So, in this presentatio
today, our office will share a
summary of the recommendations,
a little bit of the background
and then SDOT will explain thei
work so far and their progress
in implementing them. To give
you a high level summary of
where SDOT is at with the 10
recommendations, one of them is
implemented. Then the remaining
nine are pending. And SDOT will
provide an estimate of when the
expect to finish those. So, now
we will switch presentations an
then together with respect SDOT
go over each recommendations in
detail.
>> Thank you.
>> We can cut to the next slide
>> If the SDOT team can
introduce themselves, that woul
be great. We have additional
talent with us today.
>> My name is angel Garcia. I
was hired to implement the audi
recommendation. I will pass it
to kit.
>> I'm Kit Loo bridge engineer.
[ Inaudible ] [ Inaudible ]
>> Welcome. Thank you everybody
for being here and thanks for
working with the city auditor o
this. The first recommendation
is for SDOT to resolve all the
issues that the federal highway
administration identified in a
2019 review. This recommendatio
is pending but we understand
that there is only one item
remaining on the list which I
believe angel from SDOT will
tell us more about.
>> Next slide. Complete overhau
of the bridge management system
has been nearly completed for
compliance of qualification of
personnel, inspection frequency
and inspection procedures and
inventory data. We shared it at
the end of 2022 ahead of an
informal audit review. FHWA
completed the review and
statited it to be outstanding
and that we would have been
found in full compliance if it
was a full audit. WSDOT did
their review and we are waiting
for their results. The last
remaining item is in April to
migrate to historical
correspondence into the new
system. Next slide, please. The
10 recommendations are heavily
dependent upon one another.
Getting recommendations one was
a foundational step to ensure
that we had accurate bridge
component level data. We
couldn't have started the life
cycle cost analysis without it.
The life cycle cost analysis
goes to staffing analysis and
relies on reducing reimburseabl
work and changing bridge
inspection policy and
identifying technology upgrades
and all of those feed into the
development of the bridge asset
management plan. Next slide,
please.
>> For recommendation two, when
we did the audit. SDOT had a
practice of doing what they
called reimburseable work for
other entities. And, so, given
SDOT's critical bridge needs we
recommended that SDOT reduce th
amount of reimburseable work
that they were doing and instea
prioritize work on their own
bridges. SDOT implemented this
recommendation and I will turn
it over to angel to talk about
how they did that.
>> A new policy went into effec
in 2023 that highlights
reimburseable work and allow
restructure crews to focus on
complex repairs. Repairs are
underway on Queen Anne, Magnoli
and Ballard bridges and will
include things like epoxy crack
injection and resealing of
expansion work. Queen Anne they
will spend an estimated 20 days
on the work orders that total
roughly $123,000. This work wil
likely not be able to be
scheduled without that change i
policy. Next slide, please.
>> The rest of our audit
recommendations we will talk
about in groups because they
relate to each other. So, for
recommendation three, the
Seattle has an old ordinance
SDOT is responsible for annuall
inspecting private bridges. We
recommended that SDOT revise
that ordinance to be interpret
aligned with current needs and
their available resources. Then
recommendation four is to creat
new policies and procedures tha
would put that change into
practice. So, recommendations
three and four are pending.
Angel will share the status.
>> SDOT has determined that
revising an ordinance isn't
needed. We can shift the
responsibility of private bridg
inspection to owners through a
director's role. Seattle
municipal code 3.2 refers to
ordinance 102228 which grants
the director of transportation
authority to adopt rules as
deemed necessary for
interpretation of the Seattle
municipal code. This will allow
the inspectors to focus on
restructure assets. We expect
the recommendations implemented
by the end of the year. Turn
that back over to Melissa.
>> Thank you. The recommendatio
5, 6 and 7 are for SDOT to
perform a staffing analysis to
determine what positions they
need in order to implement a
bridge preservation program or
as SDOT refers to as a bridge
strategic asset management plan
And we recommended that the
staffing analysis incorporate
the goals from the city's race
and social justice initiative
and include an evaluation of th
technology tools that bridge
crews use. Recommendations 5,
six, seven is pending. The work
is underway. Angel will tell us
more.
>> We are delivering these
recommendations in four parts.
We are identifying immediate
resource needs by early quarter
two of this year, conducting a
cost benefit analysis to
identify technology solutions t
increase resource efficiency by
the end of quarter two of this
year and complete a regional
equity tool kit on staff
diversity to include race and
social justice values by quarte
three and we are going to final
lists the staffing analysis wit
resource needs identified in th
life cycle cost analysis by
quarter four and presently thes
efforts are underway happening
concurrently. Back to you,
Melissa.
>> Thank you. So, our last
recommendations here are the
biggest in terms of effort but
also impact. So, recommendation
8 and 9, we recommended that
SDOT recalculate the useful lif
of the bridges in a more
granular way then use that
information to inform and
prioritize their bridge work.
So, these recommendations 8 and
nine are pending an in progress
I will turn it over to angel.
>> Thank you. So, we have
grouped the bridges by route
classification and material
type. We are presently working
on the unconstrained life cycle
plan to identify treatments in
cycles for routine and
preservation maintenance,
capitol rehabilitation and
replacement as well as identify
what treatments are needed now
to improve our bridge's
condition. We will then develop
different life sickle plan
scenarios driven by performance
measures, risk and funding
constraints. When we final list
a life cycle plan we will have
established remaining service
life of the bridges and identif
timing for bridge treatments. W
plan to have this done by
quarter four of this year.
>> The last recommendation,
recommendation 10 takes all the
information from the previous
recommendations and asks SDOT t
develop a bridge asset
management plan. We also
recommend in this recommendatio
a citywide effort to develop an
implement strategies to fill th
funding gap. So, this
recommendations is pending and
we understand that SDOT plans t
complete their bridge strategic
asset management plan this year
but we recognize that the
citywide effort to address the
funding gap will likely take
more time. Over to angel.
>> So, together, the audit
recommendations create the
bridge strategic asset plan,
holistic proactive approach to
preservation. The plan for the
right treatment at the right
time. The bridge strategic asse
management time will highlight
life sickle plans and inventory
condition, risk management and
implementation strategies and w
plan to have it completed by th
end of this year as well.
>> So, just speaking from the
office of city auditor, I think
we are done with this portion o
the presentation but I want to
note that SDOT officials were
very cooperative during the
audit. This is particularly --
we appreciate it because it was
in the middle of them dealing
with the unexpected problems
with the west Seattle high
bridge. We appreciate how open
and transparent they were durin
that time with us and I thank
the people that worked on this,
Sean debeelike, Luis and Meliss
Alderson. As you can see from
the slide, you know, any time
the committee would like a
further update on the status of
the recommendations or audit
report, we are more than willin
to come back and from our offic
happy to answer any questions
that you may have for us at thi
point.
>> Thank you, auditor Jones.
Just for my colleagues and the
viewing public, there are a few
more slides where SDOT will tal
about bridge investment and
activity that they are doing
more immediately. We wanted to
have a comprehensive view of
this today. So, the auditor wil
drop off and we will hear more
from SDOT but we can pause for
questions about the 10
recommendations. I see
councilmember Herbold has her
hand up. Do you mind if I make
some remarks, overview here?
Really, first of all, we will
have the auditor come back with
SDOT in December of this year t
take another look at where SDOT
is on these recommendations on
the bridge audit. We were
reminded about a lot of public
callers and people E-mailing us
with the west Seattle bridge
shut down three years ago and
the audit recommendations
published 2 1/2 years ago, ther
is a lot of time to accelerate
the improvements to our bridge
assets in Seattle. So, I'm a
little bit concerned with the
top level view of this update i
really that, you know, nine out
of 10 of the recommendations ar
incomplete. And, so, I
appreciate you coming here to
explain the context behind that
There is a lot of planning goin
into this. I appreciate you
bringing on additional talent t
help with this, director spots
but what do we say to those tha
look at this and see nine out o
ten haven't been implemented. I
this a priority for SDOT and
what can we tell our
constituents that are writing t
us about the bridges? Thank you
Director spots if you want to
respond to that or we can get
questions from Councilmember
Herbold.
>> I was going to give the
introduction to the next sectio
so I think I can address your
questions. Let me pass it to
Councilmember Herbold. In case
missed the opportunity, I want
to thank Mr. Jones and miss
Alderson for your efforts. I
found your work to be extremely
helpful in on boarding at SDOT
and I believe you set a strong
mountain days for us to build a
modernized approach bringing
contemporary asset management t
the Bridgeport folio assets.
Kudos to you and thank you so
much.
>> Thank you, director spots.
Councilmember Herbold.
>> This is a question for the
city auditor. Thank you for
letting me get in here before w
move to the next presentation.
Given that as you have shared
and Councilmember Pedersen live
up the recommendations are not
just pending, I'm curious as to
what the auditor's role is in -
I understand you don't have a
prodding role but maybe a role
that confirms that the
department is on the right trac
as they develop a policy that
conforms with the
recommendations? In particular
I'm interested in examples wher
the city auditor may have
recommended legislative action
and instead the department is
taking the action of doing a
director's role. Is that
something that you would review
once that director's rule was
proposed to make sure that it
captures and addresses the issu
that you identified as needing
to be captured in that it does
so sufficiently or would you no
opine on that until the end of
the process?
>> Let me give you an answer,
Councilmember Herbold and tell
me if I'm not answering your
question. We follow-up on the
status of all our
recommendations that have not
been resolved, recommendations
made in the reports. Just like
any other recommendation, we
follow that recommendation unti
it's clear it has been
implemented or there is a reaso
to close it, like the departmen
won't do it. A specific example
you raised about the director
rule w will wait and see what
SDOT does and gets back to us
and says we have done this in
order to meet your
recommendation. Sometimes we
will say it's implemented even
though they don't do the precis
thing. If the spirit of the
recommendation, the problem we
are trying to get to, they deal
with. So, we will follow-up, to
answer your question, the
specific thing on the director
rule involving inspection of
private rule, we will follow-up
that and look at what SDOT has
done, says it has done to
implement that recommendation
then make a judgment on does
this meet our intent. So, I hop
I answered your question. If
not, prod me.
>> I think you have answered bu
let me just put a little finer
point on it. You would not
review the draft director rule
when it's being developed and
considered internally by SDOT.
Is that correct?
>> That's correct. That is thei
process. We look at the end
product in relation to the
specific recommendation we made
in the report.
>> Thank you, Councilmember
Herbold. Any other questions
while the auditor team is here
-- they will remain for the
second item on the agenda.
Councilmember Strauss.
>> Thank you, chair. Auditor
Jones, Melissa, great to see
you, director spots, Fran chess
say, great to see you as well.
My question is similar to
Councilmember Herbold. The
recommendation to have a
director rule change to the
ordinance instead of changing
the ordinance, can you just in
plain language tell me why we
wouldn't change the ordinance i
it is in statute?
>> I will take a shot at this
but Melissa Alderson, if you ar
here. She knows about this. We
consulted with the city
attorney's office and apparentl
there is existing code that
gives the department of
transportation the ability to
determine how often it should
inspect private bridges. It's
Seattle municipal code
15.76.010. So, I guess the shor
answer to your question is, the
authority may already be there
for the department to do this
and so farther amenable to doin
something, to give them
flexibility about when they
inspect private bridges. The
reason why it's brought up in
the report, again, it's not
necessarily a huge thing but
it's about .5 FDE effort that i
sort of taken away from SDOT.
They have to look at these
private bridges versus their ow
bridges. Our recommendation
said, is there some way to give
yourself more flexibility to
spend more time, your staff,
inspecting our bridges, the cit
of Seattle bridges. Melissa, do
you want to add anything to wha
I said or did I cover
Councilmember Strauss' question
appropriately.
>> You covered it great, Dave.
will add, yeah, we did talk to
the city attorney office for th
language and they advised the
current ordinance language does
allow for SDOT to create a
director's rule that specifies,
you know, in more detail what
their inspection schedule of
private bridges should be. So
there wouldn't be any conflict
if they decided to go that
route.
>> Wonderful. Helpful. To thrar
clarify, the code that is
currently on our books is not
prescriptive of the schedule
rather it is broad in stating
that the inspections need to
occur and it's up to SDOT to
determine the schedule. Is that
a correct understanding?
>> Yes. Councilmember Strauss,
the specific language, I will
read it to you quickly, the
director of transportation may
annually, the key part, or as
often as deemed necessary for
the protection of the public
safety cause to be inspected th
private bridges. So, the
director has that flexibility,
the director of SDOT to do that
And I think this is something
that they can do now. They don'
have to wait for an ordinance t
be passed, a more lengthy
process. So, which is not to sa
I may get on shaky ground. Not
to say that you could go that
route. But there is the -- they
could do it now. They have the
flexibility to determine a
schedule of their inspection on
private bridges.
>> Sorry. Maybe this is my
misunderstanding for not diggin
-- I didn't have the prebriefin
of this agenda item as I prefer
to have before these meetings s
you are seeing more of me
learning in the realtime. Is
this ordinance not also on
publicly owned bridges, simply
for privately owned bridges?
>> The particular section of th
Seattle municipal code that I
quoted is for private bridges.
And the recommendation that we
have is just about private
bridges. I don't know if I'm
clarifying that for you.
>> Perfect. Then my follow-up
question is do we have a system
or ordinance or requirement for
inspections of publicly owned
bridges?
>> I will defer to SDOT on that
I don't know the answer to that
question with absolute
certainty. I will defer to SDOT
to answer that particular
question if you don't mind.
>> A great question for Kit Loo
>> Go ahead, Kit Loo, if you
could answer that. The short
answer is, yes, federal and
state requirements impose those
inspections on us. But go ahead
kit, can you respond? Are you
there.
>> It's con -- kit's connection
went down. I am Megan and
working closely with the roadwa
structure team for the past few
months to support the
implementation of the audit
recommendations. While we wait
for kit to get back up and
connected, he is the expert
bridge engineer. Our
requirements to inspect our
bridges are set by the federal
government. These are -- they
are very well governed, very
prescribed at what frequency we
must inspect the bridges and we
meet that schedule. Inspecting
bridges is the top priority. By
implementing this recommendatio
for private bridges, this puts
us in a better position to
improve the efficiency of our
inspectors related to our entir
body of assets. Roadway
structures as Greg and kit will
talk about in addition to
bridges is responsible for a
variety of infrastructure and
the right-of-way including
retaining walls, area ways,
stairwells. So, we meet the
federal requirements on bridge
inspections which is typically
two-year cycle for all the
structures and the
implementation of this changes
the director rule will allow th
inspection team more capacity a
it relates to the entire body o
assets.
>> Thank you. Chair, I got
another question but there is a
hand up.
>> I just wanted to add that
it's that capacity issue that
was the gift of the auditor's
recommendation that it was
taking public resources and
directing it to fulfill this
private responsibility and, so,
the idea is to still have that
requirement but have private
entities go to other sources to
provide those services and not
have a draw on the same
resources that we need.
>> Very helpful. Chair, I do
have questions on slide 6 of
this presentation. I know you
were about to transfer. Were yo
about to rans officer to what i
listed as 1.
>> Go ahead and ask your
question on slide six. The
updated version we are using is
different than what is posed to
leg ISTAR.
>> Repairs underway now and nex
Queen Anne bridge, Magnolia
bridge, Ballard bridge. What I'
seeing is -- can you explain
what a spalls repair is? We hav
epoxy crack injections,
resealing expansion joints. A
repaving project for 15 N
including the Ballard bridge.
What is more of interest to me
is what future looking work is
being done to these bridges and
just for a more in depth
explanation of what repairs are
underway now and next. How this
keeps our bridge working, how i
extends the lifetime of the
bridge then tell transfer into
what is next.
>> So, I can take that one. You
have to excuse me, I'm not an
engineer. I I may not do it as
eloquently as kit if he was
here. The surface level or
concrete -- basically bits of i
breakaway from the reinforcemen
and it creates essentially like
a pothole on the bridge is what
it might look like if it's on
the deck. It's fixing those,
essentially fixing the concrete
That is there. Epoxy crack
ejection is plugging up the
cracks, the finer cracks that
you may see on bridges and
revealing expansion joints is
keeping moisture out of them, I
believe and hopefully kit keeps
back on soon to confirm that.
But what they -- this slide is
highlighting is the pot repair
that the crews do. This allows
them to do it quicker and more
timely and plan for -- like
addressing all of the spot
repairs needed on the bridge
after what has been identified
during an inspection. It doesn'
necessarily improve the
condition of the bridge but it
could slow the deterioration of
existing defects that are on
there by repairing them at that
time.
>> The core message of this
slide is that by reducing the
amount of hours that our in
house crews spend maintaining
third party assets, through the
policy that I initiated shortly
after I got to SDOT in Septembe
and got finalized in time to be
an effective for the beginning
of 2023, is that the routine
type maintenance that our crews
perform, we would have
substantially more capacity to
do that and the ability to
schedule longer stretches of
that on a particular bridge
because they are not getting
pulled a way to do other third
party work. This it is really i
parallel with what we were
talking about regarding the
inspectors. Both with the city
forces capacity on routine
maitenance around city forces
capacity on inspectors. We want
that capacity to be focused on
city assets and let owners of
private assets find other
sources of expertise for those
activities.
>> Smart. That's great. Job wel
done. Extend the capacity to
have the city workers focus on
the public assets. As you all
know, I am interested and avid
champion of the Ballard enter
transportation corridor, BERT,
15th avenue northwest and west
traveling through Interbay. Thi
is the third most used behind
I-5 and state route 99. There
has been interest from the
federal delegation of providing
city funding to make either
repairs or replacement to the
Ballard bridge and other bridge
in the area. What I was told at
the time is that our bridges do
not have the studies completed
to allow us to receive federal
funds. Now, I want to give you
the opportunity to double check
that that is correct and if tha
is correct, that we are not in
position where we can receive
federal funding, what needs to
be done to accept the federal
funding?
>> We can have SDOT answer that
and also think the next slides
from SDOT may help to address
that as well. But SDOT did you
want to answer that now?
longer term large major
maintenance plans which are in
the second -- that more pertain
to the second half of the
presentation.
>> Great. Then I will prep you
with the follow-up question tha
I will have to that, which I
provided a statement of
legislative intent during last
year's budget about spending th
$25 million that we received fo
the state in the BERT corridor.
I think you can clearly see
where I'm leading you now, whic
is that we have interest from
the federal delegation to
provide federal funding to
assist us with our bridge
replacement and maintenance.
It's my understanding at this
time that we as the city do not
have the studies completed to b
able to receive those funds. We
have state funding and this is
the second round of state
funding in this corridor to
assist us in these matters. I
have not at this date in time
received a plan or action item
for how we will spend the
federal -- these state dollars.
My slide has a due date of July
1st. I know that there is
oftentimes with slides, the
request to turn those slides in
later. I will double check with
you here and now on the record
that you are indeed on track to
be able to provide the slide
report by July 1st. But really
think you areseeing where I'm
going with this. We have state
funding available 2340U. We hav
a desire for federal funding an
to my knowledge and I'm here to
be proven wrong today. Prove me
wrong. That it's my
understanding that we do not
currently have a plan to spend
the state dollars and that we
are not currently in a place to
accept the federal funding for
these bridges. So, those are my
questions, if you would like to
jump to the next power point an
I can come back to these
questions when you find it's an
I don't know yacht time.
>> Very good. Staff was
expecting that question and has
a response prepared that they
will share shortly later in thi
presentation here. So,
transitioning from the audit to
the broader bridge program
overview, the team asked me to
kind of make this transition to
also help update the committee
on my own leadership and
engagement on the bridge issue
in the six months that I have
been in the job. You will know,
last summer, on the day that
mayor announced me as the
nominee for SDOT director, I me
Councilmember Pedersen on the
university bridge later that
day. We toured the inside of th
bridge and we learned about
these systems that were built
many years ago for this moveabl
bridge. I committed to
Councilmember Pedersen at that
time that maintaining the bridg
assets and strengthening the
approach would be up to -- a
priority of mine and that
mirrored the interest of mayor
Harrell as well. You know, as I
was going through the
confirmation process last summe
and into the early fall,
generally I wanted to conduct a
listening tour in the fall with
Seattleites to learn about thei
needs and aspirations for the
streets and transportation. But
it was clear to me last summer
that there was consensus, a
broad consensus that two relate
focus areas, everybody agreed
should be an early focus area
for me and the job and that was
number one, strengthening of
vision zero and that's why I
commenced a top to bottom revie
of that program on my first day
of work on September 7th and
number 2 strengthening our
approach to the bridge assets.
As I was preparing to engage on
that topic and preparing for my
confirmation hearings, I spent
lot of time with the bridge
audit. I shared it with some of
my colleagues from Los Angeles
who were leaders in maintaining
a large portfolio of bridge
assets, street related bridge
assets in L.A. The people I
consulted felt that the audit
was very strong guiding documen
in how we could build a strong
foundation to modernize our
approach to the bridge network.
So, when I arrived, I wanted to
kind of accelerate delivery of
the bridge audit
recommendations. I thought ther
was a window of opportunity to
do that because the west Seattl
high bridge reopened within a
couple of days of my arrival.
The only thing I contributed to
that was emcee the press
conference. But I remember
thinking maybe there is talent
that worked on the west Seattle
bridge that could be redeployed
to really driving comprehensive
follow through on the bridge
audit recommendations. As the
executive team huddled up on th
question, everyone felt strongl
that Megan shepherd was the
right leader among our wonderfu
team of leaders that worked on
the west Seattle bridge project
to shift her attention for a
period of time to provide some
high level guidance, support an
communications around the
implementation of the audit
recommendations which have been
in great hands all along with
angel. Thank you, angel for you
leadership on this very
important issue. And I think
angel felt well supported with
Megan coming in. It has freed u
Matt Donoghue who has been
running the roadway structures
group to focus on other issues
like the issues that we have
been having with the Spokane
street bridge. So, it felt like
the right thing to do to bring
Megan to roadway structures and
a lot of what you are seeing
today in our progress and
confidence that the audit team
has that we are really moving
with great seriousness and
urgency on the recommendations
has been showered up by the wor
that Megan has been doing. Also
you know, I felt like it was
very, very important to find a
resolution of -- sort of
something that had been a long
time, sort of confounding thing
the fact that in a way our
roadway structures work crews
were victims of their own
success. They had a lot of
specialized training, a lot of
specialized equipment that made
them sort of the provider of
choice for noncity owners of
these type of bridge assets and
other city departments that own
these type of assets. In a way
it was a high class problem tha
our teams were good that lots o
other entities were willing to
pay them to do the work and cam
to rely on them. But I worked
very closely with staff. I had
strong idea that we have to tak
care of SDOT's assets first and
there are other resources that
private sector can bring, our
public entities can bring
resources to support other
important assets that are not
part of SDOT's portfolio. We
worked through the issues
carefully throughout the fall
and came up with a new policy
how the crews can be assigned
which I think is very much
fulfills the spirit of the audi
recommendation and it felt good
to take one, that's number two,
I guess, and check it off as
complete and be able to enjoy
that extra capacity for nice
projects like the ones that we
saw on the prior slide up here.
That is something that I have
been very excited about having
chance to bring home in my earl
time in the job. And then we ar
going to bring home all the
other audit recommendations so
that we can build an excellent
investment program, strategic
investment program across the
asset portfolio based on the
life cycle expectations for eac
asset and what intervention are
needed at what film to get the
performance out of each of thes
assets and that is a more
sophisticated approach rather
than logging the condition of
each bridge. There are a lot of
assets. That's why it is taking
a while. We will have the fact
based to make strategic informe
metric going forward around
seeking state and federal
funding to help us. There has
never been a better funding
environment than currently. It'
great that we will be ready to
do that. With that, I am hoping
that Kit Loo is back online who
is our bridge engineering and
operations manager and is takin
on the acting roadway structure
division director role. Kit, ar
you now back.
>> I am back on. Thank you,
Greg. I appreciate that
introduction.
>> Thank you for your
leadership, kit. We appreciate
you and stepping in to the
division -- acting division
director role this month. You
have all of our support.
>> Thank you, I appreciate that
This slide -- give you more
context in terms of what roadwa
division structure does, we hav
60 staff members from engineers
and support staff responsible
for the operation and
maintenance of 126 bridges and
15 other structures located
within the public right away.
That number will continue to
grow as the city grows as well,
too. These structural assets
require ongoing construction
ichs, maintenance to be
resilient, reliable for use. We
invest 13 million in the trucks
terse and responsible for
overseeing $36.4 million that i
projected to be delivered this
year. As designated responsible
for bridge maintenance, we
respond to bridge maintenance
audit recommendations. Next
slide, please. Planning for the
future, we are investing for th
future. As a product of the
audit recommendation is the
development of the bridge
strategic asset management plan
This plan in partnership with
the partnership and seismic
studies will answer these
questions. Can the life of the
bridge be extended. What type o
maintenance at what time. When
does it became cost effective.
The plan serves as a basis for
future work plans and future
funding strategies. Councilman
Strauss asked a specific
question and I will hand it off
to Megan to answer that
question. Megan?
>> Thanks, kit. Councilmember
Strauss, we will have a respons
to the slide by July 1st. That'
the first thing to say. I don't
see him on the screen. There he
is. 0, So, with the
opportunity, the thing we are
weighing and evaluating going
forward, the types of studies
that we would do to replace the
Ballard and mog knoll I can't
bridges are specific called a
tight size and location study.
We typically do these. They loo
at -- assess alternatives, out
of those alternatives they go t
preferred alternative, pearl
design, engineering,
environmental analysis. They ar
critical. We generally do them
about five to seven years out
before the full replacement. An
that requires us to put togethe
a fully comprehensive funding
package. The amount of money
available from the state right
now is -- represents only a
fraction of what is needed
toward a full replacement of
either facility. So, these are
some of the factors and we look
forward to in the slide respons
being able to advance the
conversation with you.
>> Thank you, Megan. Sorry,
chair, may I?
>> Oh, yeah, please go ahead,
Councilmember Strauss.
>> That's helpful. What I am
hearing here today is that for
us to receive federal dollars
for these projects, the type,
size, location studies complete
and submitted. And because I'm
not new to this, it's my
understanding that has to be
submitted to the state. Is that
also correct?
>> Kit?
>> That's correct.
>> You are not on mute.
>> I had to double check. That'
correct. I mean, I think part o
it is that the type, size and
location really focuses on the
environmental risks, the other
constraints related to what the
potential alternative -- to mov
forward with it. Typically allo
that information -- a lot of
that information has a term
limit to it. As Megan noted, we
need a full package including
construction in order to
understand when we need to walk
back to start that TSL
development.
>> So, I will jump into the
point of in the last three year
we have seen the federal
government really focus on
infrastructure. We had interest
from the federal delegation tha
providing our city funding to
replace the city bridges. We
have not been able to receive
that funding because we don't
have the type, size location
complete. We are now saying tha
we are not -- that we are not
going to create the type, size,
location studies and file them
with the state to be able to
accept federal dollars because
we don't currently know if we
are going to fund these
projects. Is that the loop we
are in right now?
>> I would like to add a little
bit. I think what folks are
trying to communicate we need a
general funding concept to make
sense to start the type, size
and location. Doesn't mean we
have to have everything nailed
down. These are hundreds of
millions of dollar projects. It
requires a certain amount of
preplanning on the city's part
to see where the local match
comes from. So we are ready.
Once we start the pathway so we
are ready to meet the
expectation of what we have to
provide as a local match. I
would say once we have the
strategic asset plan down we
will be in a good state to say
with maintenance, we can get ex
bridge another 20 years of
useful life which means in year
13, we should be starting to
look at putting together the
broad package of how we may fun
the local match and looking for
federal partners. I think that
is what the team is trying to
say. Not that we are in a loop
or stuck. That we are cognizant
of not doing work too early
before we have the full package
outlined.
>> Thank you, that is helpful.
Where we started with the BERT
was five years ago. If we had
created the TSL for these
bridges five years ago, we coul
have been in the running for
federal funding in the last
three years?
>> Remember --
>> If that is not correct -- is
that not correct?
>> I think it could be that we
would then have a TS and L read
but the problem would be that w
may not have identified the
source of however many tens of
millions of dollars we need to
provide from the local match.
>> Fair point. And with
additional levies coming up wit
councilmember Pedersen's
proposals aired later today, we
understand that there are city
dollars. I think this is why --
I don't think, I know this is
why this conversation was
started five years ago with BER
to give SDOT the time that they
needed to identify in concept,
not hard numbers, about where
the match would be. In the
intervening time we had the
opportunity from the federal
government to receive funds and
we missed that opportunity. Thi
is the problem that I am
confronted with right now on ho
do we -- how does SDOT prepare
the city to receive federal
funding when we have been able
to receive state funding, I
believe 25 million and then 75
million? Do you want to correct
me on those numbers.
>> I think the bridge strategic
asset plan will allow us to do
multidecade look ahead. With
x-amount of annual funding we
can extend -- use a subset of a
dozen bridges. For these dozen
core bridges we can extend the
useful life with X million
dollars of maintenance every
year then expect bridge 7 will
need to be replaced in 2040,
bridge 8 in 2045 and start to
schedule that out and then star
to tee up the different TS and
Ls that we need in order to be
ready to get the federal money
necessary to make it happen. We
don't want to replace bridges
earlier. These are hugely
disruptive projects to surface
transportation and everything.
We want to make sure that we ar
cognizant of not disrupting day
to day operations until we are
at a point where we need the
major -- I am looking forward t
having a more proactive strateg
with you.
>> I venture we have had the
15th avenue repaving on the
Ballard bridge and the
pedestrian December try January
corridors are not adequate for
the community just coming in to
work I watched a runner and
bicyclist have to veer around
each other just trying to get
across the bridge. Understandin
that the physical operational
ability of that bridge may stil
be here present and able to
service in the future, but when
we have conversations about jus
the southeast corner that is no
even in my district that I aske
about four years ago how we wil
address that intersection for
people trying to just get off
the bridge deck to the bus stop
has not been addressed. We had
five years of my requesting the
TS and L to receive federal
funds and we saw the largest
transportation package from the
federal government in decades
and we missed the opportunity t
receive funds there. I think
that you're feeling the concern
from me loud and clear today
because it is in my opinion tha
we are behind schedule. I have
asked for these reports in the
nicest way possible year after
year. I look forward to that
report being transmitted no
later than July 1, 2023. Thank
you.
>> Thank you, Councilmember
Strauss.
>> SDOT, continue with the powe
point about investments.
>> Thank you. Thank you,
Francisca and Megan for that
update. Next slide, please. We
are investing today while
planning for the future with th
bridge asset management plan. A
part of the levy to move
Seattle, we are on track to
limit the maintenance backlog b
the end of next year for the
work orders, maintenance work
orders prior to 2015 the start
of the move Seattle levy. Eight
capital projects by the end of
this year and seven other
projects in design this year. W
are actively investing in more
major maintenance. Next slide,
please. In terms of capitol
project investments, in 2023 an
next year we are looking at an
aggregate capital of $71 millio
in total project costs split
between bridge painting and lev
[ Inaudible ] It is expected to
break ground in 2023 and we are
working toward fulfilling the
levy to move Seattle commitment
for the retrofit program in
early design this year and
expected to start construction
in 2024. Next slide, please.
Since 2021 council has approved
funding to allow us to tackle
maintenance with the bridge
structures. With additional
funds part of the structure
capital program budget it has
allowed us to expand and advanc
hydraulics [ Inaudible ] Spokan
street bridge, move beyond [
Inaudible ] Design and placemen
of the university bridge motor
control cabinet and fund the
repair work to restore full
operation of the fourth avenue
south railroad bridge. These
funds allowed us to capitalize
on grant United States, U.S. DO
bridge investment grant that we
received fourth of Julyth avenu
railroad bridge planning study.
Next slide, please. We have
invested in and planning,
maintenance work on string
letter structures when it's
appropriate to do so. We are
investing $2 million in ongoing
preventative maintenance work
and preliminary design to
achieve good repair for the
remaining segments of the
university bridge. Next slide,
please. As a quick update in
terms of where we are with the
west Seattle bridge safety
program investment, we are
continuing to work on completin
closing out the remaining bridg
and safety investments that are
part of the program. This is a
highlight of the anticipated
completion of early 2024.
Strengthen contract, final list
[ Inaudible ] Swing bridge
replacement of the swing bridge
control system and communicatio
line and completion of remainin
15 reconnect west Seattle
projects. Some of these are
reconnect west Seattle projects
were sapped to be completed in
Q1 2023 but delayed due to
inclement weather. In total to
date we have invested about $12
million in the safety program.
Next slide. The key takeaways
for this presentation is our
continued investment in the
planning and maintenance of our
bridges in a thoughtful way. We
are invest 47.6 million in
operation and maintenance.
Capital investments and plannin
for the future. The [ Inaudible
] Which will serve as a basis
for future work plans that move
us to proactive approach and
preventative maintenance. Next
slide. That is the end of the
presentation. Any questions fro
anyone in the council?
>> Thank you very much to
everybody from SDOT for being
here today and really appreciat
the overview from director spot
in terms of how he is trying to
prioritize bridges and
reallocate resources within the
department to make it a reality
and the city auditor continuing
to track their 10
recommendations from the 2020
audit and we will have SDOT bac
here in December, notice later
than December. We would love to
have you here earlier but
October and November we will be
reviewing and amending the
executive budget proposal but w
want to -- internally we will
follow-up with you on several o
the bridge projects and I'm
hoping that the budget that
comes down from may josh Harrel
appropriately prioritizes
bridges this year and make
progress on the projects,
especially the ship canal
bridges that have those
components required to open and
close them and we don't want
them getting stuck like they
have in the past. So,
colleagues, any final comments
or questions from SDOT before w
move on to the next two
projects.
>> Councilmember Herbold,
please.
>> A question on 523 about the
west Seattle bridge. The slight
nodes that budget used as of
quarter one 2023, I'm wondering
what will the estimate be on th
total from the $135 million
budget if that is noable and I
would love to have SDOT
follow-up and get back to us on
that.
>> We would be happy to
follow-up with you on that. Som
costs are still unknown as we
close out a number of west
Seattle commitments that we mad
to community. Some of those
projects we deliberately held t
implement them after the bridge
was closed. So, some -- not all
the costs are fully realized
yet. We expect to come in under
175 million but I don't think w
willfully know the extent until
we get through the remaining
close out activity.
>> I have been overly eager
about that question and you tel
me to hold my horses. I will.
>> Thank you, councilmember.
>> Appreciate it.
>> Okay.
>> Councilmember Herbold for
asking that. We will ask SDOT t
have a close out as well and if
there are funds leftover, the
City Council would want to opin
on how those resources she
allocated and I'm presuming tha
would require a budget action o
our part but we would want to -
I would want to reinvest those
funds into bridges or related
investments. Well, colleagues,
thank you, SDOT and we will
transition to item 2 on the
agenda. We will read that into
the record.
>> Agenda item 2, U.S. DOT audi
report implications for SDOT fo
briefing and discussion.
>> Thank you. For the benefit o
the viewing public, this
briefing and discussion concern
the U.S. office of the inspecto
general audit of the U.S.
department of transportation,
specifically oversight of a few
grants provided to our own
Seattle department of
transportation. I asked the cit
auditor, David G. Jones to join
us for this item in case they
can lend expertise regarding th
federal audit report about the
federal agency. I spoke directl
to the U.S. inspector general's
office after the report was
published. They confirmed that
the U.S. DOT must resolve the
concerns in the audit by
December 31st of this year. The
46 page federal audit makes 14
recommendations. Particularly
interested today in hearing
about SDOT plan to retain
federal funding that we have no
spent. Audit recommendations 11
and 13 could potentially impact
up to $14 million for a few SDO
projects. Recommendation 11
seeks supporting documentation
from FTA regarding 9.9 million
among six FTA grants for three
projects, one FTA grant for
streetcar maintenance, the bus
rapid line G project
reconfiguring Madison street an
four FTA awards for the Seattle
monorail. So, recommendation 13
concerns the so-called center
city connector streetcar projec
currently in the redesign or
restudy phase. This federal
audit asks whether the U.S. DOT
should invest the 3.8 million
elsewhere. So hopefully SDOT ca
work in answers to those
questions about recommendation
11 and 13 that impact dollars
not yet spent. So we will turn
over -- we have Kristen Simpson
with us. Welcome.
>> Thank you, Councilmember. I
will do a brief introduction fo
the team members then turn it
over for the bulk of the
presentation. Good morning. As
Councilmember said I'm Kristen
Simpson, senior deputy director
With me are Francisca Stefan
staying over from the previous
presentation and Cris says Kell
man and julius Rwamashongye. We
appreciate you inviting us
today. We share your interest i
transparency and
accountabilities and welcome th
opportunity to provide
information about the U.S. DOT
audit of the projects between
2014 and 2019. Based on changes
to the business practices durin
that time and since we are
confident in our ability to pro
busily manage the grant funds
and we believe USDOT shares the
confidence based on large grant
awards we received including
more than 180 million for
projects like the west Seattle
bridge, rapid ride J and safe
streets for all. You asked abou
the unspent mounding for the
center city connector streetcar
project. So, I will address tha
before turning it over to Kris.
For folks following along it wa
awarded in 2017 for vehicles fo
the center city project. We are
working with FTA and WSDOT to
retain the funding and to make
shift in the use so we can spen
that on design. We are in the
process of working with those
agencies and don't have a final
out come yet but as you know
there is new interest and
enthusiasm for the project and
we are looking forward to
resolving that in a way that
let's it move forward with
design.
>> Thank you. I will turn it
over to Kris and be happy to
answer any questions.
>> Great.
>> Thank you, Kristen. And good
morning, Councilmembers. It's a
pleasure to be here today and
have the opportunity to
demonstrate how SDOT core value
and goals come in play with
granted funded projects,
particularly in the context of
this audit with respect to
excellence and product delivery
and stewardship of taxpayer
dollars. Today's presentation i
about the purpose and key
findings of the recent USDOT OI
audit that focused on how well
federal transportation agencies
did in overseeing the use of
federal dollars distributed
through funding awards to the
city. Almost all of the funding
in the audit scope focused on
projects managed by SDOT which
is why we are here today. I wil
start by sharing a summary of
the most important takeaways
that we think will be of
greatest interest to you and
members of the public then
provide a basic overview of the
audit scope and conclusions. I
will share the highlights of
SDOT thoughts on the audit and
the best practices bev in place
to manage grand funded projects
then a quick look at what we ar
doing next before stopping for
discussion and Q and A. As we
know and which was reinforced b
the prior presentation, audits
are one way of even shushing
that government is accountable
to the people. Audits serve to
verify that the government has
been acting responsibly. The
review, key findings and
recommendations of this audit
were directed at the three
granting agencies within the
U.S. department of
transportation and it's
incumbent on those agencies to
take the next steps to respond
to the audit findings. The
review period for this audit as
Kristen noted, 2024 to 2019. It
represents a snapshot in time
for how well those USDOT
agencies were doing in executin
their response built and for
SDOT and the city in terms of
our fiduciary duty. I'm blessed
to say that SDOT self identifie
the needs for certain business
practice improvements and how w
manage grant funds and SDOT
implemented those improvements
prior to the audit commencing s
that by the time we were
notified that the audit was
going to happen, we had already
addressed the concerns that
would be later identified in th
audit findings. As a result, we
feel confident in our ability t
responsibly and appropriately
use federal funding in support
of our transportation projects
and we can satisfy any question
about actual or planned use of
federal funding awards. And
perhaps most telling throughout
the audit period and after as
Kristen noted, SDOT continued t
receive significant federal
transportation dollars for our
projects. The intent of the
audit was to assess the aqua se
and effectiveness of grant
oversight and management
controls of local offices of th
U.S. DOT agencies have in place
As demonstrated by their
management of funding awards
provided to the city of Seattle
The OIG contacted us in early
2019 to request records related
to a significant number of
grants and funding awards that
we had received from the USDOT.
We provided thorough
documentation on the projects
that he reviewed including all
information requested as well a
proactively offering additional
information relative to the --
relevant to the audit scope. We
were responsive to subsequent
inquiries and worked with staff
to answer all follow-up
questions. It was quit an effor
spanning 46 projects, 86
different grants and agreements
and looking at our compliance
and response to the management
practices of the federal highwa
administration, the federal
railroad administration and the
federal transit administration
as well as those of WSDOT as th
local pass through agency for
most federal transportation
grants. The focus was on the
USDOT agencies. The final
report, which I believe all of
you have received, which kiss
available online, put a
spotlight on four areas of
weakness in the federal agencie
oversite practices and included
14 specific recommendations for
how they could improve. The U.S
DOT agencies had a chance to
respond to the audit findings
and agreed with most of them.
Consider the recommendations
resolved but some are officiall
still open pending completion o
all follow-up actions by the
federal agencies. The OIG noted
some findings and/or areas of
improvement for both WSDOT and
SDOT. As I noted earlier,
though, SDOT had implemented ou
grant tracking practices and
compliance control improvements
before the audit was announced.
Relating to business practices
from 2014 to 2019 have been
fulfilled. There were a few
notable comments on specific
circumstances related to a few
key projects. One example is th
Lander street overpass where we
were able to significantly
reduce the actual cost of the
project from our initial
conservative cost estimates
thanks to important changes to
project design and advancements
in engineering and construction
We spent far less than the gran
award. We stand by the way we
managed that project along with
our management of all federal
transportation dollars we
received. As we strive to build
a transportation system that
meets the needs of the
community. As I have noted, we
had already improved the grants
management practices before
being notified of the audit. Th
audit is a look back and we are
set up for success now and
moving forward. We know that th
OIG identified some follow-up
actions for the federal
transportation agencies. We are
ready to assist them and provid
any further documentation they
might need to demonstrate how
their dollars have been spent
properly and for the public's
benefit. What I want to say
overall we at S dot appreciate
the rigorous review that went
into the completion of the
audit. We believe in full
transparency how we manage the
capital projects and committed
to being responsible and
accountable in how we spend all
funds. It's important to note
that while this audit was
underway, a federal transit
administration was conducting
its own regular every three-yea
review of the city's compliance
in 21 areas of F is TA
requirements. This is the FTA
try annual. It encompassed
federal year 2020 and mostly
focused on SDOT. As you may
recall, we were found to be
fully in compliance with no
deficiencies. Officially, as we
mentioned, SDOT remained
competitive in federal grant
awards during the audit review
period and following. Recently
including earlier this year we
received over $183 million in
federal transportation funding
awards including confirmation o
the 60 million-dollar ward to
the rapid J line project a mont
after the audit findings were
published. There are several
reasons why SDOT is successful
in securing federal funding
awards and grant funded
projects. One key element is th
regular communication channels
with our funding and oversight
partners, whether it's the
federal agencies directly, WSDO
or budget sound regional counci
that distributes some of the
awards. We coordinate closely
with SA public work and contrac
and procurement groups. We have
regular monthly, quarterly
meetings as well as
presubsequent ad hoc
communications with partners to
review project stages and
progress, discuss monitoring
steps and grant life cycle
management stages and walk
through regular reporting. We
exchange information, support
each other in sound management
practices, identify issues and
problem solve together. Another
area of strength is our interna
organization and grant
management and tracking tools.
As you may be aware, SDOT
received positive reviews by th
management consultants for rapi
ride G and J projects when they
reviewed the organizational
setups, systems, controls and
best practices. Something to
highlight is the project
portfolio management system
which we implemented in January
2021 and have been continuously
improving since. The system,
which we affectionately call
PPM, not creative but a start,
allows us to track all stages o
a capital project including if
grant funded, stage, status and
reporting milestones. Since it
allows us to track all aspects
of a project in one place,
risks, schedules, scope, budget
we are able to identify any
deviations in a project early o
to perform corrective action
from management. Finally, I wan
to assure you that our business
practices ensure that we at S
dot are informed of all federal
and state standards, employ bes
practices for requirements and
controls and remain accountable
to the public trust. Now on to
next steps. As we were working
with OIG audit team, we were
confident that we were followin
all best practices for grant
management and control. Even so
after the audit was released, w
combed through all the findings
regardless of which agency they
pertained to to confirm that on
SDOT was and will remain in goo
standing and two prepared to
assist the USDOT agencies and
WSDOT in the next steps in
implementing the audit
recommendations. I want to than
the SDOT staff particularly
within my own division, finance
and administration and in the
capital projects division as
well as folks in the department
wide grant management team for
the hard work and countless
hours they have put in to
responding to the auditor's
request for information, meetin
with the team for follow-up
questions and due diligence tha
they did prior to, during and
following the completion of the
audit to ensure that we are
managing these federally funded
projects appropriately,
successfully and in accordance
with our value of excellence.
So, now it's time for me to sto
talking and for us to take your
questions. Thank you.
>> Thank you for that
presentation and thank you,
Kristen Simpson for answering
the question at the beginning o
the presentation about one of
the items. I wanted to offer to
the city auditor, David G. Jone
if he or his team have comments
or questions about this using
our own auditing expertise,
whether you feel that these
presentation is adequate, SDOT
is taking appropriate measures.
>> I have no reason to believe,
councilmember Pedersen that SDO
is not doing whatever it can to
meet the intent of the audit
recommendations. I think -- the
thing from the city of Seattle
is are any of these
recommendations made by the U.S
department of transportation
inspector general going to caus
the city to lose funds that had
been awarded? That is the real
-- one of the things of major
interest. I don't know the
answer to that question. I know
that Kris talked about --
someone mentioned that working
to secure the 3.6 million for
the center street, getting that
changed to be used for design.
Those are open questions. So, I
think from the city of Seattle
we don't want to lose that mone
if we can. But to answer your
question, nothing that I see
that SDOT is doing that causes
me concern. The big concern is
what will happen with the funds
awarded Seattle. Are we at risk
of losing them?
>> Thank you. SDOT, if you want
to, could you respond to that?
feel like you responded to that
on the center city connector
funds that you got a request in
to repurpose those for the
project. In terms of the other
recommendations from the U.S.
audit of the U.S. department of
transportation, is there
anything -- are you concerned
about that -- like the 9.9
million for the six FTA grants?
>> I will speak to that,
councilmember.
>> Sure.
>> We are not concerned. The
support being documentation tha
is referenced with respect to
that remaining balance has to d
with demonstration that we have
appropriately build the grants
with eligible activities and
costs. And we did provide the
audit team a sample of the
various records of transactions
labor records and so on to show
them how we track and report ou
and then bill eligible project
costs. It was a sample. It was
not every possible scrap of
digital paper if you will. We
are ready to provide that at
their request. I am more than
confident that we can
demonstrate that we have
appropriately used all the
funding that was awarded to us
and that that funding that we
have awarded but have not spent
for example that related to the
streetcars that we have
discussed can still be put to a
very good Muir post that meets
the overall intent and spurred
of the award and benefits our
community by building a better
transportation system.
>> Thank you.
>> Colleagues, any comments or
questions. Councilmember
Herbold.
>> Referring to a recent Mike
article about the FTA audit, he
spoke to a former FTA program
manager who said that if he was
overseeing the Seattle region,
he would compel the city to
produce, quote, a specific
recovery schedule and cash flow
plan. And given that the projec
space -- significant funding
gap, $93 million after the
federal funds project [
Inaudible ] Last estimate and
has a significant ridership --
post-pandemic [ Inaudible ]
Intend to do this, to produce a
recovery schedule and cash flow
plan as part of the new request
to the FTA?
>> We are in the process right
now of looking at all of the
documents that were prepared
when the project was at 100%
designed and looking at what we
need to do to refresh those,
update cost estimates, anything
that changed in terms of the
environmental or vehicle pieces
All of that will help us know
what we need to do to continue
to seek FDA funding to put othe
funding sources in place. We
don't have a lot of answers now
but we are actively working to
refresh the information that we
have, collect new information
and present a full package.
>> Thank you. All right. Thank
you, everybody for this report
on item 2 on our agenda. I thin
we are ready to move to the las
item on the agenda. Will the
clerk read the third item into
the agenda.
>> Agenda item 3 project list
for transportation impact fees
for briefing and discussion.
>> Thank you.
>> Colleagues we have in front
of us this afternoon a
presentation about
transportation impact fees. As
many of us no, impact fees have
been for a long time authorized
by the state law to help local
governments pay for new
transportation infrastructure
needs. They are used by
approximately 70 other
Washington state cities and
throughout the nation. Under ou
state's growth management act
impact fees can be used to pay
for that portion of new
infrastructure needed to addres
increases in demand created by
new development before a local
government can adopt impact fee
a review must be completed
according to the state
environmental policy act. We
will hear about that process
today. I did appropriately
confirm that we may discuss
impact fees and transportation
projects but we cannot and will
not take action on impact fee
legislation until the SEPA
appeal is resolved. In the
meantime, we may have briefings
and discussions about this
important funding source for
transportation projects. So, I
asked for today's presentation
so the committee members can
refamiliarize themselves with
impact fees, how they work in
other cities. We have with us a
representative, consultant that
did the study published online,
the updated technical work
required by that long-standing
state law to establish how
projects eligible for impact
fees are determined and how the
fees can be calculated. Thank
you for being here today. Ketil
freeman and Calvin Chow. We wil
turn it over to Ketil -- oh,
Councilmember Herbold, please.
>> I want to take this
opportunity, if I may, at the
top of the presentation before
Ketil goes into the details. I
know he will cover it but just
because of the public comment
that we heard at the top of the
meeting, I wanted to address
some of those comments head on
before we get on to the
presentation. We are not at thi
time deliberating on an impact
fee program. We are, instead,
taking a step that is
preliminary to the deliberation
on an impact fee program. This
step that we are seeking to tak
is a foundational step that is
necessary in order for us to
have the policy discussion
around impact fees. So, I think
-- because so many people she
opining already on the impact o
impact fees before we even have
the requirements that are,
again, necessary before even
deliberating on a program, it's
important for public he had
education -- [ Inaudible ]
>> You went on mute.
>> We are only talking about
what are the projects that woul
theoretically be eligible to
receive funding from an impact
fee if the city of Seattle were
to enact one. And I will hand i
over to Ketil but people are
opining and commenting on a ste
that we are not taking yet. I
just really wanted to address
that at the front. Thank you.
>> Go ahead, Ketil.
>> Council central staff. I hav
a brief presentation for contex
before I turn it over to Kendra
But to reiterate your point,
Councilmember Herbold, three
steps to I am meaning an impact
fee program. First a rate study
comprehensive plan and third
step setting rate. We are hear
to talk about the rate study. I
does set out a ceiling above
which the city could not charge
rates but it does not recommend
or prescribe that ceiling as th
rate. That will be the subject
for future council decision
making. Shall I start out, set
context.
>> Yes, please.
>> Let me share my screen. Oops
-- are you seeing --
>> PDF.
>> There are two.
>> It went to a different one.
Okay W. all right.
>> We are seeing the correct
one.
>> Okay. All right. So, a
little bit of background and
legislative history here. The
city has been considering impac
fees off and on for almost 10
years now. In 2014 the council
appropriated SDOT fund balance
general reserve to study impact
fees. That appropriation is
still what we are using to pay
Kendra. In 2015 the mayor's
office and SDOT recommended a
preliminary recommendation abou
pursuing a transportation impac
fee program and a parks impact
fee program, recommended holdin
on other types of impact fees
that could have been
implemented, schools and fire
facilities. But recommended tha
the city keep in close contact
with the city about school
impact fees. That work was
essentially put on hold in 2016
with implementation of the
housing affordability program.
The council continued to have a
interest and from 2017 until
last year the council docketed
comprehensive plan changes. In
2018 the council did issue a
determination for an impact fee
program to set the basis for
future impact program. That was
appealed by the Seattle mobilit
coalition. A year later the
hearing examiner remanded the
council's threshold
determination to the council fo
further work. Back in 2020 when
the council was considering a
sales tax increase for transit,
proposition one, the council
genre it tear rated its intent
for transportation impact fees
and recited the value of impact
fees as revenue source. This
year we updated the study for
another comprehensive plan
amendment and determination and
the Seattle mobility coalition
appealed that. What our
transportation impact fees, fee
charged to new development to
partially funneled the cost of
new infrastructure. [ Inaudible
] Again three step process, ste
one, rate study, improvements
for new development and
establish a ceiling for any
future rate. Step 2 is amend
ments to the comprehensive plan
As Councilmember Pedersen, the
council can't move to step 2
until SEPA is resolved. Then
step 3 implementing legislation
where rate setting would occur.
Is all development subjected to
impact fees? No. There is
statutory authority to provide
some exemptions, low income
housing, housing serving
households with incomes of 80%
of AMI, early learning
facilities defined by the
statute can be exempted and
jurisdictions have some
authorities to exempt with broa
public purposes. By way of
example, some exempt ADUs. The
sum million-dollar question, ho
much revenue could it generate?
It depends. It depends on futur
council decision making about
fee levels which would have to
be below the ceiling in the rat
study and rate of future
employment and residential
growth. With any impact
mitigation charge, revenue woul
be lumpy, up and down depending
on the development cycle bull w
could make some rough guesses
how much an impact fee program
could generate. Looking across
jurisdictions in western
Washington, on the lower end an
Kendra will talk about this as
well. On the lower end like
Bellingham, assuming the rate o
growth and rate study, if we ha
a Bellingham like transportatio
impact fee program it may
generate about $200 million ove
10 years. Something like Kent,
we might generate $764 million
over 10 years. The average base
rate in western Washington is
about 4,$744 per person if the
city pursued a program with tha
base rate, it would generate
about $400 million over a
10-year period. The
comprehensive plan amendments
would amend the transportation
element and related appendix [
Inaudible ] It would update the
list of transportation
infrastructure projects that
were identified back in 2018.
So, the project list and the
rate study today is more or les
the same project list from the
rate study in 2018. Just update
projects that are completed hav
come off and project costs have
been updated. It would establis
policies for the decision maker
for considering locational
discounts for different parts o
the city and exemptions for low
income housing and other
activities with a broad public
purpose. Next steps, there is a
SEPA appeal. A lot of that is
based on that appeal. Prehearin
conference Thursday. We will no
more about the schedule after
that. Unless council members
have questions about me about
the backgrounds and legislative
history, I will turn it over to
Kirsten -- no, Kendra to walk
through the rate study
presentation.
>> Thank you, that was excellen
summary. These all online on ou
agenda. I think we are ready fo
Kendra. Good morning.
>> Good morning. And I am
sharing my own screen here. Let
me get this going. There we go.
All right. Well, --
>> Perfect.
>> All right. Good afternoon. O
good morning, I guess we are
still in the morning. My name i
Kendra Frieland. I am a
principal with Fehr and Peers.
Since some of what my
presentation overlaps with what
Ketil shared I will go through
this quick but happy to answer
any questions once I learn how
to advance a slide. There we go
So, Ketil shared, transportatio
fees are one time charges paid
by new developments authorized
under the 1990 growth managemen
act. They fund improvements tha
add capacity to the
transportation network. They ar
not necessarily intended for
filling pot holes but intended
for funding projects that reall
provide person trip capacity fo
new growth in Seattle. So, the
kinds of things that impact fee
can be spent on are, first of
all, projects within the public
right-of-way. Sidewalks, bike
lanes, traffic signals. Those
are the types of improvements.
One of the rules is that impact
fee dollars must be spent withi
10 years of collection and must
be spent on projects that are
listed in the capitol facility
element of the comprehensive
plan. So, this slide here just
seeks to provide a high level
overview of how we arrive at
that maximum eligible fee. We
will talk in more specifics in
few slides here. But first
identify eligible projects that
are providing capacity, project
in your capital facilities
element, projects in the
right-of-way. Then state law
prescribes that we take some
reductions to arrive at eligibl
costs. So, that is removing kin
of the portion of those project
that are addressing deficiencie
or issues on the ground today.
It requires that we remove the
component of trips that are
related to land uses outside of
the Seattle. So, really focusin
in on those components of
projects that are providing new
capacity for growth in Seattle
and we arrive at an eligible
kind of portion of those
projects and we spread that ove
the growth and trips that you
anticipate over the life of you
program. Typically programs can
last from six years to 20 years
That would be dependent on the
Horizon anticipated for this
program. So, in terms of he wil
general projects, this slide
really seeks to show you what w
looked at and included in the
rate study. If you squint at th
screen you can see the projects
that we included. Really what w
are seeking to show here is a
few things. One, projects are
spread all over the city. Good
distribution of benefits all
over the city. The other is tha
the projects are multilevel. Th
sources that we looked at from
the master plan, freight master
plan, capital improvement plan.
So, really a multilist of
projects providing person trip
capacity throughout the city.
When we looked at the projects
and summed up what was eligible
to be included, we arrived at a
project list that had a total
capitol cost of just under $1.7
million. Then when we take the
steps that I described in terms
of the reductions required by
the state for removing the
portion of the projects related
to existing deficiencies and
figuring out what portion of
those projects are accommodatin
trips in Seattle, we arrive at
over a billion dollars in
eligible costs. That maximum
defensible fee that you can see
on the left-hand side of your
screen as can Ketil mentioned,
that is a ceiling, not
recommended rate but as much as
the city can charge based on th
list of projects we looked at
and the growth anticipated over
the span of potentially April
20-year program. Just to give
this some specifics here, we
wanted to talk about a few of
the projects featured. One is
Madison $144 million capital
cost project. Even though a lot
of this is anticipated to be
completed soon, it's still
providing capacity for a long
time for growth and kind of
downtown Seattle. Lots of
eligible components, bus lane,
signal improvements, bikes.
There is ineligible components
of the project such as pavement
restoration. Another project
mount baker. Almost $4 million
project. It also has a lot of
eligible components, widening
sidewalks, improving crossings
but, again, for each of these
projects we think about what ar
the components that are not
eligible. Aesthetic, safety
improvements that aren't
providing capacity. Those are
things that would be not funded
by impact fees. And then just t
provide the diversity of the
program, we have the east
marginal way heavy hall project
$64 million project. We found
that almost half of the project
could be eligible for impact
fees. Providing bike lanes. In
this case it's improving the
pavement to provide capacity an
ability to accommodate the heav
haul network and transit stop
amenities. It includes
ineligible costs as well.
Something to stress with
everybody watching this
presentation today, these
projects are provided for
illustrative purposes. It could
be figured out at a later
process, part of design not
necessarily today.
>> It translates the cost per
trip in actual land uses. That
is in the form of a fee
schedule. The basis is the PM
peak hard person generation of
different types of land uses.
That is something that you woul
use for development when
proposals come in, look to the
rate study, the fee schedule to
figure out how much impact fees
might be owed. State law
requires it allow for
independent fecal can you
lations as well.
>> The last piece I wanted to
share here about the draft rate
study is that we would recommen
that fees would vary or that th
rates charged would vary by are
of the city. We recognize that
your urban centers, urban
villages and nearby rail
certainly will be with fewers
trips, more trips made by more
efficient modes. We would
recommend that rates be lower i
those areas in recognition of
that less impactful trip making
behavior. My final slide is to
say that as noted by other
speakers, Seattle would be
joining a lot of company around
the state and charging impact
fees. This screen shows some of
what we looked at as potential
pier communities for Seattle.
These are other cities in the
budget sound nearby and other
lag large cities around the
stated. Impact fees vary
greatly, top end, north end and
the 14,000 cost per trip but
lots of other cities at a lower
fee level. I will stop sharing
the screen and happy to take
questions.
>> Thank you very much. And for
the public, both of these
presentations are online.
Appreciate the thoroughness of
the process here. Previous city
councils have been talking abou
this for years. We saw the city
budget constraints that we had
last year and the year before
where we were unable to fund
several multimodal
tranportation projects.
Yesterday we received a
comprehensive presentation from
central staff on rising propert
taxes. I know we have received
comments from the public
encouraging us to align any sor
of discussion about a new
revenue source to align that
with hopes to renew the move
Seattle transportation package,
that $930 million nine year
package approved in 2015. That
is 100% property tax. It totall
agree. That is the pace that we
are on here. It would be
aligning with that, the need to
perhaps have an additional
funding source or diversify for
a new transportation package.
It's not 100% property tax so w
can move away from sales taxes
from other -- for other
transportation projects. So,
goes I appreciate that. Based o
the comments today, we can
exempt low income housing
projects, child care facilities
other public purpose facilities
I think this is promising to
receive this information about
what impact these can do. I see
Councilmember Morales has her
hand up. Please, Councilmember
Morales.
>> Thank you, chair Pedersen. I
appreciate this presentation.
This is probably a premature
question. I am interested in
understanding -- I think what I
am taking from the conversation
you are having here, if we did
something like this, we would
basically design it from scratc
the rates that would be charged
the criteria set for how the
money is spent right now and I'
trying to understand a bit abou
if there are parameters about
where the money is spent. If a
project is generating a fee, is
it -- an implication that that
revenue generated would be spen
in that project, maybe eight
years later or five years later
or the case that we are
basically building a fund and
then we can decide later how
that fund gets used and it
doesn't have to be associated
with a particular project?
>> Turn to the plan discussion.
What the comprehensive plan
amendments do is set a list of
projects that are impact
eligible. It will be up to
future councils if an impact fe
program is I am element to
decide how it should be spent
among those projects. The
projects in the comprehensive
plan became the un234EU verse o
projects that the council makes
decisions on. That is a decisio
making process that happens in
part during the budget every
year when the council adopts th
CIP. In developing transpor
important expectation impact
program, they could develop
under policies how to allocate
the pot of revenue among
projects. That is not prescribe
by the rate study nor
comprehensive plan amendment so
it would be future decisions by
the [ Inaudible ]
>> Thank you. Councilmember
Herbold.
>> Thank you. Reflect on, boy,
think it was in 2018 myself,
Councilmember [ Inaudible ] And
O'Brian cowrote an editorial fo
the Seattle times where we open
up saying Seattle hats long had
the authority of fees on new
development projects and did
indicate funds toward
improvement for transportation,
goes schools and fire
facilities. It's long pastime
that the city used that
authority and have growth pay
for growth. We say, we went --
underway. This was an editorial
about [ Inaudible ] Prior to th
one we are contemplating now. I
was a step also related to the
comp plan, a resolution that
established the 18 docket of
proposed amendments, the come
present hen safe plan. That was
the comp plan docketing that
created language that predated
the step that we are taking now
choice the step that to add
eligible projects to the comp
plan to allow us in the future
to take the next step which
would be the consideration of a
impact fee. The discussion
around this was delayed
intentionally. We were at that
point considering -- well,
delayed for a couple of reasons
One an appeal. Secondly, we wer
considering discussions around
the mandatory housing afford
ability program. It was
important that we consider the
impact of layered fees. We
wanted to know what the amount
of the fee was for MHA program
before making future decisions
around the transportation impac
fee program. We have that
information now. And we can mak
decisions on transportation
impact fee program and the
appropriate rates with the
understanding of what the rates
are for affordable housing. The
information that Kendra provide
in the rate study shows many
cities that have a
transportation impact fee
program -- many of the cities
also have other types of
mitigation fee programs. So, fo
the viewing public if Denver
Kendra can confirm that the par
that you showed of the other
cities, those rates that you ar
showing in that chart are
exclusive to transportation
impact fees only even though
some of those cities also have
other types of mitigation fees
to support parks, schools or
housing.
>> That's correct.
>> Thank you. You know, I think
it would be helpful -- I don't
know if it would be research
that Kendra would do or Ketil
might help out with but if we
could get more detailed
information about a sampling of
the other cities in Washington
state so that we can understand
a little bit more about how
other cities have addressed thi
issue of layered mitigation fee
that support a menu of
development infrastructure --
infrastructure investment
priorities for their cities. I
think that would be very, very
helpful to this conversation
moving forward.
>> I think that would be on me
to do that. I think the good
news is that I should
acknowledge the good work done
by what is OPCD on impact fee
stuff until about 2016 and ther
is a base level of work that
they did looking at what other
jurisdictions charge across all
mitigation programs to get
comparables. There is some
information there that we can
update that would be useful to
the council in a rate setting
conversation.
>> Thank you very much. Really
appreciate the work from Kendra
and I know when we were getting
a briefing you mentioned that
you had worked on this for 30
other Washington state cities
approximately. So, we will see
if we can catch up to them and
have this as a possibility. All
right. Well, thank you. That wa
the last item on our agenda
today. For the public, the
materials she online for you to
review and you can always E-mai
council at Seattle.gov with you
feedback. So, that is our last
item. So, the time is 11:44 and
this will conclude the March 21
2022 meeting of the
transportation and Seattle
public utilities committee. The
next meeting of this committee
will be on Tuesday, April 4th.
Thank you. We are adjourned.