Name: Bellingham City Council - Public Works and Natural Resources Committee meeting, Apr 27, 2026
Start: 2026-04-27
End: 2026-04-27
Location: City of Bellingham

City Council - Public Works and Natural Resources Committee

Mon, April 27, 2026

Agenda PDF Minutes PDF Watch Video

Agenda items

Vote records

Discussion summary

Transcript

Meeting summaryAI-generated

City Council – Public Works and Natural Resources Committee — April 27, 2026

This was a substantive committee meeting chaired by Councilmember Michael Lilliquist, joined by Councilmembers Jace Cotton and Lisa Anderson. The committee worked through five items in roughly an hour, covering habitat restoration, fish passage, fleet facilities, and a major rapid transit planning milestone.

Squalicum Creek Property Acquisition Grant (Item 24899)

Staff presented a resolution authorizing the city to apply for a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program (WWRP) Habitat Conservation Project grant to acquire property along Squalicum Creek. The acquisition would support fish passage improvements and riparian habitat restoration near a stream crossing at Meridian Street, complementing existing work on nearby fish passage barriers. A willing landowner is already in conversation with the city. The state Recreation and Conservation Office requires a formal council resolution to authorize the application.

Councilmember Anderson moved approval; the motion was seconded implicitly. Vote: Unanimous "aye" — forwarded with a positive recommendation.

Voluntary Culvert Remediation Implementation Plan (Item 24916)

This item represented years of work by the city, Lummi Nation, Nooksack Indian Tribe, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Habitat and Restoration Manager Annalise Burns gave an extensive presentation.

Background: The city has invested over $43 million in stream restoration over 25 years. A 2022 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the four entities established a cooperative, voluntary framework for remediating city-owned fish passage barriers — important because salmon access is a tribal treaty right, though the city is *not* under the state court order that applies to WSDOT. Since 2022, the partners inventoried and prioritized all city-owned barriers. The city has 174 culverts intersecting streams across 90 miles of anadromous habitat; 126 are full or partial barriers to fish passage.

The plan: The top 60 priority barriers carry an estimated cost of $289 million — and at a realistic grant capture rate of roughly $1.5 million per year, it would take 193 years to complete them. Instead of a dollar-per-year commitment, the partners developed a goal-and-milestone framework: restore 100% of blocked habitat as the long-term goal; open 25% of blocked habitat within 30 years and 50% within 60 years. A six-year near-term work plan (similar to the transportation TIP) will be updated regularly, with annual coordination meetings and tribal partner review at each design phase.

Current progress: Three barriers have already been completed in 2024–25; eight more are in design. The next construction project is Padden Creek at 30th Street, anticipated 2027–2029. Staff are finalizing over $22 million in grant applications this month.

The new MOA supersedes the 2022 agreement and formally adopts the inventory, prioritization, and implementation plan. Councilmember Cotton asked about funding sustainability and whether the updated customer assistance program discount rates might affect the stormwater utility fund; staff committed to follow up on the latter. Councilmember Lilliquist asked about linking the implementation plan to the Comprehensive Plan; staff explained the plan is referenced by name in the comp plan but not adopted by reference, because as an interagency agreement it is not fully under the city's control. Lilliquist also noted the plan should inform the upcoming stormwater rate study and surface/stormwater comprehensive plan update — staff agreed the timing was appropriate.

Councilmember Anderson moved approval, with Council President Stone (observing) asking that the motion explicitly name the tribal and agency partners.

Vote: Unanimous "aye" — forwarded with a positive recommendation to include all named partners (Lummi Nation, Nooksack Indian Tribe, and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife).

Pacific Street Operations Center Fleet Building Improvements — Contract Award (Item 24918)

Public Works is replacing the roof, upgrading heating and ventilation, and improving the fluid distribution system at the fleet maintenance building at the Pacific Street Operations Center. The improvements will also add a direct vehicle exhaust system and replace gas heaters with electric units, reducing the building's carbon footprint. Staff noted mechanics have been working with buckets on the floor during heavy rains.

The city publicly opened bids on March 24, 2026. Highline Construction LLC submitted the lowest responsive bid at $808,459.37, well below the engineer's estimate of approximately $1.3 million. Because the engineer's estimate exceeded $1 million, apprenticeship-hour requirements will apply even though the final bid did not. Staff confirmed the architect spoke with the low bidder to verify they fully understood the scope.

Councilmember Anderson moved approval; Lilliquist confirmed the bidder review process before calling the vote.

Vote: Unanimous "aye" — forwarded with a positive recommendation to award the contract to Highline Construction LLC.

Resolution Adopting the Rapid Transit Locally Preferred Alternative (Item 24917)

Assistant Public Works Director for Transportation Tim Homan, joined by WTA General Manager Les Reardon and WTA Planning Director Tim Wilder, presented the culmination of a multi-year rapid transit study.

What it is: Rather than the classic model of dedicating large capital to a single premium corridor, Bellingham and WTA determined that the better approach was to enhance all four existing GO lines — which already run at 15-minute frequency — to reach 10-minute headways. At 10 minutes, riders no longer need a schedule; they simply show up and wait no more than 9 minutes. The WTA board adopted the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) at its April 2026 meeting.

Why it matters to the city: The LPA directly supports the 2025 Bellingham Plan's urban village model, transit corridor development, and mode-shift climate goals. The city's role involves infrastructure — signals, stop improvements, street modifications — while WTA handles service frequency.

The six improvement types in the LPA:

1. Increased bus frequency (WTA-led)

2. Bus stop islands (keep buses in the travel lane, reducing merge delays — estimated 20% time savings)

3. Queue jumps at congested intersections (e.g., Lincoln/Lakeway)

4. Advanced transit signal priority (TSP) on all GO lines — the gold line TSP project is already in a grant application and will appear on the city's TIP in June

5. Tier one (mini transit centers with amenities, bike parking, real-time signage) and tier two (upgraded shelters with branding) stops — with Barkley Village and Fairhaven identified as early priorities

6. Bus stop spacing standardized at quarter-mile intervals, and continued urban village/transit corridor land use support

Short-term improvements make up roughly 80% of the total capital program; tier one stops and some roadway prioritization are longer-term. Total short-term capital costs are approximately $36 million with an estimated $2–4.5 million annual operational cost increase for WTA once frequency improves.

Public outreach by WTA showed overwhelming support for the LPA, with majorities favoring faster, more reliable, more frequent service and supporting street modifications to benefit transit.

Discussion covered linking the LPA to the Multimodal Transportation Plan (staff agreed an annual comp plan update should reference it), adding LPA projects to the Transportation Improvement Program (the gold line TSP project will be on the June TIP), and land use policy along transit corridors. Planning staff noted that middle housing regulations and ADU rules already use proximity to GO lines as a factor, and that transportation impact fee incentives apply within a quarter mile of rapid transit/urban village areas.

Councilmember Cotton moved approval.

Vote: Unanimous "aye" — forwarded with a positive recommendation.

MOU with Whatcom Transportation Authority for Rapid Transit LPA Implementation (Item 24919)

This companion item authorizes the Mayor to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with WTA to formalize how the two agencies will collaborate on implementing the LPA — clarifying which improvements are city-led, which are WTA-led, and where responsibilities overlap. Staff described it as documenting shared intent for continuity across future staff.

Councilmember Cotton moved authorization.

Vote: Unanimous "aye" — forwarded with a positive recommendation.

Key Takeaways

Fish passage is a generational commitment: The city, Lummi Nation, Nooksack Tribe, and WDFW have adopted a voluntary, cooperative implementation plan to open blocked salmon habitat — targeting 25% restored in 30 years and 50% in 60 years, funded largely through grants the city is aggressively pursuing ($22M+ in applications finalized this month).

Rapid transit planning reaches a milestone: Bellingham and WTA formally adopted a Locally Preferred Alternative to upgrade all four GO lines to 10-minute frequency — a level at which riders don't need a schedule — through targeted infrastructure improvements across the city.

Both major plans are grant-ready: Staff emphasized that having multi-partner, formally adopted plans significantly strengthens the city's competitiveness for state and federal grants, particularly important given the current uncertainty in federal funding.

Fleet building gets long-overdue repairs: A $808,000 contract was awarded to fix the roof, HVAC, and fluid systems at the Pacific Street Operations Center — well under the $1.3M estimate — improving worker safety and reducing carbon emissions.

Land use and transit are increasingly linked: Council discussion reinforced that transit investment and land use policy along corridors must move together; existing middle housing, ADU, and TIF policies already incorporate GO line proximity, with more to come in permanent residential regulations later this year.

AI-generated summary from voice-to-text transcript. Not the official record. Verify important details with the source documents linked above.

What happened at this meeting

A resolution authorizing the City to apply for and enter into a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project grant for property acquisition on Squalicum Creek

Staff presented a resolution authorizing the City to apply for a Washington State Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project Grant for property acquisition on Squalicum Creek to support fish passage improvements and riparian habitat restoration at a Meridian Street crossing. Annalise Burns, habitat and restoration manager, explained this aligns with decades of restoration work on Squalicum Creek and complements other ongoing projects including fish passage barrier remediation. Councilmember Lisa (Cotton or Anderson) expressed support, noting it was a great opportunity to advance restoration work, especially regarding culverts. The motion passed unanimously with a positive recommendation.

An interagency agreement adopting a voluntary culvert remediation implementation plan

# Summary

Staff presented a voluntary interagency agreement between the City of Bellingham, Lummi Nation, Nooksack Indian Tribe, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to adopt a culvert remediation implementation plan. Annalise Burns explained that while the State faces court-ordered fish passage remediation, the City's approach is voluntary and reflects tribal treaty rights and 25+ years of $43 million in stream restoration work. The City identified 174 culverts across eight watersheds, with 126 functioning as full or partial fish passage barriers; using prioritization criteria developed with tribal communities, staff determined that the top 60 barriers would cost $289 million, making traditional fixed-budget approaches unworkable with realistic grant funding of approximately $1.5 million annually. The new MOA establishes 30-year and 60-year goals to open 25% and 50% of blocked habitat respectively, with coordination mechanisms including annual 6-year project plan updates, stakeholder input at design phases, and community outreach. As of 2024-2025, three barriers have been completed, eight are in design, the next construction project is planned for Padden Creek in 2027-2029, and the City is finalizing over $22 million in grant applications.

A resolution adopting the rapid transit locally preferred alternative

# Summary

Tim Homan, Assistant Public Works Director for Transportation, presented a resolution to adopt the Rapid Transit Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA), a joint planning document developed by the City and Whatcom Transportation Authority (WTA) based on a 2023 feasibility study confirming rapid transit viability for Bellingham's size. The LPA shifts from upgrading a single rapid transit line to enhancing all four existing GO Lines to achieve 10-minute service frequency, which eliminates the need for riders to check schedules and supports the city's urban village growth model and climate goals. Implementation includes multiple infrastructure enhancements—such as bus stop islands, transit signal priority, optimized bus stop spacing, and tier one and two stops with varying amenities—designed to improve on-time performance and prevent bus bunching. The project requires $36 million in short-term capital costs and $2-4.5 million in annual operational costs, funded through a combination of city funding (including the transportation benefits district) and grant funding, with the first project already underway on a Transit Signal Priority grant for the gold line. Public outreach by WTA showed overwhelming support for the LPA, and the committee voted to recommend approval to the full council, with staff subsequently presenting a Memorandum of Understanding between the City and WTA to implement and prioritize the rapid transit improvements.

A contract award for the Pacific Street Operations Center fleet building improvements, Project EF164, Bid No. 8B-2026

Public Works presented a contract award to Highline Construction LLC for $808,459.37 to replace the roof, upgrade heating and ventilation systems, and address fluid distribution at the Pacific Street Operations Center fleet building (Project EF164). The bid was significantly lower than the engineer's estimate of $1.3 million, and staff confirmed through architect outreach that the lowest bidder thoroughly reviewed specifications and understood the project requirements. Committee member Lisa expressed enthusiasm about improved working conditions for employees, and the motion to approve passed unanimously.

Authorization to enter into a memorandum of understanding with Whatcom Transportation Authority for implementation and prioritization of the rapid transit locally preferred alternative

# Summary

Staff sought council authorization to enter into a memorandum of understanding between the City of Bellingham and Whatcom Transportation Authority to implement and prioritize the adopted rapid transit locally preferred alternative, which includes improvements to existing GO Lines that decrease travel times and improve service reliability. Council Member Chase moved to authorize the mayor to enter into the MOU, outlining how both parties will work together on service and infrastructure improvements. The motion passed unanimously with a positive recommendation to the full council.

Agenda items (5)

Procedural (5)

24899ProceduralA resolution authorizing the City to apply for and enter into a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project grant for property acquisition on Squalicum Creek

The city is seeking approval to apply for a state grant that would fund the purchase of land along Squalicum Creek for habitat conservation purposes.

What happened

24916ProceduralAn interagency agreement adopting a voluntary culvert remediation implementation plan

Multiple agencies are agreeing to work together on a plan to fix culverts (pipes under roads that allow water flow) to improve environmental conditions.

What happened

24917ProceduralA resolution adopting the rapid transit locally preferred alternative

The city council is formally adopting a preferred plan for rapid transit service in the Bellingham area.

What happened

24918ProceduralA contract award for the Pacific Street Operations Center fleet building improvements, Project EF164, Bid No. 8B-2026

The city is awarding a contract to a company to improve the fleet building at the Pacific Street Operations Center, where the city maintains its vehicles and equipment.

What happened

24919ProceduralAuthorization to enter into a memorandum of understanding with Whatcom Transportation Authority for implementation and prioritization of the rapid transit locally preferred alternative

The city and Whatcom Transportation Authority are establishing an agreement to work together to implement and prioritize the rapid transit plan.

What happened

Additional votes recorded in minutes

Recommend approval of resolution for WWRP Habitat Conservation Project grant on Squalicum Creek

aye 3

Jace Cottonaye

Lisa Andersonaye

Michael Lilliquistaye

Recommend approval of interagency memorandum of agreement for Fish Barrier Culvert Remediation Project

aye 3

Jace Cottonaye

Lisa Andersonaye

Michael Lilliquistaye

Award contract for Pacific Street Operations Center fleet building improvements, Project EF164, Bid No. 8B-2026

aye 3

Jace Cottonaye

Lisa Andersonaye

Michael Lilliquistaye

Recommend approval of resolution adopting the rapid transit locally preferred alternative

aye 3

Jace Cottonaye

Lisa Andersonaye

Michael Lilliquistaye

Authorize MOU with Whatcom Transportation Authority for rapid transit locally preferred alternative

aye 3

Jace Cottonaye

Lisa Andersonaye

Michael Lilliquistaye

Verbatim transcript available

225 transcript segments indexed

Okay, welcome back. So, the next committee this afternoon is Public Works and Natural Resources. That committee is chaired by Councilmember Lilliquist, so I will turn it over to them at this time. Thank you, Hannah.

City of Bellingham Public Works and Natural Resources Committee minutes April 27, 2026, 1:20 PM Chair: Michael Lilliquist Phone: 360-778-8200 Members: Lisa Anderson, Jace Cotton Email: ccmail@cob.org Web: cob.org/council City Council committee meetings Standing committee members receive reports and information, ask questions, and vote on a recommended action for consideration by the full Council at the regular meeting.

There is no public comment period during committee sessions. Call to order and roll call Council President Stone called the meeting to order at 1:31 p.m. Present: Committee Chair Michael Lilliquist, Sixth Ward Committee Member Lisa Anderson, Fifth Ward Committee Member Jace Cotton, At-Large 24899 1.

For this committee, I'm joined by Councilmembers Cotton and Anderson, and we have a full schedule of five items in just over an hour to do it. Um, uh these are some pretty important items. I don't want to go too quickly.

A resolution authorizing the City to apply for and enter into a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project grant for property acquisition on Squalicum Creek Summary: Joel Pfundt, Public Works Director, and Analiese Burns, Habitat & Restoration Manager, presented the resolution, which authorizes the City to apply for and enter into a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project Grant for property acquisition on Squalicum Creek.

The first one is a resolution authorizing the city to apply for and enter into Washington State Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project Grant for the acquisition property acquisition on Squalicum Creek.

Uh staff's prepared is is preparing a grant application, and the property would support fish passage improvements and riparian habitat function associated with a crossing at Meridian Street. The Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office requires a council resolution to authorize the grant application and designate authority for administration of the grant.

Council Members discussed the resolution and asked questions. Action: Lisa Anderson moved to recommend approval of the resolution. MOTION CARRIED 3-0. 24916 2. An interagency agreement adopting a voluntary culvert remediation implementation plan Summary: Page 1 of 3 Joel Pfundt, Public Works Director, and Analiese Burns, Habitat and Restoration Manager, presented the interagency agreement between the Lummi Nation, Nooksack Indian Tribe, City of Bellingham, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, adopting a Fish Barrier Remediation Project Implementation Plan.

Um Mr. Funk, do you want to start with this or Annalise Burns, habitat and restoration manager, Public Works Natural Resources. Um yeah, this is a fantastic opportunity. Um we have a grant that aligns well with this property acquisition.

Council Members discussed the agreement and asked questions. Action: Lisa Anderson moved to recommend approval of the interagency memorandum of agreement with the Lummi Nation, Nooksack Indian Tribe, and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife for the Fish Barrier Culvert Remediation Project.

MOTION CARRIED 3-0. 24918 3. A contract award for the Pacific Street Operations Center fleet building improvements, Project EF164, Bid No. 8B-2026 Summary: Carol Rofkar, Public Works Assistant Director - Internal Services, and Scott Jorissen, Facilities Project Manager, presented the contract award for the Pacific Street Operations Center Fleet Building Improvements Project.

The acquisition is in support of restoring Squalicum Creek, something that we have worked on for decades, and there is a a strategic approach this fits well within the bounds of a couple of other projects that are going on that would complement those projects, including the fish passage barrier um uh that uh is along Squalicum Creek in the same vicinity, and uh uh also the willing landowner that is uh in conversation with the city.

Thank you. Any discussion or motions? Lisa? Um thank you. This is a great opportunity. Always glad to see when um we can move forward on some of our restoration, especially with the culverts. Um so, with that, I will move approval of um um authorizing the city to apply and enter into a Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program Habitat Conservation Project Grant for property acquisition on Squalicum Creek.

The project will replace the roof, upgrade heating and ventilation systems, and address fluid distribution at the fleet building. Council Members discussed the contract award and asked questions. Action: Lisa Anderson moved to award bid No.8B-2026 for the Pacific Street Operations Center fleet building improvements, Project EF164, to Highline Construction, LLC in the amount of $808,459.37.

Thank you. You have a motion before us. Any further discussion? Okay, seeing no discussion, all those in favor of authorizing this resolution, signify by saying I. I. >> I. Any opposed? I'll bring it forward with a positive recommendation.

MOTION CARRIED 3-0. 24917 4. A resolution adopting the rapid transit locally preferred alternative Summary: Tim Hohmann, Public Works Assistant Director - Transportation, Tim Wilder, Whatcom Transit Authority Planning Director, and Chris Behee, Long Range Planning Manager, presented the resolution, which adopts the rapid transit locally preferred alternative.

All right, excellent work. Good luck with that grant. The next item is kind of related in the sense that it has to do with water quality. Let me get to that page. This is an interagency agreement adopting a voluntary culvert remediation implementation plan.

Council Members discussed the resolution and asked questions. The presentation is available here. Action: Jace Cotton moved to recommend approval of the resolution. MOTION CARRIED 3-0. Page 2 of 3 24919 5.

Authorization to enter into a memorandum of understanding with Whatcom Transportation Authority for implementation and prioritization of the rapid transit locally preferred alternative Summary: Tim Hohmann, Public Works Assistant Director - Transportation, presented the memorandum of understanding with Whatcom Transportation Authority for implementing and prioritizing the rapid transit locally preferred alternative.

The City of Bellingham, the Lummi Nation, the Nooksack Indian Tribe, and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife have voluntarily entered into a 2022 memorandum of agreement to cooperatively remediate city-owned fish passage barriers.

Council Members discussed the resolution and asked questions. Action: Jace Cotton moved to authorize the Mayor to enter into the memorandum of understanding with Whatcom Transportation Authority for implementation and prioritization of the rapid transit locally preferred alternative.

It was a rather short and simple document, but important in its intent. But since 2022, these entities have inventoried and prioritized quite extensively the city-owned barriers and created an implementation plan plan to guide future actions.

Staff's here today recommending the City Council to adopt a new interagency fish barrier remediation project implementation plan and a memorandum of agreement affirming each entity's commitment to cooperative culvert remediation.

Annalisa, I think you're here to present. Um first to tell us about the issue and then about the plan itself. Yes, thank you. Annalise Burns, habitat and restoration manager, Public Works Natural Resources.

Um I'm extremely excited to be here today. This is many years in the coming, and as I'll acknowledge in a minute, has many partners that we can acknowledge as part of this work. So, to to remind ourselves, uh we've been doing restoration in the City of Bellingham is doing been doing restoration along our streams, including fish passage as well as uh floodplain rehabilitation and habitat improvements for a variety of species for more than 25 years, and have been actively securing grants and doing work totaling to date $43 million worth of work.

So, this is this is work that has been going on, but there is more to do. And there has been a highlight recently on fish passage barriers. So, you might be aware that there are barriers that prevent fish from moving from the ocean up into their full extent of their habitats.

The State of Washington is under a court order to uh remediate or improve those fish passage barriers to make sure that fish can access their full habitat uh up through barriers that the state owns. So, that includes, you know, for driving on I-5, a lot of the work that the construction work that we see, that's the state doing their work to fulfill that court order to improve those fish passage barriers so that fish can seamlessly move under the state highways.

And um that work uh obviously is done under a court order. This approach that the city is taking um is for our city-owned barriers, and we are not under that court order. I I hear this question all the time, are we doing this because of a court order?

This is a voluntary approach. So, we see the same um issues that the city has with city-owned barriers, but we are um acknowledge that this is a tribal treaty right that we are supporting, and as part of that work, we're committed to doing that work, and um we have been doing it on our own, but we'd like to take uh the approach it Okay.

[laughter] Um >> [clears throat] >> we'd like to make sure that we are doing it consistent with the co-managers. So, the co-managers are the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and for us, it's Nooksack Indian Tribe and Lummi Nation.

And we want to make sure that we're working cooperatively, and we're all in agreement about the shared approach. And so, we um are taking a a slightly different approach here, and I want to just acknowledge to take a voluntary approach, it means that a lot of people have to be at the table and make sure that um we're in agreement.

And so, I wanted to just take a moment and specifically name some entities that allow this different type of approach to happen. So, um the Nooksack Indian Tribe has been a key player at the table, and specifically Mike Modlin at the staff level has been instrumental.

Lummi Nation has also been heavily participating, and the key staff person for Lummi Nation is Greg Dunphy. Department of Fish and Wildlife, our key partners have been Joel Ingram, Marcus Reeves, Willie Lizzie Lutz, and Samuel Harris.

And we have an excellent consulting team who's been guiding this work, and led by Paul Schlinger. He's actually in the audience today. Thank you, Paul. Stacy Marion and Nicole Lebedinski. So, this this team has really changed the way that people can think about fish passage barriers.

This is a a new and innovative approach that the city is trying with our co-managers. So, in 2022, we signed a memorandum of agreement that that outlined how we're going to approach this cooperative approach, um and we have been working since 2022 in fulfilling that work.

The key components, just to remind yourself of what that 2022 MOA consisted of, was that all the signatories, so this is the Lummi Nation, Nooksack Indian Tribe, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the city, we all are coordinating to support developing an inventory of the city-owned barriers, so we understand the full extent of what we need to accomplish, prioritizing those barriers.

The city had previously prioritized it using our own methods, but we we want to circle back and make sure that that prioritization does take into account all of the entities' views. So, reprioritizing the city-owned barriers, evaluating designs, developing a schedule, obtaining regulatory permissions, and securing funding.

So, all of the partners are working together on all elements of this approach. So, since 2022, we've been doing that work. I want to say thank you to Mike Modlin to Nooksack Indian Tribe, um and to the NOAA to NOAA for the funding.

They provided funding to actually begin this work. So, we began solidifying our inventory. We found that the inventory we were working off of, which is the state's inventory, had some gaps, and and we needed to correct some of the the designations of the barriers, and also there were some that were missing off of the list.

So, we have in the City of Bellingham eight different watersheds, and we are responsible for 90 miles of anadromous habitat. Anadromous is just a fancy word for salmon that move from the ocean to freshwater and back.

So, 90 miles of habitat is what we're stewarding. We have 174 city-owned culverts that intersect with streams. 126 of those culverts are either full barriers to fish passage or partial. Uh so, 126 are not allowing the full extent of fish through.

>> [snorts] >> Here's a some photos of what some of those might look like. They're probably very familiar if you take a walk anywhere in the city of Bellingham. We have lots of water everywhere. You've probably seen some pipes pipes under roads, under trails.

They come in different shapes and they cause fish to not be able to pass through for a variety of reasons. Sometimes the water's moving too fast in the winter. Sometimes in summer the water's too shallow.

Sometimes there's a drop that they can't jump up. So, there's a variety of reasons why they can't get through and all of them would be considered barriers. So, once we figured out the inventory which is 126, then we prioritized them and we again we circled back to make sure that we're prioritizing it in a way that everyone felt comfortable with.

So, here are some of the components that we ended up agreeing on. These were in agreement after we had reached out to communities that would be affected most by um by fish barriers and the remediation of them.

And so, that included tribal communities. We reached out specifically to tribal communities and asked for their input. This does reflect what we heard. So, upstream habitat quantity, how many miles are we going to open up?

The severity barrier of the barrier meaning how many you know, is it blocking all fish or just some fish? Downstream barriers, are there barriers down below something that we're going to fix or is it the first one in line?

We're looking also at upstream habitat quality. So, if we're going to open up habitat, how how usable is it? How high functioning is it? And then we are also looking at core salmon production area which is a a term that's basically used to a designation by the Department of Fish and Wildlife of how the salmon use the area.

So, for instance, do they use it for spawning? So, we used those components to prioritize the barriers and this is a graphic that shows scoring. We scored them and and and ranked them. And this is one graph that shows that the anadromous which is in blue, that's the fish that move back and forth from the ocean.

Those scored generally higher. That reflected some of the input that we were hearing from the tribes about concentrating on resources that are economically important and culturally important to the tribes.

That is generally higher for anadromous fish. But we also did have on the list uh streams that only have resident fish too. Like for instance, above the natural barrier in Whatcom Falls Park would be in the stream in Whatcom Falls Park that we generally think of the fish from the ocean can't go back and forth there, but there's resident fish that still live up above the falls.

So, they're still on the list. If there was a barrier up there, it would still be on the list, but a lower priority. So, the second thing we did which is fairly unique and we've gotten quite a few calls from other jurisdictions on how we did this is um we know the priority for fish of how we wanted to um the order in which we wanted to fix the barriers, but how feasible was it?

And one of the things that really stood out was the cost of these projects are extremely high and we're learning more and more how costly all the jurisdictions are trying to grapple with that issue. So, the city pays for fish passage barriers primarily through grants.

We also have our some of our funding from our stormwater utility going toward fish passage. That generally pays for permanent staff, water quality improvements that are ongoing including stormwater retrofits.

That's partly what our stormwater utility pays for. Stormwater utility pays for long-term maintenance and our grant matches. So, we're utilizing our stormwater utility to the best effect we can, but the remainder of a fish passage barrier which is in the millions to fix is really grant funded.

So, when what we did is we took the top 60. So, we have 126 barriers. We took the top 60 and we said, "How much would it cost?" So, the highest priority 60 barriers, when we did a cost estimate in 2025 dollars, that was with the help of our engineering team.

I'm looking at Tim. Thank you, Tim. >> [laughter] >> Um was a 289 million dollars. And that helped our whole team when we were looking at how are we going to accomplish this work and develop an implementation plan if the top 60 are 289 million dollars and were grant mostly grant funded work.

We said, "Well, what could we reasonably expect to um have in grant funding could that we could predictably get?" And you know, an estimate would be we could probably predictably get about a million and a half per year every year for in perpetuity if we were being realistic.

It would take [snorts] us 193 years to get through just the top 60 barriers which was unacceptable to everyone at the table including the city of Bellingham. So, the way that the state of Washington in their implementation is working is it was a certain amount of money per you know, it was a it was very sort of commitment of funding to get through the list.

We realized that the commitment of funding because it's grant funded and especially because the the landscape of funding right now from the federal government is significantly changed. That didn't seem like a workable solution.

So, we needed instead of using a dollar amount per year we that was problematic. We needed a different way to show progress. So, instead together we decided to to use an approach that developed a goal, a milestone and projections.

This is a very unique approach. It's not something that on the state had used. We kind of crafted this for the city. We said the program goal is to restore of course access to 100% of the length of the habitat by city owned culverts.

The milestone [snorts] will be that the near-term work. So, within the next 6 years, upcoming 6 years, we are going to list out the work that we plan to do in the next 6 years. It's very much like the 6-year tip.

And we're going to project we're going to give a projection for how long it will take us or or what I'm sorry, not long how long it will take us, but how many barriers which barriers will get us in the first 30 years to opening up 25% of the blocked habitat.

So, that's that's what we're aiming for is the next 30 years we want 25% of the blocked habitat to be opened up. And in the next 60 years, 50% of the blocked habitat to be opened up. And we're going to um be in close coordination to keep up to date on how close how our progress is going toward those projections.

So, the implementation plan that we have created um has those goals, milestones and projections. And then it has a this is the key component, coordination very specific coordination. So, every um the program coordination is that we're meeting once annually and we will the city of Bellingham give an update on our 6-year plan for the projects that are happening in the next 6 years, how our funding is looking, how the design progress is going.

The actual projects themselves, we will invite all of the entities to the table to comment on our scoping phase, our 30% designs, our 60% designs, our 90% designs and the completion phase. We will also continue what we've been doing for decades is participate in the WRIA 1 salmon staff team.

And we will have community coordination meeting outreach meetings and neighborhood meetings as needed. So, that's all set out in the implementation plan for expectations of how we're going to do this work.

And that's memorialized in this new memorandum of agreement that is before you today. So, today we're here to present a new memorandum of agreement that adopts the inventory, the prioritization and this implementation plan.

And this MOA would supersede the previous MOA. So, we've essentially completed part of the work of the previous MOA. This is the new one adopting that body of work that I just went over the commitments that are in the implementation plan is kind of the key part of this MOA.

So, the MOA key components, all signatories agree to adopt the inventory adopt the prioritization adopt the implementation plan adaptively manage and coordinate with each other. Again, support obtaining regulatory permissions which was in the original MOA and also support securing funding together which was also in the original MOA.

Um it's been working very well so far. We've already been working cooperatively to secure funding. Just wanted to let you know where we are today. Just because we've been working for the last 4 years on this body of work doesn't mean we've been stopping working on actual projects.

So, we've been doing them simultaneously. So, we have three barriers completed already in the 2024 and 2025 time span and we have eight barriers in design. The next project to go to construction is Padden Creek at 30th Street which is near the AM/PM if you're going off Old Fairhaven Parkway.

The city owns a barrier on 30th Street and we're anticipating construction in the 2027 to 2029 time frame for that project. And we are in the midst of finalizing um, applications for over $22 million worth of grants that we're finalizing this month.

So, we continue this work. It's been very successful, um, and we look forward to uh, continuing this voluntary approach. I think that because the the funding landscape has changed, I think this cooperative approach is probably a a more secure way of proceeding, um, and we hope that, um, it will get us to the end point of full fish passage, um, faster and more efficiently.

Thank you. I'm here for questions if you have any. Thank you, Ms. Burns. Uh, committee members, questions, discussion? Go ahead, Jay. I think that this, um, is a great testament to the the leadership that the city is taking in close partnership with the tribes to tackle this issue.

That number of how long [snorts] it would take to remove all the barriers is depressing to me. Um, as I'm sure it is to you. Yes. Um, can you give me a sense of what we're able to do from our existing stormwater fund resources and, um, what, um, other local funding sources we might evaluate in the future to, um, expand [clears throat] what we're able to do from a local matching perspective.

Yeah, I I can take a stab at it and Joel can, uh, chime in if if I've missed something. I think that we're in an enviable position in that we have a stormwater utility that that is written in a way that allows us to use, uh, funding for fish passage.

Um, that is fairly unique and what we do that that is different than some other jurisdictions, especially jurisdictions of our size, is that we have dedicated staffing. So, that that grant funding helps pay for staff that are secure and we can, um, stay with a project over the long term and we can, uh, build relationships with grant funders and, you know, that that staffing is key.

The other part is that we have some match funding and so, I think our stormwater utility is incredibly important and it is being very successful in doing, I think, the most efficient use of that money, which is to, um, set a solid foundation for going and get grant grant money and we have been extremely successful getting grant money.

So, like I said, you know, we could promise, maybe, that we could get a 1.5 million per year every year, you know, may a promise is probably too strong a word, but it's it's likely, but like I said, we're finalizing $22 million worth of grant funding this year.

So, having that permanent staff and match allows us to go um, as far as we possibly can, um, with whatever funding is available from the state and federal government. So, local, probably not a lot of other funding that I can think of, but it um, what we have is key.

Yeah, and I can add [clears throat] on to that, or maybe even just, um, emphasize that that is, um, you know, I think that we've been so successful because we we have [clears throat] a plan that we've invested in developing and developing.

We have dedicated staff and we have that, um, that that grant match that I think so many communities just don't have those three things in place, which are just so critical to being able to leverage that outside money.

Certainly, you know, additional funds, um, could allow us to, you know, stretch those grants further and leverage them to a larger degree, but, um, that is I think it's really clear that that's why we've been so successful.

Go ahead, Jay. Um, so, I I think our customer assistance program updated discount rates also applies to our, um, stormwater charges and so, I'm curious if there we've seen any impact to that fund or will we will start to see any impact to that fund after implementation.

Um, sorry, kind of a tangential question, but, um, and feel free to follow up if that's not immediately available. Yeah, I think we'd have to follow up on that and see the the knock-on impacts and if there were any, yeah.

Um, so, I have, uh, a lot to say. First of all, um, I love this very, very much and I think I won't be the only one. I I think you're you're right about our success in getting grants. Having a multi-jurisdictional, you know, approach like this with agreed-upon prioritization with with, you know, focusing on what what has the most impact first, if I was a grant funding agency, I would love us and I think they will love us.

Well, you you showed one map, but there were some other maps in there and it made it really clear that the first few bites are obvious. You know, there was 174 culverts, 126 passages, $289 million. The numbers are huge and big, but really it's three main creeks and then when you look at the map, there's just a series of projects at the mouth or the early part of each of those creeks.

They're really easy to understand projects when you look at it, right? Watkins Creek up until this blockage again, Patton Creek up until natural blockage and then the beginning, I think, of you know, one Patton Creek up to Watkins and Watkins Creek also the beginning.

Squawkum is one I forgot to mention. That's a really high value stream. So, really this plan, those maps paints a really easy to understand picture. So, it makes me not look at the $289 million number, but look at more like a number that's 20 to 40 to 60 million over the next 6 years, which might get us to the target of 25% of the blocked habitat opening up.

That number actually seems doable and so, what I appreciate about the plan is that it went beyond just the first big numbers and and focused in on, okay, what's the near term, what's the priority, what can we do, what do those numbers look like.

Um, so, I'm very, very, um, hopeful about this. Um, we're looking for a motion. This has to do with an interagency agreement. Lisa. Thank you. Um, again, I I do appreciate this and I love the agreement because as council member Local stated, I think if I was a funding arm for federal or state looking that our, uh, tribal partners are working with us on this, kind of buoys us a little bit, hopefully more towards the top.

Um, and I think this is great work. So, with that, I move approval of agenda item 24916, an interagency agreement adopting a voluntary culvert remediation implementation plan. Thank you for the motion before us.

Continue discussion. I have two small things. One is, I please confirm that I'm right. These grants, if we if and when we receive them, they will help to pay for staff support including design engineering.

In other words, what I don't want to have happen is we get all this grant money, we don't have the staff to make it happen. Won't the grant also help for the staff potentially hiring the engineering staff we need to get up to 90% design or, you know, whatever it needs that we can grow the staff capacity with the grants.

>> [snorts] >> Yes, we have been the last, um, several grants that we've submitted, we have included staff time uh, as part of that, so we have a billing, uh, a way of being able to keep track of how much staff time and then bill toward the grant.

So, yes, that does include that as well. >> Yeah, cuz I wouldn't want these great projects to compete with other projects that staff are already doing in in other parts of public works. Uh, the next thing is, um, our comprehensive plan, I'm told, is a living document.

Right? That we can link new implementation plans. We have these adopted by reference. This isn't quite adopted by reference. I noticed the comprehensive service and stormwater plan is adopted by reference to the comp plan.

Um, since that is a living document, it seems to me that the implementation plan portion of this really could be or should be linked to the comprehensive plan as it relates to not just service and stormwater, but but also it has links to our transportation choices we make with regard to when we're doing bridge enhancements for transportation purposes.

What is staff's reaction to somehow kind of like linking up this implementation plan with the comprehensive plan, you know, publicly in the document? Um, I won't, uh, answer on behalf of the planning community development department, but it is certainly a great observation that I think we can take a look at and see if this is an appropriate one to to link up with and and make sure that we're reflecting that this is, uh, this is a further implementation of the goals and policies that are, you know, reflected in the plan.

And and if not, sorry. Go ahead. >> just chime in, um, and this is partly the the great work that the planning department has done to have a coordinated approach in developing their comprehensive plan.

Um, I was, uh, part of that team and I asked that same question, um, cuz we knew that this implementation plan was coming and, um, the answer that I received was that, um, it is it is named in the comprehensive plan, um, but it is not adopted by reference because it's an interagency agreement.

And so, when it's an interagency agreement, the recommendation, um, was to it isn't under our complete control and so, to not adopt by reference, but instead, um, sort of link it by, um, by name like it is it is named in the comprehensive plan.

That's helpful. There is a part of the whole agreement, which is the last part, part E or whatever, which is the plan. That's the part I'm referring to. Um so how current So if not linked to the comp plan, how is it linked to the surface and stormwater plan?

How recent is the surface and stormwater plan? And how actively are those two documents linked? Uh yes, so obviously the funding, the utility funding is key for this work. Um so it's been several years since we have updated our stormwater surface surface and stormwater comprehensive plan.

So that plan is slated for um updating in the next couple of years along with a rate study with our other utilities. And so what's really nice about the timing of this is we have now an implementation plan that allows us to have a more informed rate study, which then can adopt or update the surface and stormwater plan.

So it's happening in probably the proper order. >> I completely agree. I think this plan in its sense uh should lead and shape the stormwater plan rather than say follow it. I think it should lead it.

Uh thank you. Any further discussion from other council members? If not, I'll call the motion and which is to uh recommend approval of the interagency agreement adopting a voluntary culvert remediation implementation plan.

All those in favor Oh, Councilmember Stone. Could you just do me a favor since this is an interagency memorandum, the requested motion includes naming those partners in the middle of the agenda bill? Sure.

So this is a motion to approve an interagency agreement which includes the Lummi Nation, the Nooksack Indian Tribe, and the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. I. Any opposed? None. I'll bring forward a positive recommendation tonight including to list all the partners in the agreement. Thank you. And I should have said earlier that um there are several um entities watching this presentation right now and watching the work that we're doing.

Um some of them might have called in and I I did um say that I would let them say a couple of words if they wanted. I don't I don't know. I don't see any of them on the screen. No one. Okay. Okay. Just wanted to make sure I didn't miss it.

Thank you. Uh thank you very much. Uh we'll go on to the next item which if I've turned the page is correctly is a contract award for the Pacific Street Operations Center Fleet Building Improvements which is project number EF164.

Public Works is replacing the roof, upgrading the heating and ventilation systems, and addressing fluid distribution at the fleet building in Pacific Street Operations Center complex. The city publicly opened bids on March 24th and Highline Construction LLC was the responsible bidder who submitted the lowest responsive bid of $808,000 plus change including sales tax.

The engineer's estimate was higher than that, 1.3 million in change. And the project uh even though the final amount was below a million dollars, since our estimate was above a million dollars, we're going to treat it as if the we're going to it would the apprenticeship requirement apprenticeship hour requirement will apply.

Um Would you like to present this, Ms. Rothgar? Yes. Um good afternoon, Council. Carol Rothgar, assistant director for Public Works with uh Internal Services. Along beside me is Scott Jorson who will be the project manager on this project.

This is a a project that's been a long time coming. Our mechanics have been working with um buckets at certain points and during heavy rains, so we're very excited to have this project come through. Um we were also able to get four alternates in the project which include um the uh fluid distribution system which will help alleviate some of the barrels of oil that are along the floor and will um upgrade some of the hose that's in there that leaking, so that's kind of exciting.

And then um a new vehicle exhaust system, so we'll be venting straight directly out of the roof instead of having a a um sort of um hodgepodge of of ducting that goes all through the the ceiling. So yeah, so we're really excited about this project.

And it sounds like some of these improvements actually just actually free up space by using up less ceiling room, less floor space. Yeah. Yeah, we have the larger vehicles and so when we're lifting up the the vehicles to work underneath it, we're often getting just into a fraction of where that the heating heaters are or the vents are, so it's really yeah, it's been problematic.

Um part of the project also is replacing the existing gas heaters uh in certain locations, so we're able to pull those out and put new uh electric heaters in the corner which will reduce our carbon footprint in that.

So. Committee members. Lisa. I don't have any questions. Um but I am excited for this along with you. Um it'll be nice that our employees who work in this facility will have a better working environment, hopefully even safer with less things underfoot.

Um so with that I move to approve agenda item um to award the bid number 8B-2026 for the Pacific Street Operations Center Fleet Building Improvements project EF164 to Highline Construction LLC in the amount of $808,459.37.

You have a motion before us. Any further discussion? I have just one question. So the uh the bid amount is lower than the engineer's estimate by a fair fraction. There was the usual and a pretty ordinary spread in the bid prices.

Uh was there any check done to make sure that the bidder like really read the specifications and like didn't like omit something or anything like that? Yeah, do you want to answer that, Scott? Yep. I Scott Jorson uh public facilities manager.

Um Yeah, we we uh we have our architect reach out to the to the bidder, the lowest bidder, and and they have that conversation, make sure that they read thoroughly and have any questions, and that conversation went well and and they know what they're bidding on.

Okay, that's reassuring. Uh all those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? I'll bring forward a recommendation to award that bid tonight. Thank you very much. Good work. Uh next two items are related.

Um One is a resolution adopting the Rapid Transit Locally Preferred Alternative which is a uh planning implementation document with regard to Whatcom Transportation Authority. And the next item would be an authorization to enter into a memorandum of understanding between Whatcom Transportation Authority and the city for implementation and prioritization of that Rapid Transit Locally Preferred Alternative.

So that one naturally follows the first one. Uh Mr. Homan, I see you're here to discuss the resolution itself to adopt the Rapid Transit Locally Preferred Alternative. Uh thank you very much uh Chair Lillquist, members of the committee, and other members of the council.

Thanks for having me. Tim Homan, uh assistant Public Works Director for Transportation. And I'm joined uh today uh by some folks from WTA because this is a shared project between the city and WTA. I have Les Reardon's uh the general manager of WTA, and uh Tim Wilder, the planning director of WTA here to join us.

Um We're pretty excited to uh to uh bring this before you today. And like I like you mentioned, this is a this will be a uh resolution for adoption of the Rapid Transit Locally Preferred Alternative, and then yeah, we'll follow it up with the next item which is a memorandum of understanding um which we'll go quickly through after we talk about the LPA a little bit.

So we've been working on the uh the Rapid Transit study uh for a couple years now. We started in uh 2023 with a feasibility study to look at whether Rapid Transit was even doable in a city like Bellingham.

Uh at that point uh we saw that there were other cities of similar size doing it uh we and that it would be a feasible option. We dove into studying it a little more and came to the conclusion that the initial initial Rapid Transit study envisioned a more classical Rapid Transit uh system which would be uh dedicating a significant amount of money to upgrade one one line.

That's that's classically how Rapid Transit has been done around the country. Um and we identified uh as I'll talk in a little bit that that maybe wasn't exactly the right solution for Bellingham. So during that kind of 23 to 24 range, we took a little little uh direction shift and we shifted more towards enhancing the existing GO lines.

Um then in 2025, we brought that forward I think in May uh to the council just to talk about that uh shift and to to adopt a preliminary locally preferred alternative if you can remember back then. Uh WTA presented that and since that time we've been working uh on identifying the projects and finalizing the LPA, and we're ready to bring that forward today.

Uh just of note, the WTA board uh passed this some of you know cuz you're on the WTA board, but the WTA board passed this the adopted the locally preferred alternative on behalf of WTA uh at their uh meeting first meeting in April.

So we're bringing that for forward today for you. Uh so, like I said, the the in studying the local the rapid transit in Bellingham, we came to the realization that we already have some good really good go for really good go lines uh that right now provide 15-minute service.

So, uh instead of uh looking to upgrade just one of those with a a significant amount of money, um we thought, why don't we look at They They all four can serve uh the the different urban villages in different um places that people want to go around the city.

And so, why don't we look at smaller projects that we can enhance service enhance uh the on-time uh performance of those go lines in such a way that we can get down to 10-minute service on each of those four lines.

So, really quick, why why [sighs] So, if this is just about transit, why is this a city project? Um so, contained in the in the 2025 Bellingham plan, as you folks recently uh passed, are quite a few different goals both for transportation, but first I wanted to touch on uh how how we want to grow as a city.

We We have put forth this model of growing through urban villages and connecting those through transit corridors. And so, that's exactly what the rapid transit study does. It It looks to make connection uh uh with transit with high high you know, um frequency transit to those urban villages, other transit cities centers, other key locations.

Uh it'll help us define the transit corridors that are identified in the Bellingham plan for uh transit-oriented development as well as other, you know, uh multi-family mixed-use development. And then it'll increase the access to transit for everybody.

From a transportation standpoint, it also meets many of the goals contained in the multimodal uh element of the transport of the Bellingham plan, including expanding the transportation uh network, providing more multimodal options for transit, but not just for transit, because every transit trip also has elements of a pedestrian trip or a bicycle trip.

Uh and it also helps us realize our mode shift goals, which are going to help us meet climate goals as well. So, ultimately, just to boil it down, what will this project accomplish? It's going to get more people wanting to ride the bus.

It's going to help support the growth of the higher density growth that we've envisioned for the city. And it's going to make transit more attractive even when the streets get more congested due to that growth.

So, uh let's talk really quick about uh rap the the problem of rapid transit. How do How do we provide more frequent service? Is it just about putting more buses on the street? No, unfortunately, it's not.

Uh if you If you just add buses, um we're going to get a concept that we refer to as bus bunching, where the uh the first bus will get delayed by traffic and will see more and more people that it needs to pick up, and then as it uh is has to stop more and more to pick up more and more people, the bus behind it begins to bunch or come right up behind it, and pretty soon uh you have a bus the second bus arriving uh at a stop with no people there, or you have the second bus right behind the first bus.

First bus is full, it passes by people, and they say, "That was my bus." And they don't know they have to wait for a second bus. So, what we need to do is make uh improvements to the the network in order to keep that 10-minute head time between the buses that we add to the system.

And And that happens uh in our proposed rapid uh locally preferred alternative by making a whole bunch of different smaller enhancements in order to uh meet that on-time performance. Uh So, what are the the enhancements envisioned in the locally preferred alternative are uh s- kind of grouped into six different types.

And as we'll talk about uh in the memorandum of understanding a little bit or in the LPA talks about as well, we'll talk about uh the different uh W- Whether some Some of these enhancements are are the more WTA-oriented, some of these enhancements are more city-oriented because they uh involve city aspects assets, and then some of um some of the improve uh enhancements also are shared.

So, the first uh one is definitely a WTA cuz it's the goal of the W- of the rapid transit study is to uh get us to that increased frequency of every 10 minutes uh headway. Why are we shooting for 10-minute headway?

Well, 10 minutes is a is kind of that magic sweet spot where people no longer have to look at a schedule, figure out how they're going to get to where they're going, when they're going to get to where they're going.

They just know if they show up at a bus stop, bus is going to arrive somewhere in an average of 5 minutes, but no more than 9 minutes from now, and they can hop on that bus and get where they want to go.

So, we find that is really uh lessens the barrier to riding transit and is is the goal. And that will take some more buses on the road, but we need to uh provide enhancements to avoid that bus bus bunching.

Uh one of those enhance- enhancements are bus stop islands. Uh so, bus stop islands allow uh for the uh the bus to stop in the in the roadway, which gives the bus kind of control of the traffic queue that's behind it, helps them uh avoid their uh avoid having to wait for traffic to merge back in.

I think we say see a savings of about 20 20% from just installing bus islands on the on the lighting time. It also provides uh lessen conflict between those other modes of pedestrians and bikes by giving them some space uh and reducing the conflict between the borders and those other modes that we want to be promoting.

Uh Another uh transit spot improvements is are at another place where we see a lot of delay, and that's at some signals. Uh As you see an example here, Lincoln Lakeway, we all know that is a busy uh congested intersection, and we actually have a queue jump uh at Lincoln and Lakeway that's existing, um but we're looking to implement that at some other congested intersections along those go lines in order to uh continue to uh provide that on-time performance and get them through those intersections quicker.

Uh Another major element of the rapid of the locally preferred alternative is >> [snorts] >> uh advanced traffic transit signal priority, or TSP as we call it. Uh We already have TSP in our system. [snorts] TSP is uh is providing a mechanism for a the traffic signal to identify that there's a bus waiting in the queue that might be uh delayed or or behind its schedule, and then provide that bus with either a green light or a shortened red light in order to uh get it through the intersection quicker.

Like I said, we already have that in our system today, but it's kind of an quite a bit older system, and there's quite a bit of new technologies out there available to use uh existing technology like GPS and other things to uh to make that more enhanced.

So, we're going to look to implement that on on all of the go lines. This will actually be our first project if if we move forward with the locally preferred alternative. We actually are working on a grant with WTA right now uh to implement a transit signal priority on the gold line.

And I also wanted to identify another advantage to the city. As we look to do transit signal priority uh on these go lines or other signals around town, it's also going to allow us to have this more advanced technology available to us for emergency uh response and their preemption of signals as well.

Uh Another element of of the uh locally preferred alternative are tier one and two stops. So, tier one stops are going to I I like to call them kind of a mini transit center. Um So, these are going to be larger stops with more amenities, um maybe some bus uh layover space, some uh some amenities that help uh provide that transition from uh pedestrian and bike trips to uh to a bus trip like um um bike uh parking or bike lockers, some things of that sort is going to have on time signage um and and just things to help people know where the bus is coming, how soon.

Uh tier two stops are going to look more like a conventional bus stop, but we're going to look to upgrade all all of the stops on the GO lines to at least have a shelter and kind of those base level amenities.

As well as provide branding so folks know that they're on those uh enhanced GO lines. Another aspect of uh the LPA >> [clears throat] >> is bus stop balancing. So, uh right now the stops that exist, many are uh little too close together, some are a little little more spread out.

And so, what we're looking to do is is target a quarter mile between bus stops. We find that is right strikes that right balance between being accessible to walk and bike to them easily, um but also keeping the bus on time.

If there's too many stops, the bus stops too many times and once again gets behind uh behind schedule. And then the last element of the LPA is uh this urban village and transit corridor. So, it's we have identified in our comprehensive plan that this is how we want to um grow as a city, uh but we need to keep uh keep moving forward and and realizing those goals throughout the life of the comp plan uh s- because it's important uh for being able to implement rapid transit that there be the riders available to take it.

So, we need to keep growing as a city in the way that we've envisioned and and doing this mixed use along in the urban villages along the transit corridors and passing rules uh that help promote that.

So, that's identified in the locally preferred alternative as well. Uh so, as you can see on this map, this isn't for you to drill in and see. If you want to do that, it's available in the in the locally preferred alternative, but I just wanted to give you a general overview of of how wide-ranging and spread over the whole network the different improvements are.

And then really the the most important element of the locally preferred alternative are as twofold. It's the savings that we can realize uh that help us keep those buses on schedule and moving so we can hit that hit that point where WTA feels comfortable and up- upgrading the amount buses to hit that 10 minutes, as well as the cost to implement.

So, uh there's some fairly large numbers here and many of these improvements uh will be seeded with some city money including our transportation benefits district, but we're going to be obviously pursuing uh some grants as well uh in order to implement these projects.

So, I just wanted to touch on becau- uh the outreach that W- WTA performed. Um they they were the lead on this project, so they chose their engaged WTA instead of Gage Bellingham to look at uh the public outreach.

Um but we had an over- overwhelming support uh for the locally preferred alternative. Um you know, a vast majority of people uh either sup- fully supporting it or mostly supporting it. Um And then when we asked them what sort of things they were looking for, you know, it wasn't surprising.

It was faster trips, more reliable trips, and more frequent buses. And then this one speaks uh a lot um when we asked people if they supported making uh changes to the street in order to pro- promote uh transit.

It was, you know, over- overwhelmingly supportive of of that. So, I wanted to uh give you the chance to ask some questions. Like I said, I have Tim and Les here with me. And uh otherwise we we uh recommend support of the resolution to adopt the LPA.

Okay, thank you for the presentation. Committee members. Uh well, I'm going to go ahead and start then. Um in the uh locally preferred alternative, it it not only lists the cost which you showed, some substantial cost, $36 [snorts] million just for the short-term improvements, um but also on a potential two to four and a half million dollar operational cost.

That would be um if and when uh WTA can start running buses more buses more frequently, that would be the operational impacts to WTA on its own. Um what I really appreciate is you pointing out that you can't just add more buses in a congested roadway, you don't actually get better service.

That uh before it makes sense to get to that magic 10-minute interval where you never have to look at a a schedule again, um we need to make sure there's reliability for the buses to stay on time and not bunch up as you said.

Um I noticed that uh the pro- the uh capital improvements are broken down into short-term and long-term. The short-term really was generally like 80% or more of all the improvements would be short-term and only a few held off mostly some roadway prioritizations and then the tier one stops.

All I think all the tier one stops were considered later investments. Um My reaction to this is very similar to, by the way, the culvert plan. Uh it looks really big and daunting, but if you look at the project, you actually see that it can come in pieces that can be sequenced.

Um and so, the first few bites might be a million here, three million there, rather than the the daunting number that's too large to get to. Um and the other thing that I appreciate about it is I immediately wanted to start linking this to our comprehensive plan again.

And so, maybe it's a a question for you. Can we link it to the comprehensive plan or instead there is the multimodal plan? Multimodal transportation Multimodal transportation plan which is in the linked in document referenced in the comprehensive plan.

How does this locally preferred alternative and its implementation relate to the multimodal plan? Does the multimodal plan already anticipate all this or could it should it be revised at some point to include this if indeed we do adopt this approach?

I I think I think that's a great observation. I'm I'm going to tackle real quick what you said about uh having having you know, some short-term, some long-term projects. Yeah, one of the benefits of these plans at least at the staff level is really looking at what gets you that biggest bang for the buck and where to prioritize those grant applications and those uh limited city dollars.

Uh so, that's a great observation. Um when it comes to the comprehensive plan, yeah, we did uh obviously we were working on the the LPA uh while we were uh putting together um the multimodal transportation plan.

So, it uh is it's baked in there uh with at least in intent and and you know, re- some reference, but I do think as we look at, you know, kind of our annual updates uh to the comprehensive plan and and knowing we have that process to kind of update it every year, I think adopting the LPA uh by reference at least to the multimodal transportation plan makes a certain amount of sense.

Related to that, we also have an annual update to the TIP, our transportation improvement program. Uh now that some of these are identified and we do have a transit supportive element of our transportation plans already, um I can easily imagine these being moved some of these, the first ones finding their way into the TIP.

Do you think that will happen this year, next year, by year two at least? How quickly do you see that happening? Yeah, we you will see on the TIP uh coming to you uh this year in June, you'll see one of uh one of these tran- uh specifically that gold line uh transit signal prioritization project will be on the TIP.

It'll be in the out years because that's how we do that before we have grant money, but if we win the grant that we're applying for this year, that'll bump forward and something else will take its place in the out years.

Okay, thank you. Lisa? Um I was a little bit curious with the bus stops, the the two that you had mentioned, the tier one, tier two, and one of them would act kind of like a a mini transportation center.

We have the two, the one out on Cordata by the community college and the downtown. I'm just wondering on the long-term planning, is there like a ridership base, population base that makes a determination of creating another transportation hub?

I think as we grow, especially out by Barkley, I always think of it like a kind of a triangle, a triad. As transportation hub makes a great location to centralize where people can go multiple different directions versus a loop to get downtown and catch something else um especially with GO lines.

So, just wondering if there's long-term planning eventually for another transportation center. Yeah, that's exactly it. That's exactly the idea that we're trying to convey here with the the tier one stops where they can function like a mini transit center.

They may not have as much parking associated like you would have with with our other other stations. Um but they will function very similarly. Um I think number one for us would be the Barkley area because that is obviously as you pointed out that's one area that is kind of underserved in terms of of a of a hub a transportation hub.

And so we've worked really hard to try to identify a location for that that has support for the the tablet developers uh where they could support that and where we could also include and revise some of our service in that particular area and add other multimodal components like bike parking and other sorts of things.

And there is some adjacent parking and car parking there as well that could help support that that center. So yeah, we've looked at that very closely. So that would provide one area and then the Fairhaven is probably other area that you can think about as far as hitting all the quadrants of the city in terms of that of that need.

So yeah, absolutely this this project does that. Thank you. My naturally seemed Barkley and then Fairhaven. So glad I'm not too off the mark. Yeah, I I just wanted to draw your attention. You're you're right on the mark because uh the the rendering that you see on your screen and it is just a rendering is is an Envision tier two stop on Woburn Avenue in Barkley Village.

So that'll probably be the first one we look to implement. >> And I I will also mention that um we are hopefully to seek a grant for this particular location um later in the year. Um it's another state grant.

Um so we're looking at that and trying to design up to that um currently. So yeah, that that'd be in the works if we approve the LPA. And again, my comments with regard to the the culvert plan. If I was a grant funder and I saw our culvert plan, I'd be happy to fund it.

I think having this document as well as our multimodal element. If I was a grant funder, if I looked at WTA, then you'd had city support or the city and knew we had WTA in mind. I'd be be I think I would have awarded us the money.

Um any further discussion? Looking for a motion on the resolution. Chase. Okay, I'll make the motion. One second. Um but uh quick question. I mean um we're thinking about uh adopting land use policies to support this from a from WTA or um public works perspective.

Uh not your area of expertise, but what should we as council members be looking at to make sure that those um levels of intensity are supportive of this. Um yeah. Yeah, that's that's a great and and you'll get maybe a little bit of uh engineer's thought on that, but I will say Chris Beebe, I should have acknowledged him.

He's he's been on the on the rapid transit team all along and helping us with that kind of land use element. You know, I I think uh whatever whatever you can do as policy makers to encourage development along these uh go lines.

I think that's the sort of thing that should be in your mind. I think you guys we as a city have already done a great job of that within the urban villages and I think the next step is looking at these transit corridors and that's envisioned in in the comp plan.

I think thinking about how do we incentivize uh that mixed use and maybe that vertical residential construction along these areas because these are areas where people are going to be able to hop on a bus and get to those other commercial areas.

I guess from from my perspective, um think about this as a fixed infrastructure even though we often think about buses as fluid, but I think in our in this particular case, we can think about this we may not have rail, but it is the next best thing, right?

And these are these these would be fixed corridors that we'd serve with with higher levels of service with infrastructure improvements. And so those should support higher levels of intensity um not just at hubs, but on those corridors themselves, right?

And so we'd be looking at higher levels of intensity um to support the investment to support that that 10-minute service that we hope to provide with that. So we've got the urban villages in place. It's the corridor I think policies that we'd be looking to this city to support.

Of course, there are exceptions and the other factor is the types of development too that are important in those in those corridors. Not just housing, but are there mix of uses that that need to be supported?

What about Chris Beebe, planning and community development. Just wanted to chime in that um you'll remember that the the interim uh middle housing ordinance and also the previous uh permanent regulations for accessory dwelling units all take into account uh in one way or another distance to those go lines to allow in the case of middle housing uh one of the methods to get to that sixth unit beyond the four that are allowed outright.

So we've already baked in some of that and we'll be continuing to do that as we bring permanent residential regulations forward to you later this year and into next year. And and just one more thing from a public works standpoint.

If you remember in the uh transportation impact fees that we talked about a couple weeks ago, we also give incentives uh to their TIF fees when they uh when they're within a quarter mile of these rapid transit and urban villages.

Glad I asked that question and not just buy me time to look and find the motion which um I believe is just to move to approve the resolution. We have motion before Motion before us to approve the resolution adopting rapid transit locally preferred alternative.

Um any further discussion? I had one other Oh, so um you know, there's a usual rule of thumb about how much residential density is needed to support transit scenario from five to 15 units per acre, but I would think what matters it raw numbers aren't always accurate.

What what I've learned more and more from like my recent visits to some other cities by the way is um the pedestrian network has to be safe and thriving too. When you get off the bus, you walk. When you walk, you get on the bus.

They they go together. They you see them both go up at the same time. You don't have one without the other. Um which would be a great lead-in to a future downtown item later today uh for walkability. Um so I think that's also key.

If we work on our safe sidewalks and and other things, people get on the bus and vice versa. Uh all those in favor of recommending approving the resolution to the full committee tonight signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed? Uh I will bring that forward with a positive recommendation. So we'll go straight to the next item if there's no more need for discussion. This is simply an authorization to enter into a memorandum of understanding between WTA and the city Bellingham for implementation and prioritization of the rapid transit locally preferred alternative.

Uh the staff are seeking council authorization to enter into this memorandum. Uh it outlines how both parties will work together uh to prioritize, implement service and infrastructure improvements contained in the rapid transit locally preferred alternative which we just adopted.

The locally preferred alternative identifies improvements to existing go lines which we just discussed which would decrease travel times and provide better service reliability. Such a service is convenient to use by most people.

Um is there anything more Mr. Homan you think we should say about that? No, I think that pretty much covers it. Just uh this memorandum of understanding will provide us with a framework to continue to work with WTA like we intend to do.

Um but just documents that intent uh from this staff to any future staff members. And it outlines what things WTA would focus on, what things the city would focus on and where the overlaps would be. Chase.

Move to authorize the mayor to enter into the memorandum of understanding with Whatcom Transportation Authority for implementation and prioritization of the rapid transit locally preferred alternative.

We have a motion before us. Any further discussion? Other committee member other council members? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. All those opposed? I'll also bring that forward with a um positive unanimous recommendation.