Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReg 2004-05-03 Item 6B - Ordinance - Repeal TMC Chapter 9.48 Traffic Concurrency Standards1 Meeting Date 5/03/04 CAS Number: 04-053 (Ref Agenda Item Title: Original Sponsor: Timeline: Sponsor's Summary: Recommendations: Sponsor: Committee: Administration: Cost Impact (if known): Fund Source (if known): Meeting Date 1 11/24/03 1/26/04 I 4/12/04 1 Meeting Date 5/03/04 .1 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Prepared by 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review 1 CK r A- 1 I 03 -151) I Original Agenda Date: May 3, 2004 Adopt Revised Chapter 9.48 for Traffic Concurrency Standards and Impact Mitigation Fees and repeal all previous underlying ordinances. Council Admin. Recent legal challenges to the City's Traffic Concurrency Standards ordinance, specifically to the impact mitigation fee methodology, have created a need for Tukwila to modify the Tukwila Municipal Code (Chapter 9.48). We also have to update the project list. Adopt the revised TMC Chapter 9.48 Traffic Concurrency Standards and Impact Fees Forward to Regular Council Same as Sponsor RDICT Action Discussed for information only Discussed for information only Sent back to Transportation Committee on 4/26/04 ;PEND,CES Attachments Information Memo dated April 21, 2004 Draft Impact Fee List Ordinance TMC Chapter 9.48 Transportation Committee Meeting Minutes from April 26, 2004 ITEMNO. Public Works INFORMATION MEMO To: Mayor Mullet From: Public Works Directotr,(~ Date: APril 21, 2004 Subject: Transportation Concurrency and Imoact Mitieation Fees Ordinance Chances ISSUE Update to the Impact Mitigation Fee list and modifications to the Concurrency Ordinance (TMC 9.48). BACKGROUND Recent legal challenges to the City's Concurrency Ordinance, specifically to the impact mitigation fee methodology, have created a need for Tukwila to modify the Concurrency Ordinance (TMC 9.48) and update the Mitigation Fee list. ANALYSIS As disenssed at both Transportation Commit'tee and Committee of the Whole on April 12, 2004, the proposed language changes to TMC 9.48 have been fmalized. The attached proposed ordinance includes the language changes necessaryto bring Tukwila's ordinance into compliance with state laws. Additionally, policy direction is needed from Council before the final Impact Fee list can be adopted and incorporated into the City Code. Attached to this information memorandum is the current proposal for impact fee amounts. Two projects had typographical errors in traffic volumes, which have been corrected in this version. The impact fee amounts have changed due to the corrections but the initial assumptions presented previously have remained the same. RECOMMENDATION Review.the proposed ordinance changes and mitigation fee list and refer to full Council for adoption. Draft Impact Fee List r� 7 W Z 'sad ,Ohs:' zt y'. .1r 1'sos City of Tukwila Washington F Ordinance No AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REPEALING ORDINANCE Na 1769 AS CODIFIED AT 3: TMC CHAPTER 9.48; CREATING NEW TRANSPORTATION t CONCURRENCY STANDARDS AND IMPACT FEES; PROVIDING FOR i.X SE VERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila seeks to insure that state mandated standards for concurrency in existing facilities and new development are met and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila seeks to insure that new development is fairly .r �ol <{a assessed a proportionate cost of new infrastructure required to serve the new development o- NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 4 Section 1. Repealer. Ordinance No 1769, as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code ;s A. I. Chapter 9.48, "Transportation Concurrency Standards," is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 2. Transportation Concurrency Standards and Impact Fees. A new Tukwila s?, f Municipal Code Chapter 9.48, "Transportation Concurrency Standards and Impact Fees," is hereby created to read as follows: Chapter 9.48 TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY STANDARDS AND IMPACT FEES Sections: Division I Transportation Concurrency, Generally %=r` 9.48.010 Authority and Purpose i 9.48.020 Definitions 248.030 Exemptions 1 f.:- Division II Transportation Concurrency Management %x 9.48.040 Determination of Transportation Concurrency Required Level-of-Service 9.48.050 Level -of- S Methodology 248.060 Arterial Classification System -;f- 9.48.070 LOS Standards for Specific Locations 9.48.080 Design of Arterial Improvements; Load Limits Division III Impact Fees 9.48.090 Transportation System Improvement for which Transportation Impact Fee may <r; be Imposed 9.48.100 Scope and Use of Impact Fees 248.110 Designation of Service Area `=.y%:''= 248.120 Previously Incurred Transportation System Improvement Costs f: 9.48.130 Traffic Studies and Mitigation of Impacts lit 9. 48.140 Impact Mitigation Fees ""'r' 248150 Transportation Impact Fee Schedule 9.48.160 Credit to Developer 248.170 Unusual Circumstances 9.48180 Consideration of Studies or Data Provided by Developer 248190 Adjustments to Mitigation Requirements 248.200 Mitigation of Traffic Safety Hazards Division IV Appeals z 9.48.210 Appeals -I Caanarencystandards 4/30/04 Division I - Transportation Concurrency, Generally 9.48.010 Authority and Purpose A. Tukwil~ is authorized to tmpose transportation concurrency standards and transportation impact fees on new development pursuant to the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A.070 and RCW 82.02.020 B. The purposes of this chapter are to: 1. Establish reasonable transportation concurrency standards to ensure that adequate facilities are available to serve existing and future traffic demands on City 2. Ensure that financial commitments are in place so that adequate transportation facilities are available to serve new growth and development; 3. Promote orderly growth and development by establishing standards which require that new growth and development pay a proportionate share of the cqst of new transportation facilities needed to serve new growth and development; 4. Ensure that transportation impact fees are imposed through established procedures and criteria so that specific developments do not pay arbitrary fees or duplicative fees for the same impact;, and 5. Irnplemant the transportation policies of the transportation element of the TukwilaComprehensive Plan. 9.48.020Definitions As used in this chapter, the following definitions shall have the meanings set forth 1. "Development Activity" means any construction or expansion of a building, structure, or use, any change in use of a building or structure, or any changes in the use of land, that creates additional demand and need for Transportation System Improvements. 2. "Director" means the Tukwila Director of Public Works, or his or her authorized designee. 3. "Transportation Impact Fee" means a payment of money imposed upon development as a condition development approval pay of to for Transportation System Improvements needed to serve new growth and development, and that is reasonably related to the new development that creates additional demand and need for public transportation improvements, that is a proportionate share of the cost of the transportation improvements, and that is used for transportation improvements that reasonably benefit the new development. "Transportation Impact fee" does not include a reasonable permit or application fee. 4. "Transportation System Improvement~' means any and all capital improvements to the transportation infrast~ucOare of the City constructed pursuant to City design and development standards and requirements, including, but not limited to, roads, bridges, overpasses, sidewalks, curbs, turn lanes, traffic signals, traffic signs, HOV lanes, bus shelters, and associated landscaping. 9.48.0~0 Exemptions A. This chapter shall not apply to single-family building permits, multi-family building permits for projects containing four or fewer units, short plats, or any non- residential project that is categorically exempt from SEPA pursuant to TMC 21.04.080, 21.04.100, or 21.04.110. The Department of Public Works, shall also waive compHance with this chapter for other projects which will not generate new traffic trips. B. Any impact fees resulting from the Development Activities listed in this subsection shall be paid from public funds. Division II Transportation Concurrency Management 9.48.040 Determination of Transportation Concurrency Required A. Any new development or redevelopment that is not categorically exempted under TMC 9.48.030 is required to demonstrate compliance with this chapter. B. No Type 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 decision which is subject to this chapter shall be approved unless a determination is made by the appropriate department that the standards of this chapter have been met. C. For Type 1 and 2 decisions, the Department of Community Development shall refer the application to the Department of Public Works, which shall determine whether the application complies with City standards regarding transportation concurrency and, if not, what mitigation is required. D. For Type 3, 4 and 5 decisions, the Department of Community Development shall refer the application to the Department of Public Works, which shall determine whether the application complies with City standards regarding transportation concurrency and, if not, what mitigation is required. A statement identifying the required mitigation, if any, shall be incorporated into the staff report required by TMC 18.112.020. 9.48.050 Level -of- Service Methodology A. Level -of- service "LOS") gradations for corridors shall be graded from LOS A to LOS F, as defined in the most current version of the Highway Capacity Manual f t P by published b the Transportation Research Board. Intersections shall be measured in average delays at intersections or average travel speeds on corridors, as determined by the Department of Public Works following the methodology included in the Highway Capacity Manual or other approved methodology. B. The Department of Public Works may, in its discretion, utilize either a standard t LOS gradation system or, in the case of intersections that are experiencing high congestion, an expanded LOS gradation system to evaluate. The LOS gradations for intersections, based on average delays are Level of Service Standard Expanded A 7 5 cernndc 7 5 carnndc 1 R 7,5 15 cernnrl 15 cern C 15.1 75 cern 75 tern H—T) 25.1 40 second All carne F. 401 60 Reco 4 I 1 An Rare F 60 seconds 601 12Q spec,' I n I :1 •1• H IIR0 -7411 Reran• T 124p Rnfl cernncT y: :1. I T I 3on Rernn,(Tc ,::V::. 9.48.060 Arterial Classification System A. The Tukwila Functional Arterial Classification System, which is in accord with. required Federal and Washington State arterial standards, is as follows: Street Classification Pri�cina1 TTRp F r :let, _ArracR Arrecc m abutting property Collector Arterial Between access 8r minor Minor Arterial Between collector prjm:ypat "F." 1M•.. 4Y •11.1..1 eR 2.: B. The Department of Public Works shall classify all streets in the City in accordance with the classifications in TMC 9.48.060A. Such classifications shall be .;i reviewed and modified as necessary by the department from time to time 3_ Concurrency Standards 4/30/04 aa. 9.48.070 LOS Standards for Specific Locations A. A minimum LOS standard of •E for traffic capacity shall be maintained, based upon a calculation of average LOS, for the following arterial segments: 1. East Marginal Way (5. 112th St. to north city limit) 2. Interurban (Southcenter Blvd. to I -5) 3. Tukwila International Boulevard (5. 152nd St. to Boeing Access Rd.) 4. West Valley g e Highway Y(1-405 to S. St.) St. of S. 180th S ter Parkway south o 5. Southcenter Y the Central Business District ("CBD") area, a minimum average LOS level of B. In th g E shall be maintained. In the CBD, LOS shall be determined by using the "link" averages for the 17 segments defined in the Transportation Element of the g I CBD the area bounded by 1-5, section, the CB is of this secti Comprehensive Plan. For purposes o Corn reh Y Pm'P I405, the Green River, and S. 180th St. C. A minimum LOS standard of E for traffic capacity shall be maintained, based upon a calculation of LOS for individual intersections and corridor segments for all other minor, collector and principal arterials principally serving commercially zoned property. D. A minimum LOS standard of D for traffic capacity shall be maintained, based upon a calculation of LOS for individual intersections and corridor segments for all minor and collector arterials in predominantly residential areas, provided that for the following arterials, LOS shall be calculated based on the average LOS for the arterial: 42nd Ave. S., S. 160th St., S. 164th St., Macadam Rd., S. 124th St., S.130th St., S. 132nd St., S. 144th St., 53rd Ave. S., and 65th Ave. S. A: E. Access streets which exceed 1,000 vehicles per day volume will be evaluated on a case -by -case basis to determine whether traffic improvements or control measures are required to reduce volumes and provide adequate safety. 9.48.080 Design of Arterial Improvements; Load Limits A. Arterial improvements in commercial areas shall be designed to include trucking geometric and loading parameters. B. Trucking will be allowed on all arterials as well as commercial area access streets unless restricted by load limits. Load limits may be used as restrictions following a traffic study. Division III Impact Fees 9.48.090 Transportation System Improvement for which Transportation Impact Fee may be Imposed A Transportation Impact Fee may only be imposed on Transportation System Improvements that are identified within the Capital Facilities element of the Comprehensive Plan and /or any associated background reports therein referenced or adopted, or any updates to the aforementioned documents. 9.48100 Scope and Use of Transportation Impact Fees Transportation Impact Fees: 1. Shall only be imposed for transportation improvements that are reasonably related to the traffic impacts of the new development 2. Shall not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of transportation improvements that are reasonably related to the new development; 3. Shall be used for transportation improvements that will reasonably benefit the new development; 4. Shall not be used to correct existing deficiencies; and 5. Shall not be imposed to mitigate the same off -site traffic impacts that are being mitigated pursuant to any other law. 4- Concurtency Standards 4/30/04 9.48.110 Designation of Service Area The service area in which the City shall calculate and impose a Transportation Impact Fee for Transportation System Improvements per unit of development shall be the area contained within the legal boundaries of the City. 9.48.120 Previously Incurred Transportation System Improvement Costs The Director may impose a Transportation Impact Fee for Transportation System Improvement costs incurred by the City prior to Development Activity if the Development Activity will be served by the previously constructed Transportation System L. Y .ement. However, no Transportation Impact Fee imposed pursuant to TMC 9.48.120 may make up for any Transportation System Improvement Deficiencies. 9.48.130 Traffic Studies and Mitigation of Impacts 5;n A. TMC 9.48.070 identifies Level of Service standards for specific areas and corridors that can be maintained by making improvements identified in the Transportation Element based on 2010 "build out" development traffic projections. Level of Service standards are also established for other non specific arterials and for access streets. B. Any proposed project which requires a Type 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 decision and which will generate five or more vehicle trips in an AM, noon, or PM peak hour period shall submit, as part of the application process, a trip generation analysis using standard generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, other standard references, or from other documented information and surveys approved by the Department of Public Works. In addition, such projects shall submit a trip distribution study, unless the requirement for such study is waived by the Department of Public Works. C. If the trip generation and distribution studies demonstrate that the proposed project will generate five or more additional peak hour traffic trips in a specific area or corridor prior to the horizon year established by the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, impact mitigation fees shall be determined based on the fees established in TMC 9.48. D. If the trip generation and distribution studies demonstrate that the proposed project will generate five or more additional peak hour traffic trips on any non specific arterial or access street such that the intersection, corridor, or area will be below the Level of Service standards established in TMC 9.48.070, prior to the horizon year established by the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the Director of the Department of Public Works shall require, as appropriate to the particular circumstances, one of the following methods for mitigation of the project's traffic impacts: 1. Require the applicant to pay a mitigation payment equal to the applicant's proportionate fair share of the cost of the improvements necessary to restore the intersection(s), arterial(s) or access street(s) to: a. a level of service that would exist at the time the project is completed, but without project traffic, or b. the level of service standard established in TMC 9.48.070; or 2. Require the applicant to complete the improvements required to restore the intersection(s), arterials) or access street(s) to: a. the level of service that would exist at the time the project is completed, but without project traffic, or b. the level of service standard established in TMC 9.48.070; or 3. In appropriate cases, mitigation may consist of a combination of improvements constructed by the applicant and mitigation payments. If the proposed project does not generate five or more additional peak hour traffic trips at an intersection or corridor which will be below the Level of Service standards established in TMC 9.48.070 prior to the horizon year for the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, no mitigation under TMC 9.48.130 will be required for that intersection or corridor. -5- ConcurrencyStandards 4/30/04 E. A project applicant shall have the right to mitigate all or a portion of the capacity impacts of a project by utilizing capacity mitigation measures, including but not limited to, carpooling and rideshare programs, widenings (roadway, lane, radius), signal improvements, and other capacity imi..,.,,,...,ents. In the event that mitigation measures such as carpooling and rideshare programs are proposed, the applicant shall execute such agreements with the City as are necessary to assure the permanent availability of such programs. `h F. In the event that the applicant completes improvements which are part of the Transportation Impact Fee Schedule and the cost of such improvements exceeds the applicant's proportionate fair share of the cost of such improvements, the applicant %N; shall be entitled to apply to enter into a Latecomer Agreement with the City. 9.48.140 Impact Mitigation Fees A. Impact fees for the specific areas, intersections and corridors identified in TMC 9.48.070 are provided in the schedule of Transportation Impact Fees in TMC 9.48.150. The Transportation Impact Fee Schedule has been reasonably adjusted for taxes and other revenue sources, which were anticipated to be available to fund public improvements. B. The Transportation Impact Fee Schedule shall be updated annually by the t 4;. Department of Public Works and adopted by motion or resolution of the City Council. :91 C. If the trip generation and distribution studies demonstrate that the proposed project will generate five or more additional peak hour traffic trips on any project or z projects identified in the Transportation Impact Fee Schedule, an impact mitigation fee 5:• will be assessed, payable at issuance of the building permit. Final fee determination is based on the number of trips impacting the project multiplied by the cost per trip ',t identified in the Transportation Impact Fee Schedule. t 9.48.150 Transportation Impact Fee Schedule The standard Transportation Impact Fees to be imposed are set forth as follows: y le I 1990 2010 Pk Vol I i...,. Cost ant I cost/ fF Southcenter Pkwy /168 Signal W Valley Strander NB dual left tum lanes :;:;s:..:" Iy I widen dual it i I Mm (APWe S/C t Pkiry) I a S 178 St (S /C Pkwy WCL) r realign (cap /safety /transit) fz:; Andover Pk W (T Pkwy Strander) widen to 5lanes M. I widen t 51aness ©lints. Southcenter Pkwy (180 S. City limits) construct and 5 lane street 9.48.160 Credit to Developer A developer is entitled to a credit against a Transportation Impact Fee for the value of any dedication of land for, improvement to, or new construction of any Transportation System Improvement provided by the developer to the City as a condition of approval of the Development Activity. i'= 9.48.170 Unusual Circumstances At the time a Transportation Impact Fee is imposed, the City shall be allowed to adjust the standard Transportation Impact Fee to consider unusual circumstances in specific cases to ensure that a Transportation Impact Fee is imposed fairly. -6- tS., Concutrency Standards 4/30/04 7T; 9.48,180 Consideration of Studies or Data Provided by Developer In calculating the amount of a' Transportation Impact Fee, the Director may consider studies and data submitted by the developer in determining whether any adjustment o ent f the standard Transportation Impact Fee is warranted. n J P P anted. 9.48.190 Adjustments to Mitigation Requirements 1f, in the rare instance and in the judgment of the Director, none of the options for calculating impact mitigation amounts accurately reflect the impacts of the new development, the Director may allow the fee payer to conduct an independent fee calculation. The fee payer shall, at that time, prepare and submit to the Director an independent fee calculation of the development P activity for which the building permit or development approval is sought. The document(s) submitted shall show the basis ;;;;14. upon which the independent fee calculation was made and the proposed amount of the fee. The Director is not required to accept any documentation that the Director reasonably deems to be inaccurate or unreliable and may require the fee payer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. Based on the information within the Director's possession, the Director may adjust the impact fee ^i calculation to the specific characteristics of the development, if necessary. 9.48.200 Mitigation of Traffic Safety Hazards A. If the Department of Public Works determines that a hazard to safety could reasonably exist as a result of traffic generated by a project, the applicant shall be required to construct the improvements necessary to mitigate the traffic safety hazard, regardless of whether the roadway corridor or intersection meets the capacity standards of this chapter. B. If the Department of Public Works determines that there is an existing hazard to safety affecting a traffic corridor or intersection which will be impacted by traffic from a proposed project and that the improvements necessary to resolve the safety hazard are not a funded project in the Capital Improvement Program and are not already funded for correction from other sources, the applicant shall have the option of 1 1. Constructing the improvements necessary to mitigate the traffic safety hazard, subject to the right to apply to enter into a Latecomer Agreement regarding such project, or 2. Postponing the project until such time as a project to correct the safety hazard has been fully funded. Division IV Appeals 948,210 Appeals A. Any party seeking to appeal a Transportation Impact Fee or mitigation requirement imposed by the Director under TMC 9.48 may file an appeal of Type 1 decision as provided in TMC 18.104.010(0) and TMC 18.108.010(0). B. Any fee payer may pay the Transportation Impact Fee imposed by TMC 9.48 under protest in order to obtain development approval. Appeals regarding the Transportation Impact Fees imposed on any Development Activity may only be taken forward by the fee payer of the property where such development activity will occur.. No appeals shall be permitted unless and until the Transportation Impact Fees at issue have been paid. C. Determination of the Director with respect to the applicability of the Transportation Impact Fees to a given Development Activity, the availability or value of a credit, or the Director's decision with respect to the independent fee calculation or any other shall be appealed to the hearing body pursuant to TMC 18.104.010(B) and TMC 18.108.010(B). Section 3. Severabflity, If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. -7 ConcurrcncyStandards 4/30/04 Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or wummary thereof shal l be pub ed in the official newspaper of the City, d sh effect and be in full force five days afte. a_rand publication as provided %law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL 7 THE CITY OF TUICWILA,WASHINGTON, _aRegular Meeting thereof t a s 2004. w9&UTHENTIc 22 Steven M. Mullet, Mayor \<2 Jane E. Cmk CMC, City Clerk Filed wi± the City o APPROVED AS TO FORM Passed by the City CounciF dlisha a_ D_ Office wt City Att _y adinanceN_r \d2 _____04 Transportation Committee April 26, 2004 DRAFT Present: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Pam Carter, Joe Duffle Jim Morrow, Cyndy Knighton, Ryan Larson, Brian Shelton, Bob Giberson, Frank Iriarte, Lucy Lauterbach 1. Sound Transit Light Rail Brian gave a very general report on some of the issues he is dealing with on Sound Transit. One issue is the columns that will be used to construct the rail line, and how much space they may take up on Tukwila International Boulevard. Brian showed three pictures of how the system might look. They will build it by bringing in sections of colttmn and track to install one at a time. The Committee members asked if the columns would be graffiti-proofed. Brian said they'll makc it easy to remove graffiti. Information. .~ 2. Transportation Concurrency and Impact Mitigation Ordinance Because a recent lawsuit pointed out the need to update Tukwila's concurrency and mitigation ordinance, Cyndy worked to clean up the old ordinance and apply generally the same methodology as before, with some updated numbers. Jim M said it's important to get agreement on a reasonable cosfftrip. The first draft presented to the Committee had cost/trip too high for the comfort of the members. They are now proposing a table with the highest cost/trip under $2,500. The City would pay half of the cost of the projects, and that mount would not include grants, which are taken out before the City and developer costs are figured out. It's not clear how the City will fund the projects, though they are in the 6 Year Plan. The paybacks business make will come to the City much later than the projects that are being planned and will be built. Cyndy reiterated that only trips that are an increase over current trips are counted for mitigation. Pam C had some comments about clarifications needed in the ordinance. The Committee understood that this version of traffic concurrency is only to be used until a more thorough study of what can be used, is done next year. Recommend ordinance to Regular Meeting. 3. S. 144t~ Street Improvements Plans are ready for construction of S. 144th Street improvements to begin this summer. One of the things that has helped past street projects is a blanket condemnation used when street fight of way (ROW) is needed from adjacent property owners. A list of twelve properties with needed fight of way was provided, and Cyndy pointed out on a large map where the parcels are located. Jim M said this has worked well in the past, removing names offthe list as they reach agreement with the City. Only one property on both S. 180th and on TIB were needed after all the negotiations were done. The Committee asked if the Samara needed to give ROW, and Cyndy said they did not. Recommend ordinance to COW and Regular Meeting. 4. TIB Phase I and Ribbon Cutting Ceremony If all goes well, City Light will have undergrounded Phase I of TlB by late winter, 2005. A month later all the sidewalk completions and finishing work will be done. However, some thought it would be good to have a ribbon cutting ceremony before the formal completion of this phase. There were a lot of people who helped mm the highway over to the City, and who helped secure funding for its improvement. The highway is being paved this week. Some of the organizations and people who've helped include Senators Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell, and Margarita Prentice; Congressman Adam Smith; as well as STP, TIB, WSDOT, Safety, and SGI who is donating street trees. August was mentioned as a possible date. Information. 5. First Quarter Reports The Committee members had reviewed the reports and commented on a couple of items, but did not have questions. Information. __ Committee chair approval