Administration recommends Eleventh Avenue I‑90 overcrossing; committee asks for broader council review before endorsing

City staff presented the Central Issaquah multimodal I‑90 crossing study to the Mobility and Infrastructure Committee on June 17 and recommended an overcrossing connecting Eleventh Avenue Northwest on both sides of I‑90 as the preferred alternative. The administration asked the committee to endorse the location and the overall crossing approach before advancing to the full City Council.

Public Works Senior Transportation Engineer Greg Lucas, with consultant John McKenzie of Jacobs, described a process that started with five alternatives and, after environmental and constructability screening, narrowed to three refined options. Lucas said the Eleventh‑to‑Eleventh overcrossing "meets the project goals and evaluation criteria by a decent margin," provides the greatest flexibility for a future light‑rail station and park‑and‑ride footprints, and offers the most constructible and fundable path among the options presented.

The administration provided planning‑level figures: a draft cost estimate of roughly $110 million and a multi‑decade schedule that anticipates completing design milestones and right‑of‑way phases in the late 2030s with construction targeted in the early‑to‑mid 2040s so the crossing is in place prior to the planned start of light‑rail operations (Sound Transit’s line is scheduled for 2044 in the presentation). Lucas said the project is currently funded for early engineering work in the draft CIP for 2027 and that the study is fully funded through consultant selection with ARPA funds.

Lucas explained constraints that drove alternative elimination: I‑90 and Gilman Boulevard elevations and the high local water table limit feasible undercrossing options; approaches that require raising long sections of Gilman would increase cost and private property impacts; and early coordination with WSDOT, FHWA and Sound Transit raised permitting and approval complexity for certain alignment choices. The Eleventh‑to‑Eleventh option, he said, minimizes those impacts while preserving nonmotorized access and potential connections to a future station.

The committee discussion focused on two themes: (1) funding and constructability, and (2) whether the full City Council had sufficient opportunity to vet a large, multi‑decade, multimillion‑dollar commitment. Deputy Council President Barbara DeMichele said she supported the planning logic but did not feel the full council was ready to endorse a preferred location at this time: "I don't feel that the council is ready yet to make a decision. This is a substantial decision, involving a lot of money and a lot of commitment," she said and requested more time and a possible council work session or field visit. Several other committee members echoed the request for broader council engagement and for staged approaches to avoid creating sunk‑cost momentum without reliable funding.

City Administrator Lehi (present at the meeting) and staff recommended keeping the study moving but suggested holding the request for full‑council endorsement in committee until the administration provides additional materials and staging options; staff noted that waiting for Sound Transit’s final station location could delay the project and raise costs, while advancing early engineering work increases the city’s readiness to pursue federal and state grants.

Staff outlined potential funding paths: federal competitive BUILD/RAISE type grants (very competitive), Puget Sound Regional Council grants (multiple phases possible: design, right‑of‑way, construction), the State Transportation Improvement Board, local traffic‑impact fees, private contributions and legislative appropriations. Lucas said advancing to a 10% design milestone would improve the city’s competitiveness for grants and right‑of‑way dedications from developers.

No formal endorsement or vote was recorded. The committee concluded the item by asking staff to return with additional materials and recommended holding the endorsement request in committee for a deeper council briefing and potential staged decision process rather than advancing immediately to the July 21 full council meeting.

Next steps identified in the presentation: finalize the study this fall, pursue early design milestones and grant applications, and bring an expanded briefing to the full council after committee members have had further opportunity to review and discuss the recommended location and funding strategy.