Steering committee approves draft site-selection criteria for downtown transit station, posts it for public comment

The Downtown Transit Station Steering Committee voted June 17 to approve a draft set of 14 site-selection criteria and post the draft for public comment.

Project staff told the committee the intent is to post the step-2 criteria online as soon as possible and hold the public comment period for about three weeks, then use those responses to prepare for a second round of outreach that will solicit specific site ideas. "We'll try to put out this information by tomorrow and then have it close Friday before this group meets again," said Speaker 4, the project presenter.

Staff described the criteria as a mix of pass/fail and scored measures meant to screen infeasible sites and help prioritize candidates. The presentation included a visual 'puzzle-piece' approach showing how required components would fit on a parcel; staff gave a single bus bay as an example footprint of about 50 by 20 feet and said the central platform at the current location has eight bays plus two regional bays.

Some sites were identified as effectively off the table. Speaker 4 recommended the three city parking lots currently under a redevelopment RFP (Tenth at Vermont, Eighth at Vermont, and Seventh at New Hampshire) should not be considered because public-private redevelopment would complicate timing and use of funds: "So those are effectively off the table." Staff also flagged FEMA flood-hazard areas near the Amtrak site and Watson Park (described in the meeting as a "point 2% annual chance of flood hazard") as locations unlikely to accept federal construction funds, which could rule them out for federally funded components.

The criteria include equity and access measures. Staff proposed scoring based on walking distance to a downtown 'center of mass' and on Transportation Disadvantage (TD) zones — demographic overlays the city uses to prioritize transit access. Sites serving higher-scoring TD zones would receive more points, staff said.

Staff also added cost-driven items for scoring, including existing ADA circulation, lighting, slope/retaining-wall needs and other features that could increase construction costs. Staff said they will provide example site-scorecards so the public can see how the scoring would work; in the meeting staff shared three example evaluations (Union Pacific Depot, South Park and a private church lot), noting one site scored 13 in the staff exercise.

On outreach, the committee discussed pairing the online survey with one-hour focus groups for people who prefer conversational feedback; staff agreed to circulate dates and sign-up options and to recruit through existing listservs and stakeholder groups. Speaker 4 said staff plan a follow-up phase to solicit specific site ideas about a week after the criteria survey is posted.

Safety and operations were also discussed. Committee members raised concerns heard during earlier boundary comment periods about security; staff said they would address site safety through lighting and design, and by deploying staff or an "ambassador" position to assist visitors and help manage behavior at select hours.

After discussion, Speaker 2 moved to approve the draft criteria and post them for public comment; Speaker 1 seconded. The committee recorded two ayes on the motion and the chair stated the motion passed. Staff said the committee will receive the compiled public comments and staff analysis before bringing recommendations to the City Commission in August, and the steering committee scheduled its next meeting for July 15.

What happens next: staff will post the criteria and public-engagement materials, schedule focus groups, and return public feedback to the steering committee before the planned City Commission briefing on Aug. 6.